Molecular and Cellular Biology, October 2001, p. 6984-6998, Vol. 21, No. 20
0270-7306/01/$04.00+0 DOI: 10.1128/MCB.21.20.6984-6998.2001
Copyright © 2001, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Institute for Gene Therapy and Molecular Medicine, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY 10029,1 and Laboratory of Genetics, Wageningen University, NL-6703HA Wageningen, The Netherlands2
Received 30 May 2001/Returned for modification 9 July 2001/Accepted 12 July 2001
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Structural maintenance of chromosomes (SMC) proteins fulfill
pivotal roles in chromosome dynamics. In yeast, the SMC1-SMC3 heterodimer is required for meiotic sister chromatid cohesion and DNA
recombination. Little is known, however, about mammalian SMC proteins
in meiotic cells. We have identified a novel SMC protein (SMC1
),
which
except for a unique, basic, DNA binding C-terminal motif
is
highly homologous to SMC1 (which may now be called SMC1
) and is not
present in the yeast genome. SMC1
is specifically expressed in
testes and coimmunoprecipitates with SMC3 from testis nuclear extracts,
but not from a variety of somatic cells. This establishes for mammalian
cells the concept of cell-type- and tissue-specific SMC protein
isoforms. Analysis of testis sections and chromosome spreads of various
stages of meiosis revealed localization of SMC1
along the axial
elements of synaptonemal complexes in prophase I. Most SMC1
dissociates from the chromosome arms in late-pachytene-diplotene cells.
However, SMC1
, but not SMC1
, remains chromatin associated at the
centromeres up to metaphase II. Thus, SMC1
and not SMC1
is likely
involved in maintaining cohesion between sister centromeres until
anaphase II.
| |
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The eukaryotic, evolutionarily highly conserved SMC (Structural Maintenance of Chromosomes) proteins are involved in several key DNA and chromatin dynamic processes (for recent reviews, see references 11, 21, 26, 27, 31, 48, 60, and 62). The best-documented processes are chromosome condensation and sister chromatid cohesion. Evidence is also accumulating for a function in DNA recombination and repair. A fourth role of SMC proteins is in gene dosage compensation in Caenorhabditis elegans. The phylogenetic tree comprises five subfamilies (32): SMC1 to SMC4 and an ancestral family that includes the recently defined SMC5 and SMC6 groups with the Rad18 and Spr18 proteins of Schizosaccharomyces pombe (16), which act in recombinational repair.
SMC proteins share a characteristic design. Coiled-coil domains are flanked by globular N- and C-terminal domains and are divided in the central region by a flexible hinge domain of about 150 aa. The N- and C-terminal domains of about 100 to 150 aa are highly conserved and carry important motifs. The N-terminal domain includes an NTP binding motif (Walker A box [68]), which has been shown to bind the ATP analogue azido-ATP (1). The C-terminal domain contains a DA box (68). The C-terminal and second coiled-coil domains, but not the N terminus, bind DNA (1, 2). It has been proposed that the antiparallel, heterodimeric SMC1-SMC3 protein with an N and C terminus at each end may connect two DNA molecules, such as sister chromatids, and may directly contribute to their alignment in cohesion and to recombination between sister chromatids (2, 26, 62).
In eukaryotes the SMC1-SMC3 or SMC2-SMC4 heterodimers form large multiprotein complexes. One of these complexes is condensin, which, besides the SMC2-SMC4 heterodimer, contains several non-SMC subunits. Condensin is necessary for mitotic chromosome condensation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae (61), S. pombe (64), and Xenopus laevis egg extracts (25) and has also been described in human cells (57). The MIX-1 and DPY-27 proteins of C. elegans, proteins homologous to SMC2 and SMC4, are present in a different multiprotein complex, which regulates gene dosage compensation on the X chromosomes of the hermaphrodite nematode (8, 39).
The other pair of SMC proteins, SMC1 and SMC3, is present in at least two protein complexes with distinct, albeit partially connected, functions. Genetic studies of S. cerevisiae revealed a requirement for Smc1p and Smc3p in mitotic sister chromatid cohesion (19, 45). The respective protein complex is called cohesin, contains two other polypeptides besides Smc1p and Smc3p, and interacts with several other factors required for sister chromatid cohesion and its release (reviewed in references 11, 48, and 62). One of the non-SMC cohesin subunits is the S. cerevisiae Scc1p (Mcd1p) protein, homologous to Rad21 in S. pombe (4, 19, 45). The rad21-45 mutation (in S. pombe) also causes X-ray sensitivity and a mitotic hyperrecombination phenotype (4, 18). A similar cohesin complex was identified from X. laevis cell extracts, extensively characterized, and found to be required for sister chromatid cohesion in this system (41, 42). We have identified the SMC1 and SMC3 proteins as constituents of the mammalian recombination complex RC-1, which is present in a variety of somatic cells (29, 30, 63). This complex catalyzes SMC protein-dependent cell-free transfer of duplex DNA molecules, which mimics recombinational repair of gaps and deletions (29, 30). The presence of the SMC1 and SMC3 proteins in these multiprotein complexes furthered speculations about an SMC-mediated functional link between sister chromatid cohesion and recombinational repair (26, 31, 62). Recent evidence from studies of yeast supports this concept. Klein et al. (36) reported that S. cerevisae Smc3p is required not only for meiotic sister chromatid cohesion, but also for meiotic DNA recombination.
Sister chromatid cohesion and DNA recombination are both essential for meiosis (for reviews, see references 35, 54, and 66). In mitotic cells, DNA recombination is primarily a means to repair DNA damage, and the role of cohesins may include the direction of recombinational repair towards the sister chromatid rather than the homologous chromosome (if there is one) (33, 58). In meiosis, recombination and sister chromatid cohesion are essential, but the relationship between the two processes has been modified. Whereas meiotic recombination has to be directed towards the homologue rather than the sister chromatid, cohesion between sister chromatids has to be maintained to ensure the proper orientation and disjunction of homologues at meiosis I (66). During the meiotic prophase, a characteristic, zipperlike protein structure, the synaptonemal complex (SC), is formed between homologues and likely plays an important but not entirely clarified role in adapting recombination and cohesion for meiosis (20, 23). SCs consist of two axial elements (AEs), which are connected by numerous transverse filaments along their lengths. Each AE structurally supports the two sister chromatids of one homologue.
In budding yeast, Smc3p colocalizes with an AE component during the meiotic prophase (36). In meiotic yeast cells, the cohesin protein Scc1p (Mcd1p) is largely replaced by its meiosis-specific homologue, Rec8p, or its homologues in other organisms (36, 47, 69). In S. cerevisiae, Rec8p localizes along the AEs of SCs (36).
These observations also suggest for mammalian meiotic cells an
association of cohesion proteins with the SC. In mammals, two AE
components have been identified, SCP2 (49) and SCP3
(37), which are specifically expressed in the meiotic
prophase. Recently, we have shown that mammalian SMC1 is present in
meiotic nuclei throughout prophase I. Upon permeabilization of
spermatocytes in the presence of Triton X-100, SMC1 is specifically
retained in a dotlike pattern along the AEs of SCs. We also showed that mammalian SMC1 and SMC3 proteins associate with AE components, e.g.,
SCP2 and SCP3 (13). Thus, it is intriguing to hypothesize about an essential role of mammalian SMC proteins in meiotic sister chromatid cohesion
its establishment, maintenance, and resolution
and in meiotic DNA recombination. Differences in mitotic sister chromatid cohesion, however, extend beyond meiotic prophase I. Sister chromatids separate only in the chromosome arms, but not at the centromeres, during meiosis I, leaving centromeric cohesion intact until anaphase II, when all cohesion is finally removed. An important question is
whether there is specific adaptation of SMC proteins and their complexes to their specific meiotic functions. The differences mentioned above in the interplay of sister chromatid cohesion and DNA
recombination between meiosis and mitosis render such adaptation
likely. One way to achieve this adaptation is through expression of a
meiosis-specific homologue or isoform of a somatic protein.
Here, we demonstrate the existence of a meiosis-specific isoform of
mammalian SMC1, named SMC1
, which we describe in this report.
| |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Cloning of SMC1
cDNA.
The 150-kDa protein was isolated
from testis nuclear extracts by immunoprecipitation with anti-SMC3
antibody (63) and separation by sodium dodecyl sulfate
(SDS)-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Sequences from seven
peptides, generated by tryptic digest of the protein, were determined.
Based on this sequence information, oligonucleotides were designed for
the screening of a mouse testis 5'-STRETCH cDNA library
(Clontech Inc.). Several overlapping clones were isolated, which
covered a 1,735-bp fragment at the 5' end of the cDNA. To recover the
missing 3' end, rapid amplification of cDNA ends (RACE)
(15) was performed using a SMART RACE cDNA amplification
kit (Clontech Inc.). Several independent clones have been obtained and
sequenced. The sequence of the C terminus was further verified by
performing nested PCR on 3' RACE PCR products from testis RNA. The PCR
used a gene-specific primer located at the positions corresponding to
aa 1171 to 1179 of SMC1
, and the Nested Universal Primer
(Clontech Inc.), located downstream of poly(A) within the region
defined by the RACE universal primer. Twenty cloned PCR products were
analyzed by restriction analysis, and five clones were sequenced. All
belonged to the same gene and encoded identical C termini. The 4,056-bp
full-length cDNA was assembled using standard cloning protocols.
Northern blot analysis.
Eight-microgram aliquots of total
RNA from various mouse tissues (Ambion) were separated
electrophoretically and transferred to a nylon membrane (Hybond N;
Amersham) using standard protocols (55). Hybridization was
performed as described previously (9). The probe
corresponded to the first 616 bp of the SMC1
cDNA.
Protein purification and antibody generation.
The C-terminal
domain of SMC1
(SMC1
-C) was subcloned into the Escherichia
coli expression vector pQE32 (Qiagen Inc.). The His6-tagged protein, with a molecular mass of 33 kDa, was overexpressed and purified on Ni-nitrilotriacetic acid agarose
resin (Qiagen) and eluted in steps with increasing imidazole.
The yield was 200 to 600 µg per liter of E. coli culture.
About 80% of the total SMC1
-C protein was found to be insoluble
under native conditions and had to be dissolved in 8 M urea. The
remaining 20%, native soluble protein, was mixed with an equal amount
of denatured protein and injected into mice. Monoclonal antibodies were
generated by standard hybridoma techniques. Hybridoma tissue culture
supernatants were screened by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay using
96-well plates that were coated with the C-terminal protein.
Subsequently, the positive supernatants were tested for their
specificities by Western blotting on testis versus somatic cell
extracts and by immunofluorescence on testis versus liver sections. At
least six independent hybridoma clones produced antibodies specific in
both procedures for SMC1
.
Immunoprecipitation. Nuclear extracts from tissue or cells were prepared as described previously (29), with the concentration of dithiothreitol (DTT) lowered to 0.1 mM. Five micrograms of affinity-purified anti-SMC3 antibody was incubated for 4 to 16 h at 4°C with nuclear extract (50 µg of protein unless otherwise indicated), which was diluted 1:5 in buffer IP (phosphate-buffered saline plus 0.75% Brij 58, and 500 mM NaCl). A 20-µl slurry of protein A beads was added, and the mixture was further incubated for 1 h. The beads were washed six times with buffer IP or variations of it as described in the text and were boiled with SDS gel sample buffer before being loaded on reducing 5% polyacrylamide SDS gels. Detection of proteins was done by silver staining according to a published protocol (29).
Preparation of spreads and agar filtrates. Spreads of mouse spermatocytes were prepared by the dry-down technique of Speed (59), as modified by Peters et al. (51). Agar filtrates of lysed rat spermatocytes were prepared as described by Heyting and Dietrich (22).
Immunofluorescence labeling.
Immunofluorescence labeling of
dry-down preparations and agar filtrates was performed as described
previously (22). The slides were mounted in Vecta Shield
(Vector Laboratories Inc., Burlingame, Calif.). The monoclonal
anti-SMC1
antibodies in tissue culture supernatant (from two
independent hybridomas) were diluted 1:1, serum 175 (rabbit anti-SCP3)
was diluted 1:500, CREST serum (anti-kinetochore) was diluted 1:1,000,
and serum H1 (hamster anti-SCP3) was diluted 1:50. Goat anti-rabbit
immunoglobulin G (IgG) conjugated with aminomethylcoumarin acetate
(AMCA) (Vector) or with Texas red (Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories,
West Grove, Pa.), goat anti-mouse IgG conjugated with
fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC) (Jackson), goat anti-hamster IgG
conjugated with AMCA, and goat anti-human IgG conjugated with Texas red
were used as secondary antibodies and were diluted according to the
instructions of the suppliers.
Microscopy.
Spread preparations were examined with a Zeiss
Axioplan research microscope equipped with epifluorescence illumination
and Plan-Neofluar optics. Selected images were directly photographed on
an ISO 400 color negative film using single-band-pass emission filters
(for DAPI [4',6'-diamidino-2-phenylindole]-AMCA, FITC, and Texas red
fluorescence) with separated excitation filters. Negatives were scanned
at high resolution, and their computer images were processed and
combined using the CorelDraw and Corel Photopaint software
packages.
|
Isolation of meiotic cells. Spermatocytes were isolated from rat testes by cell elutriation and density centrifugation according to the method of Heyting and Dietrich (22), and the composition of the isolated cell fraction was analyzed by differential counts of Giemsa-stained preparations, as described previously (38). The cell fraction that was used in this study had the following composition: Sertoli cells, 0.3%; spermatogonia, 0.7%; and spermatocytes, 99%, of which 1.2% was in leptotene-zygotene, 29% was in early-mid pachytene, 54% was in late pachytene or prediffuse diplotene, and 16% was in diffuse or postdiffuse diplotene.
DNA interaction assays. DNA concentrations are expressed as nucleotide equivalents. The assay for retention of double-stranded DNA on nitrocellulose filters through binding to protein (filter binding assay) was performed essentially as described elsewhere (3).
Linear double-stranded DNA fragments were generated by digestion of pBluescript SK(+) (Stratagene Inc.) with AluI and were labeled at their 5' ends with 32P. Reactions were performed in 20-µl mixtures containing 25 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 10 mM KCl, 0.2 mM EDTA, 1 mM DTT, 10 ng of linear DNA, and various amounts of peptide. After 20 min at room temperature, the reaction mixtures were diluted by adding 1 ml of reaction buffer containing 10 mM sodium pyrophosphate. The reaction mixtures were filtered through prewashed 0.1-µm-pore-size nitrocellulose filters (Whatman Inc.). The filters were washed thrice with 1 ml of the reaction buffer containing sodium pyrophosphate, and the radioactivity retained on the filters was measured in a liquid scintillation counter. The gel shift (gel retardation) assay was performed as described previously (1, 2). For a DNA substrate, we used a 200-bp DNA fragment of the 5S rRNA gene or a 230-bp DNA fragment derived from the double-stranded form of M13mp8, which we know are good binding substrates for SMC protein domains (1, 2). The reaction buffer contained 0.8 pmol of 32P 3'-end-labeled DNA (5,000 to 10,000 cpm) in 20 mM HEPES (pH 7.5), 1 mM DTT, and 0.1 mg of bovine serum albumin (ultrapure; Amersham-Pharmacia Inc.)/ml. The SMC1
peptide consisted of the C-terminal 28 aa
(TEDQEGSRSHRKPRVPRVSMSPKSPQSR; theoretical pI, 11.4). The
positive control peptide was derived from mouse Rad54L (34), aa 152 to 181 (KVCRPHQREGVKFLWECVTSRRIPGSHGLI; theoretical pI, 10.09). The
negative control peptide was derived from human Rad21
(44), aa 612 to 631 (TQEEPYSDIIATPGPRFHII;
theoretical pI, 4.65).
The assay for network formation was done as described for RecA
(7) or mammalian DNA binding proteins (17),
with some modifications. The assay measures coaggregation of DNA into
DNA-protein complexes that sediment rapidly. The DNA substrate was
AluI-digested (blunt-ended),
5'-32P-labeled plasmid DNA as used for the filter
binding assay. Various amounts of peptide were incubated with the DNA
(1.5 pmol) in a volume of 50 µl for 20 min at room temperature in the
DNA binding buffer also used for gel shift experiments. The reaction
mixture was then centrifuged for 3 min at 14,000 × g.
The supernatant was transferred to a scintillation vial, and the pellet
was solubilized in 100 µl of 0.1% SDS and also transferred to a
scintillation vial. The supernatant (nonaggregated) and pellet
(aggregated) DNAs were measured. All experiments were done in triplicate.
Nucleotide sequence accession numbers.
The GenBank accession
number of mSMC1
is AF303827.
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
A novel SMC protein complex from testis. Earlier, we used affinity-purified polyclonal anti-SMC3 antibodies, raised against the C-terminal domain of bovine SMC3, in immunoprecipitation experiments with nuclear extracts of mitotically dividing cells of human, mouse, hamster, and bovine origin (reference 63 and unpublished observations). Under stringent precipitation conditions, the SMC1 and SMC3 proteins were observed as the only strong bands in silver-stained SDS polyacrylamide gels, used to analyze the precipitates. A weaker 120-kDa band was often visible and probably represented the Rad21 protein. Immunoprecipitation experiments with nuclear extracts prepared from a variety of mouse and bovine tissues, however, revealed a marked difference between extracts from testes and all other extracts. From testes, we coimmunoprecipitated a hitherto undescribed protein that migrates at an approximately 145- to 155-kDa position between SMC1 and SMC3, depending on the particular gel electrophoresis conditions (Fig. 1). The 150-kDa protein was also not observed in immunoprecipitates from various human, mouse, and hamster cell lines, nor was it present in cytoplasmic extract fractions (63; data not shown). However, a faint 150-kDa band was visible in immunoprecipitates from ovary extracts (Fig. 1A). Comparable results were obtained with mouse tissues (Fig. 1B and F). The coprecipitated protein from mouse testis extract migrates at 155 kDa, a position slightly higher than that of the bovine protein. The 150-kDa protein is present neither in resting nor in activated, proliferating somatic mouse cells (Fig. 1D).
Incubation of the precipitates with bacterial alkaline phosphatase or the inclusion of ATP (1 mM) or of the phosphatase inihibitor o-vanadate (0.5 mM) in the extracts and all buffers did not alter the result (not shown). The characteristic band pattern also did not change upon variation of the precipitation and wash conditions, e.g., the use of different detergents, differently pretreated protein A or protein G beads, or protein G-precleared extracts (not shown). Association of the 150-kDa protein with SMC3 was found to be as resistant to stringent precipitation reaction conditions as that of SMC1 with SMC3. The 150-kDa protein was also immunoprecipitated from testis nuclear extract fractions that had been obtained by gel filtration of the extract through a large BioGel A15m chromatography column. Similar chromatography experiments were done before for either purification of RC-1 from thymus or other analysis of testis extract fractions (13, 30) (Fig. 1E). The protein was found together with SMC3 in fractions that represent molecular masses of globular proteins of around 1 MDa and
albeit in smaller
amounts
at 3 MDa. At 3 MDa, more of SMC1-SMC3 was visible, possibly
indicating differences in masses between complexes based on SMC1-SMC3
or the 150-kDa protein and SMC3. Thus, the 150-kDa protein
coprecipitates and copurifies with SMC3 and is likely a component of a
large multiprotein complex, similar but not identical to that
containing the SMC1-SMC3 heterodimer (13).
In immunoblotting, neither a monoclonal nor an affinity-purified
polyclonal antibody, both raised against the C-terminal domain of
SMC1, recognizes any protein migrating between the SMC1 and SMC3
proteins (13, 63). Likewise, anti-SMC3 antibodies do not
react with the protein in immunoblotting. Thus, the 150-kDa protein is
not a degradation product of SMC1 or very homologous to SMC3.
From immunoblotting and immunoprecipitation experiments, we estimate an
approximate relative abundance of SMC1
, 150-kDa protein, and SMC3 of
1:2:3 in total testis nuclear extracts. In extracts from purified
spermatocyte preparations, which consist of >99% meiotic cells (70%
late pachytene-diplotene [22, 38]), only a small amount
of SMC1
was seen, while the 150-kDa protein and SMC3 precipitated in
an approximately equimolar ratio (Fig. 1F).
Large-scale immunoprecipitation followed by SDS-polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis and amino acid sequencing of the 150-kDa protein
allowed us to deduce seven peptide sequences 6 to 12 aa in length. This
information was used to generate oligonucleotides with which a mouse
testis library was screened. By a combination of further screening and
reverse transcription-PCR from mouse testis RNA, the entire cDNA
was cloned and then sequenced. This cDNA encodes a protein that has not
been reported previously and that shows a high level of homology to
mammalian SMC1 (Fig. 2A). The homology is highest in the conserved functional domains of SMC
proteins, the N-terminal, C-terminal, and hinge domains. Lower degrees
of homology were found with SMC4 and SMC3. Dendrogram analyses of the
N- and C-terminal domains confirmed the close relationship to SMC1
(Fig. 2B). Therefore, we call the protein SMC1
, indicating an SMC1
variant or isoform. The "classical" SMC1 may be termed SMC1
.
SMC1
bears a unique C-terminal sequence of 28 aa that has been found
neither in any other SMC protein nor in the databases. Among the 28 aa
are 4 proline residues and 7 arginine and lysine residues. This
C-terminal peptide is very basic, with a theoretical pI of 11.4. In
contrast, the entire C-terminal domain of SMC1
, with 186 aa, has a
theoretical pI of 6.9. This C-terminal motif was present in all
independently isolated clones and was confirmed by RT-PCR of mouse
testis and subsequent sequencing of PCR products. SMC1
shows all
motifs characteristic of SMC proteins, including the N-terminal Walker A box, the C-terminal Walker B box, and the signature motif typical of
ABC-ATPases (28, 68), as well as the extended coiled-coil domains with heptad repeats and the hinge region.
|
Specific expression of SMC1
in meiotic cells.
Northern
blotting of RNA from a variety of mouse tissues was performed using a
616-bp 5' DNA fragment of SMC1
as a probe (Fig.
3). This experiment confirmed
testis-specific expression of the gene. The specific signal of about
4.5 kb was not seen in RNA from any of the other tissues. We also used
the same probe to analyze RNA prepared from purified spermatocytes. The
same 4.5-kb signal was observed, and no other band was detected (not shown).
|
, expressed in E. coli, and
purified by affinity chromatography on Ni-Sepharose (Fig. 4A). The C-terminal protein was partially
soluble under native conditions, and the insoluble precipitates were
solubilized in 8 M urea. A mixture of native and denatured protein was
used for immunization. We obtained several hybridoma lines that produce antibodies that specifically recognize SMC1
but not SMC1
(Fig. 4B). No cross-reaction with even large amounts of the purified C-terminal domain of SMC1
, or with SMC proteins present in somatic cell nuclear extracts, was observed (Fig. 4B and C). The tissue specificity of SMC1
was also confirmed for a large variety of bovine
tissues (Fig. 4D). We obtained several antibodies that recognize
SMC1
of mouse, rat, and bovine origin. Immunoprecipitation using the anti-SMC1
antibody with testis extracts confirmed the association of SMC1
with SMC3 (Fig. 4E). We never observed SMC1
to coimmunoprecipitate with anti-SMC1
antibodies.
|
in testis. Mouse testis sections and, for
control, liver sections were prepared and immunoprobed with
FITC-labeled anti-SMC1
and stained with propidium iodide (after RNase treatment) to visualize nuclear DNA (Fig.
5). No specific anti-SMC1
signal was
obtained with liver sections. In testis, however, strong staining of
prophase I nuclei was observed. The antibodies stained the compact
chromosomal axes within the meiotic nuclei, indicative of the presence
of SMC1
along the SCs. In these sections, only weak staining was
observed in cells of later stages. These results were confirmed with
three other anti-SMC1
antibodies (not shown).
|
was also found in preparations of SCs from
rat spermatocytes (13) (not shown). As these preparations contain only a very limited number of proteins (<20) and are prepared under stringent conditions, this indicates a close association of
SMC1
with SCs.
Chromosomal localization of SMC1
throughout meiosis.
High-resolution analysis of rat spermatocyte nuclear spreads confirmed
and significantly extended our initial observations (Fig.
6 and
7). Several different
anti-SMC1
antibodies were used in immunofluorescence, all yielding
identical results. Spreads of cells in consecutive stages of meiosis up
to anaphase II were analyzed for SMC1
, the AE-specific
protein SCP3, and kinetochores (Fig. 6). SMC1
tightly colocalizes
with SCP3 from early prophase I (leptotene and zygotene) on along the
entire AEs of the chromosomes in presynapsed (leptotene-zygotene [Fig.
6A]), synapsed (pachytene), unsynapsed (XY bivalent [Fig. 6B]), and
desynapsed (diplotene [Fig. 6C]) regions. The distribution of SMC1
appears rather uniform along the AEs, with occasional more intense
dots. Until diplotene, there is no concentration of SMC1
around the
centromeres (Fig. 6A and B). SCP3 and SMC1
remain tightly associated
with the AEs throughout pachytene. Upon desynapsis of the homologous
chromosomes in diplotene, SCP3 and SMC1
start to accumulate around
the centromeres and to dissociate from the chromosome arms (Fig. 7C to
E). Staining for both proteins is also visible at sites of bridges
between the homologues, which possibly represent sites of crossover
(Fig. 6C).
|
|
we find in
the chromosome arms, but intense staining remains present at the
centromeres. This is obvious in diakinesis (Fig. 6D), metaphase I (Fig.
6E), and up to metaphase II (Fig. 6F). In anaphase II, SMC1
is not
visibly associated with the chromosome anymore. Aggregates containing
SCP3 can still be seen in anaphase II, but most of these have detached
from the kinetochores (Fig. 6H to J). The colocalization of SCP3 and
SMC1
is also not perfect in other respects. The SMC1
signal on
the AEs has a more granular appearance (though far less dotty than that
of SMC1
[13]), and there is a limited SMC1
but no
SCP3 signal present on peripheral chromatin loops from leptotene until
metaphase II. Moreover, some SCP3, but very little if any SMC1
,
persists in the chromosome arms in metaphase I (Fig. 6E).
To compare the chromosomal localization of SMC1
with that of
SMC1
, we performed additional immunofluorescence experiments on agar
filtrates of rat spermatocytes (13), using anti-SMC1
, anti-SMC1
, and anti-SCP3 (Fig. 6K to M). As described by us earlier (13), SMC1
is present throughout spermatocyte nuclei in
frozen sections (Fig. 6A). However, if spermatocytes are lysed in
buffers containing Triton X-100 (as is done for agar filtration), or if they are permeabilized in such buffers (as we have done previously with
frozen sections [13]), SMC1
is preferentially
retained in intensely labeled dots along the AEs. Thus, the
localization of SMC1
differs from that of SMC1
, which is almost
uniformly distributed along the AEs. Also, the SMC1
dots appear not
to be as close to the AEs as the SMC1
staining (Fig. 6K and L). Thus, SMC1
seems to localize most closely to the SC, while SMC1
also appears SC associated, albeit not centered as much towards the
AEs. Strikingly, and unlike SMC1
, SMC1
did not accumulate around
the centromeres in diakinesis and metaphase I (Fig. 6 M).
We also analyzed the localization of SMC3 in spermatocytes by triple
labeling of SMC3, SCP3, and SMC1
, using frozen sections that had not
been exposed to Triton X-100 (Fig. 7A to C) or agar filtrates (Fig.
7D), and by triple labeling of SMC3, SCP3, and kinetochores, using
dry-down preparations (Fig. 7E to K). Along the AEs, SMC3, like
SMC1
, occurred mainly homogeneously distributed on the AEs. From
late diplotene up to metaphase II, SMC3 was concentrated at the
kinetochores, very similar to the localization seen for SMC1
(Fig.
7F to H and J), whereas SMC3
like SMC1
was not detectable anymore
at the kinetochores in anaphase II (Fig. 7I and K). In SMC1
-SMC3-SCP3 triple labelings of frozen sections, SMC3 does not
colocalize with SMC1
, indicating yet another difference between SMC1
and SMC1
. Unexpectedly, we could not demonstrate the tight colocalization of SMC3 with AEs if we labeled the AEs with anti-SCP2 rather than anti-SCP3 (not shown and reference 13).
Apparently, the anti-SCP2 antibodies interfere with the immunolabeling
of SMC3 in AEs, perhaps implying a close association of SMC3 with SCP2.
Initial analysis of the C-terminal motif.
As noted above,
SMC1
carries an unusual, basic C-terminal amino acid sequence of 28 aa that has not been found in any other SMC protein. Analyzing this
sequence, we found a nuclear localization signal (NLS) sequence (RKPR
[24]), and therefore, the C-terminal motif may
contribute to nuclear import of the protein. In addition, the basic pI
of the peptide and two consecutive SP motifs (10) renders
interaction with DNA likely. We tested both hypotheses.
.
Preliminary evidence for an interaction of the 28-aa peptide with DNA
was obtained in filter binding and gel shift (gel retardation) assays.
For a positive control in these assays, we used a peptide derived from
the Rad54L protein (34); for a negative control, we used a
Rad21-derived peptide from a non-DNA binding region (44).
In filter binding assays (43, 53), we used
AluI-digested (blunt-ended) plasmid DNA, radioactively
labeled at the 5' ends. The DNA was efficiently retained by the peptide
and the Rad54 control peptide but not by the Rad21 control peptide. The
amount of DNA retained on the nitrocellulose filters was directly
proportional to the amount of peptide used in the assay (not shown).
In gel shift experiments, end-labeled DNA fragments, either from
M13mp18 or from the 5S rRNA gene, were used (1, 2, 40) and
incubated with increasing amounts of the peptide. The results (Fig.
8A) show efficient binding of the
SMC1
-C peptide to the DNA substrate. The migration distance from the
start position linearly decreased with increasing amounts of peptide
added, with no indication of cooperative binding. Surprisingly, almost
all DNA was shifted to a higher position even with submolar amounts of
peptide (the ratio of peptide to DNA was 1:12 in nucleotide equivalents
or 1:2 in DNA molecules). This may indicate binding of one peptide
molecule to more than one DNA molecule, i.e., network formation.
|
peptide. The Rad21 peptide did not yield a signal above background, and the Rad54L peptide
was active but eightfold less efficient than the SMC1
-C terminal
peptide (not shown). Network formation as seen in this assay starts at
a minimal molar ratio of peptide to DNA of 1:1 (in nucleotides).
However, to be efficiently pelleted, DNA-protein aggregates of
considerable mass have to be created. Therefore, the true minimum ratio
required for one peptide molecule to bind several DNA molecules may be
significantly lower. Future molecular studies will have to determine
the details of the reaction requirements, specificities, and mechanism,
as well as the function of the motif in the context of the entire
protein or protein complex.
Together, these initial results demonstrate DNA binding activities of
the unique SMC1
C-terminal motif.
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
In this report, we demonstrate for the first time the existence of
a tissue- and cell-type-specific isoform of a mammalian SMC protein,
SMC1
. Specific expression of SMC1
was found in meiotic cells and
tissue from several mammalian species, including mouse, rat, and cow.
This, and the high degree of evolutionary conservation generally found
among SMC proteins, renders SMC1
likely to exist in humans as well.
Indeed, the working draft sequence of human chromosome 22 contains a
gene highly homologous to the mouse SMC1
gene (GenBank accession
number NT011522). This gene was mapped to the region 22q13.31.
Currently, only one locus in this region is known to be associated with
human disease, i.e., methemoglobin reductase deficiency, which
apparently has no direct connection to chromatin dynamics. We could
not, however, identify a corresponding gene in the S. cerevisiae genome. While there exist a few open reading frames
with low homology, no certain assignment to SMC1
could be made.
Likewise, no C. elegans or S. pombe orthologues
were detected in the database. Thus, the SMC1 gene may have diversified
in higher eukaryotes throughout evolution into a universally and a
meiotically expressed isoform. Swapping of SMC proteins in somatic
cells has been reported for the gene dosage compensation complex in
C. elegans (39), but no SMC protein isoform,
and no meiosis-specific SMC protein, has been described.
While up to 70% homologous to SMC1
in the globular domains, the new
SMC1
displays a characteristic feature that distinguishes it from
SMC1
: the highly basic C-terminal domain of 28 aa. Distinct C-terminal protein sequences, albeit not of such unusual composition, that are specific for meiotic isoforms of somatic proteins have been
described, for example, for mammalian DNA ligase III (6). We predicted that this unique C-terminal sequence would contribute important functions to SMC1
. It may, for example, affect
interactions of the protein with DNA, or it may act as an NLS. The
latter proved to be unlikely, since the peptide on its own did not
confer nuclear localization on EGFP. An NLS function may also not be
necessary: in SMC1
, there are seven more predicted NLSs distributed
all over the protein. The C-terminal peptide, however, interacts with DNA. The basic pI and the presence of two SP motifs, known to constitute DNA binding motifs (e.g., in histone H1
[10]), rendered this likely. Indeed, initial evidence
from three independent assays, filter binding, gel shift, and
protein-DNA network formation, suggests that the peptide efficiently
binds DNA. The gel shift experiments indicated binding of one peptide
molecule to more than one DNA molecule, i.e., possible network
formation. Preliminary experiments with network formation confirmed the
capacity of the peptide molecules to link several DNA molecules, i.e.,
to form DNA-peptide aggregates. The ability of short peptides to
promote networking-related reactions, such as homologous DNA pairing, has been reported, for example, for a 20-aa peptide derived from the
E. coli RecA protein (67). A detailed
molecular analysis of these DNA interactions, and the demonstration of
their significance in vivo, are important subjects for future studies.
Together, the unique C-terminal sequence of SMC1
is likely to
codetermine the DNA binding properties of the protein.
The new evidence for specialization of mammalian SMC proteins is
reminiscent of what has been reported for a limited number of other
proteins that are also involved in DNA dynamics. Examples in yeast are
the Scc1-type proteins
also collectively called gordin proteins
(48)
and Rec8p proteins, as well as the Rad51p and Dmc1p
proteins (5, 47, 49, 65, 69). Recently, a meiosis-specific homologue of the Scc3 protein, STAG 3, has been described
(52). Whereas Rad51p and MCD1p-Scc1p-RAD21 exist in both
somatic and meiotic cells, Dmc1p and Rec8p of yeast and of higher
eukaryotes are restricted to meiotic cells (although human Rec8p
transcripts were also found in spermatids and the thymus
[50]) and postmeiotic cells (47). In
meiosis, the relationship between cohesion and recombination is
modified, and apparently this is accompanied by replacement of
components of the protein complexes involved, like the gordins. Our
results suggest that in mammals one of the SMC components of cohesin,
SMC1
, is replaced by a meiosis-specific isoform, SMC1
. As had
been found for the gordins and Rad51 in yeast, SMC1
is only
partially replaced in mammals: SMC1
is present in both somatic and
meiotic cells, whereas SMC1
exists only in meiotic cells.
Earlier, we demonstrated the association of SMC1
with meiotic
chromatin in rat spermatocytes, and we have shown its presence in
preparations of SCs (13). Although SMC1
and SMC1
are
coimmunoprecipitated from total testis extracts by anti-SMC3
antibodies, a fraction of SMC1
in spermatocytes does not colocalize
with SMC3. Thus, two different SMC3-containing complexes exist in
testis. The slightly different behavior of SMC1
-SMC3 and
SMC1
-SMC3 in gel filtration, with the latter eluting predominantly
at a lower-molecular-mass position around 1 MDa, further indicates two
different higher-order complexes of different masses or stabilities
that share SMC3 but contain either one of the two SMC1 isoforms.
Furthermore, very little SMC1
, but an equimolar amount of SMC1
,
is coimmunoprecipitated with SMC3 from late-prophase I spermatocytes.
More evidence for this hypothesis originated from chromosomal
localization studies.
As for SMC1
, expression of SMC1
is regulated during meiotic cell
development, i.e., most protein is observed in prophase I of meiosis.
There are, however, important differences in chromosomal localization
between SMC1
and SMC1
. While SMC1
is distributed throughout
the meiotic prophase nucleus and
upon permeabilization or lysis of
cells in the presence of Triton X-100
is preferentially retained in a
dotlike pattern along AEs of SCs (reference 13 and this
paper), SMC1
is more tightly associated and more uniformly distributed along the AEs. In late prophase I (pachytene-diplotene), SMC1
also associates with bridges between the AEs of homologues, which possibly represent the sites of crossover. This has not been
observed for SMC1
. In addition, the association of SMC1
with the
AEs of SCs seems to be even closer than that of SMC1
with the SC.
Thus, there may be a structural organization in layers, with SMC1
constituting the inner and SMC1
an outer SMC-containing layer at the
SC. Finally, in diplotene and diakinesis, SMC1
and SMC3 accumulate
around the centromeres, where the proteins persist until anaphase II,
whereas SMC1
does not concentrate at the centromeres in any stage of
meiosis. This strongly suggests that SMC1
, and not SMC1
, is
involved with SMC3 in the maintenance of centromere cohesion during the
first meiotic division in mammals. In S. cerevisiae, a
similar conclusion was reached for another meiosis-specific component
of cohesin, Rec8 (36). SCP3 (reference 12 and
this paper) and SCP2 (56) also accumulate at the
centromeres from late diplotene until anaphase II. It remains to be
investigated whether these SC proteins contribute directly to
maintenance of centromere cohesion. Most likely, the dissociation of
SMC1
and SMC1
from the chromosome arms in late prophase
contributes to the release of sister chromatid arm cohesion, while
centromeric cohesion is further supported by SMC1
.
In addition, we observed that preparations of nuclear extracts and
total cell lysates, especially those from purified pachytene-diplotene spermatocytes (22), contained a characteristic 85-kDa
degradation product of SMC1
but no SMC1
or SMC3 degradation
products (not shown). Northern blotting showed the same 4.5-kb
transcript in RNA from purified spermatocytes as in testis RNA,
rendering alternative splicing unlikely. Thus, SMC1
appears to be
more sensitive to proteolysis than the other SMC proteins. One may
speculate that such proteolysis may be required for the release of arm
cohesion, similar to degradation of Rec8. The SMC1
degradation
product does not coprecipitate with SMC3, indicating that the 85-kDa
fragment of SMC1
is not present in a complex with SMC3.
Alternatively, it may also be cleaved quickly after synthesis and thus
prevented from associating with SMC3. The nature of the protease that
cleaves SMC1
, and whether such cleavage is necessary for meiotic
progression, are among the questions now to be addressed.
In summary, we propose the existence of two multiprotein complexes in
meiotic cells that are based on two different SMC1-SMC3 cores:
SMC1
-SMC3 and SMC1
-SMC3. Both complexes associate with meiotic
chromatin and should contribute to meiotic sister chromatid cohesion.
The "
-complex," however, appears more loosely chromosome associated, in a punctate pattern, and also in the chromatin loops. This complex dissociates and is released from the chromatin in late
prophase I. The "
-complex" closely localizes to the SC and remains chromosome associated at the centromeres beyond prophase I
until metaphase-anaphase II. Therefore, the
-complex, and not the
-complex, is likely responsible for centromeric cohesion until
anaphase II. The interplay among meiotic sister chromatid cohesion, DNA
recombination, and the new meiosis-specific SMC1
is now amenable to
future studies.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We thank Mirjam van Aalderen for expert technical assistance and David Avila for protein sequencing. E.R. was supported by a grant from the Human Frontier of Science Foundation and by NIH grant GM62517. M.E. was financially supported by grant no. 901-01-097 of The Netherlands Society for Scientific Research (NWO).
An initial part of this work was done at the Basel Institute for Immunology, Basel, Switzerland.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* Corresponding author. Mailing address: Institute for Gene Therapy and Molecular Medicine, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, Box 1496, New York, NY 10029. Phone: (212) 859-8259. Fax: (212) 803-6740. E-mail: rolf.jessberger{at}mssm.edu.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. |
Akhmedov, A. T.,
M. Frei,
C. Tsai-Pflugfelder,
B. Kemper,
S. M. Gasser, and R. Jessberger.
1998.
Structural maintenance of chromosomes: protein C-terminal domains bind preferentially to DNA with secondary structure.
J. Biol. Chem.
273:24088-24094 |
| 2. |
Akhmedov, A. T.,
B. Gross, and R. Jessberger.
1999.
Mammalian SMC3 C-terminal and coiled-coil protein domains specifically bind palindromic DNA, do not block DNA ends, and prevent DNA bending.
J. Biol. Chem.
274:38216-38224 |
| 3. | Bayne, M. L., R. F. Alexander, and R. M. Benbow. 1984. DNA binding protein from ovaries of the frog Xenopus laevis which promotes concatenation of linear DNA. J. Mol. Biol. 172:87-108[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 4. |
Birkenbihl, R. P., and S. Subramani.
1992.
Cloning and characterization of rad21, an essential gene of Schizosaccharomyces pombe involved in DNA double-strand break repair.
Nucleic Acids Res.
20:6605-6611 |
| 5. | Bishop, D. K., D. Park, L. Xu, and N. Kleckner. 1992. DMC1: a meiosis-specific yeast homolog of E. coli recA required for recombination, synaptonemal complex formation, and cell cycle progression. Cell 69:439-456[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 6. | Chen, J., A. E. Tomkinson, W. Ramos, Z. R. Mackey, S. Danehower, C. A. Walter, R. A. Schultz, J. M. Besterman, and I. Husain. 1995. Mammalian DNA ligase III: molecular cloning, chromosomal localization, and expression in spermatocytes undergoing meiotic recombination. Mol. Cell. Biol. 15:5412-5422[Abstract]. |
| 7. |
Chow, S. A., and C. M. Radding.
1985.
Ionic inhibition of formation of RecA nucleoprotein networks blocks homologous pairing.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
82:5646-5650 |
| 8. |
Chuang, P. T.,
J. D. Lieb, and B. Meyer.
1996.
Sex-specific assembly of a dosage compensation complex on the nematode X chromosome.
Science
274:1736-1738 |
| 9. |
Church, G. M., and W. Gilbert.
1984.
Genomic sequencing.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
81:1991-1995 |
| 10. | Churchill, M. E., and M. Suzuki. 1989. SPKK motifs prefer to bind to DNA at A/T-rich sites. EMBO J. 8:4189-4195[Medline]. |
| 11. |
Cobbe, N., and M. M. S. Heck.
2000.
SMCs in the world of chromosome biology from prokaryotes to higher eukaryotes.
J. Struct. Biol.
129:123-143[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 12. | Dobson, M., R. E. Pearlman, A. Karaiskakis, B. Spyropoulos, and P. B. Moens. 1994. Synaptonemal complex proteins: occurrence, epitope mapping and chromosome disjunction. J. Cell Sci. 107:2749-2760[Abstract]. |
| 13. | Eijpe, M., C. Heyting, B. Gross, and R. Jessberger. 2000. Association of mammalian SMC1 and SMC3 proteins with meiotic chromosomes and synaptonemal complexes. J. Cell Sci. 113:673-682[Abstract]. |
| 14. | Eijpe, M., H. Offenberg, W. Goedecke, and C. Heyting. 2000. Localisation of RAD50 and MRE11 in spermatocyte nuclei of mouse and rat. Chromosoma 109:123-132[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 15. |
Frohman, M. A.,
M. K. Dush, and G. R. Martin.
1988.
Rapid production of full-length cDNAs from rare transcripts: amplification using a single gene specific oligonucleotide primer.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
85:8998-9002 |
| 16. | Fousteri, M. I., and A. R. Lehmann. 2000. A novel SMC protein complex in Schizosaccharomyces pombe contains the Rad18 DNA repair protein. EMBO J. 19:1691-1702[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 17. |
Ganea, D.,
P. Moore,
L. Chekuri, and R. Kucherlapati.
1987.
Characterization of an ATP-dependent DNA strand transferase from human cells.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
7:3124-3130 |
| 18. | Grossenbacher-Grunder, A. M., and O. Thuriaux. 1981. Spontaneous and UV-induced recombination in radiation-sensitive mutants of Schizosaccharomyces pombe. Mutat. Res. 81:37-48[Medline]. |
| 19. | Guacci, V., D. Koshland, and A. Strunnikov. 1997. A direct link between sister chromatid cohesion and chromosome condensation revealed through the analysis of MCD1 in S. cerevisiae. Cell 91:47-58[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 20. | Hawley, R. S., and T. Arbel. 1993. Yeast genetics and the fall of the classical view of meiosis. Cell 72:301-303[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 21. | Heck, M. M. S. 1997. Condensins, cohesins, and chromosome architecture: how to make and break a mitotic chromosome. Cell 91:5-8[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 22. | Heyting, C., and A. J. J. Dietrich. 1991. Meiotic chromosome preparation and labeling. Methods Cell. Biol. 35:177-202[Medline]. |
| 23. | Heyting, C. 1996. Synaptonemal complexes: structure and function. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 8:389-396[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 24. | Hicks, G. R., and N. V. Raikhel. 1995. Protein import into the nucleus: an integrated view. Annu. Rev. Cell. Dev. Biol. 11:155-188[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 25. | Hirano, T., R. Kobayashi, and M. Hirano. 1997. Condensins, chromosome condensation protein complexes containing XCAP-C, XCAP-E and a Xenopus homolog of the Drosophila barren protein. Cell 89:511-521[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 26. | Hirano, T.. 1998. SMC protein complexes and higher-order chromosome dynamics. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 10:317-322[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 27. |
Hirano, T..
1999.
SMC-mediated chromosome mechanics: a conserved scheme from bacteria to vertebrates?
Genes Dev.
13:11-19 |
| 28. | Hopfner, K. P., A. Karcher, D. S. Shin, L. Craig, L. M. Arthur, J. P. Carney, and J. A. Tainer. 2000. Structural biology of Rad50 ATPase: ATP-driven conformational control in DNA double-strand break repair and the ABC-ATPase superfamily. Cell 101:789-800[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 29. |
Jessberger, R.,
V. Podust,
U. Hübscher, and P. Berg.
1993.
A mammalian protein complex that repairs double-strand breaks and deletions by recombination.
J. Biol. Chem.
268:15070-15079 |
| 30. | Jessberger, R., B. Riwar, H. Baechtold, and A. T. Akhmedov. 1996. SMC proteins constitute two subunits of the mammalian recombination protein complex RC-1. EMBO J. 15:4061-4068[Medline]. |
| 31. | Jessberger, R., C. Frei, and S. M. Gasser. 1998. Chromosome dynamics: the SMC protein family. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 8:254-259[CrossRef][Medline]. |
| 32. | Jones, S., and J. Sgouros. 2001. The cohesin complex: sequence homologies, interaction networks and shared motifs. Genome Biol. 2:0009.1-0009.12. |
| 33. | Kadyk, L. C., and L. H. Hartwell. 1993. Replication-dependent sister chromatid recombination in rad1 mutants of Saccharomyces cerevisiae. Genetics 133:469-489[Abstract]. |
| 34. | Kanaar, R., C. Troelstra, S. M. Swagemakers, J. Essers, B. Smit, J. H. Franssen, A. Pastink, O. Y. Bezzubova, J. M. Buerstedde, B. Clever, W. D. Heyer, and J. H. |