/
Comparative enrichment of Phosphopeptides from ergosterol-t Comparative enrichment of Phosphopeptides from ergosterol-t

Comparative enrichment of Phosphopeptides from ergosterol-t - PowerPoint Presentation

jane-oiler
jane-oiler . @jane-oiler
Follow
439 views
Uploaded On 2016-04-06

Comparative enrichment of Phosphopeptides from ergosterol-t - PPT Presentation

Athaliana leaves Robyn Klemptner University of Johannesburg MSc supervisors Dr LA Piater Prof IA Dubery Prof R Meijboom Background BIGGEST CHALLENGE 9 BILLION people by 2050 ID: 275196

plant protein amp ergosterol protein plant ergosterol amp figure dendrimer 2010 kda proteins transduction signal enrichment analysis etoh immunity

Share:

Link:

Embed:

Download Presentation from below link

Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Comparative enrichment of Phosphopeptide..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.


Presentation Transcript

Slide1

Comparative enrichment of Phosphopeptides from ergosterol-treated A.thaliana leaves

Robyn KlemptnerUniversity of JohannesburgMSc supervisors:Dr. L.A. PiaterProf. I.A. DuberyProf. R. MeijboomSlide2

BackgroundBIGGEST CHALLENGE

: 9 BILLION people by 2050!!!Food security – global importance.Plant exposed to multiple pathogens.Price hikes – plant diseases.

Preformed defenses.

Innate immunity = overcome pathogens.

PAMP-Triggered Immunity (PTI) + Effector-triggered immunity (ETI).

(Lochman & Mikes, 2006 ; Godfray, 2009)Slide3

Figure 1: A figure that clearly indicates the two mechanisms of pathogen detection and induction of corresponding immune responses.(Klemptner

et al., 2014)Innate immune responses

MAMPs/PAMPs

Preformed defenses compromised.

Bind PRR at cell membrane.S

ignal transduction.WRKYs.MAMP/PAMP-triggered immunity (M/PTI).

Effectors

A

gainst specific host.

S

uppress M/PTI.

E

ffector-triggered immunity (ETI).

Recognized by intracellular receptors.

ROS, HR, SAR.Slide4

Ergosterol – an “orphan” MAMPErgosterol

= Fungal sterol, fungal cell membrane component.Implicated in major crop losses world wide.Receptor/signal transduction pathway not yet elucidated.

Trigger immune response in sugar beet, grape, tomato and tobacco plants.

Reactive oxygen species, ion fluxes,

PR proteins, LTPs

.

Figure 2

: 3D models of various sterol compounds that have been used to study receptor interactions in plant-pathogen interactions. A: Ergosterol; B:

Brassicasterol

;

C: Sitosterol

;

D: Stigmasterol; E: Campesterol; F: Cholesterol.

A B C D E F

(

Avrova

et al

.,

2004;

Wang

,

2004;

Rossard

et al

.,

2010

;

Weete

et al.,

2010; Klemptner

et al.,

2014

)Slide5

What we know….

Calcium-dependent protein kinases – Ca2+ influx.Phospholipase Kinase C.MAPKs.

WRKY transcription factors.

Phenylpropanoid pathway – metabolites.

H

2O2 generation.

Ergosterol perception is specific.Slide6

Proteomics VS Genomics and Metabolomics

Genomics= genetic level = mRNA….

 

But

mRNA = protein? NOT ALWAYS!

 

 

“Lost in Translation”

 

 

Proteomics

= key players in

signaling.

 

= receptors, kinases,

PR-proteins.

 

 

Metabolomics

= metabolites:

jasmonates

etc

.

= overlapping/

intersecting.

 

= “end products”

 

= pathways???Slide7

= Post-translational modification= structural change = functional changeSerine

, Threonine and Tyrosine residues of proteins = kinases = signal transduction activation.Kinases

vs

Phosphatases = regulation

.(Schulze, 2010)

Phosphorylation

Slide8

(Yang et al, 1997; Thurston et al.,

2005)Figure 3: An overview of signal transduction pathways in defense responses in plants. Phosphoproteins & signal transductionSlide9

Enriching phosphoproteinsImportant players in signal transduction

BUT occur in low abundance! < only transiently phosphorylated!Provide a greater knowledge of defense-related signal transduction networks.Methods of enrichment include:Affinity chromatographyAntibody-based affinity capture

Chemical derivatization

Metal ion-based affinity capture

Thus, more sensitive and reliable method required = DENDRIMERS

!Novel proteome investigation in plants since dendrimer-based enrichment techniques have yet to be applied to plant studies.

(

Meimoun

et al.,

2007; Iliuk

et al.,

2010)Slide10

Dendrimers

(Holister

et al

.,

2003)Figure 4:

Dendrimer nanopolymers of varying generations.Slide11

Dendrimer isolation mechanism

(Peters, 2005)

Add dendrimer to

tryptic

digest

Phosphorylated groups bind to surface amino groups

Filter through spin-column to isolate dendrimer + bound peptides

Cleave peptides by acid hydrolysis

Figure 5

:

The fundamental dendrimer-based phosphopeptide isolation mechanism. Slide12

PolyMAC and PAMAM

(Iliuk et al., 2010; Mandeville & Tajmir-Raihi, 2010)

Figure

6

A & B

: The PolyMAC dendrimer and its 2 types of side-chain moieties; the traditional PAMAM dendrimer with amine surface groups.

A

B

Dendrimers with modified terminal groups on the surface.

Specific affinity for phosphorylated amino acid residues.Slide13

HypothesisSlide14

ObjectivesElicitation of

A.thaliana with ergosterol and total protein expression profiles.Enrich plant phosphopeptides using dendrimer technologies.Compare efficiencies of PAMAM vs. PolyMAC dendrimer enrichment techniques.

Successful identification

of differentially expressed phosphorylated proteins by Mass spectrometry.

Possibly elucidate ergosterol-induced signal transduction pathway

of A. thaliana .Slide15

Methodology

PAMP treatment of A.thaliana plantsUntreated control 250 nM ergosterol EtOH control0, 6, 12, 24, 48, 72 hr and 7 days

Total protein extraction

Liquid N

2

TCA/acetone/phenol

Ammonium acetate/meOH precipitationBuffers for downstream protocols

SDS sample buffer

SDS-PAGE gels (1D)

Western blotting

Urea sample buffer

PolyMAC and PAMAM enrichment

IEF sample buffer

Isoelectric focusing (2D)

Protein concentration quantification

Amido black assay

BSA standards (0.625, 1.25, 2.5, 5 and 10

ug

/

uL

)

Samples and standards – nitrocellulose membrane

Absorbance at 600 nm

(Granado, 1995; Lochman and Mikes, 2004; Wang

et al.,

2006)Slide16

Methodology

Western Blotting1° Ab= Anti-active MAPK= Anti-phosphoTyr

SDS-PAGE (1D)

10

ug total/lane10% gel

Fairbanks/silver staining

IEF (2D-PAGE)

pH 3-10 and pH 4-7

Fairbanks/silver staining

Dendrimer enrichment

Trypsin digest

C-18 peptide clean up

Enrichments

= PAMAM

=PolyMAC

Mass spectrometry analysis

MALDI-TOF

=DHB/CHCA

LC-MS/MS

Peptide sequences

Protein ID = MASCOTSlide17

SDS-PAGE: total proteinFigure 8: SDS-PAGE separation of all protein samples. Despite there being a large number of bands that are common to all the samples, there is a protein that shows differential expression and has an approximate size of 27 kDa.

kDA

260

140

100

70

50

40

35

25

15

10

0hr 6hr 12hr 24hr 48 hr 72hr 7 days

Erg

EtOH

EtOH

EtOH

EtOH

EtOH

EtOH

M

Erg

Erg

Erg

Erg

Erg

Erg

EtOH

M

UT

~27 kDaSlide18

AccessionDescription

MW [kDa]calc. pIP94072Germin-like protein subfamily 3 member 21.8

6.76

Q9ZUU4

Ribonucleoprotein At2g37220, chloroplastic

30.75.16

Q9FN48

Calcium sensing receptor,

chloroplastic

41.3

9.39

Q05431

L-ascorbate peroxidase 1, cytosolic

27.5

6.13

O65282

20 kDa chaperonin, chloroplastic

26.8

8.88

Q9SIU8-2

Isoform 2 of Probable protein phosphatase 2C 20

30.5

6.14

Q41951

Aquaporin TIP2-1

25.0

5.64

Q0WP12-2

Isoform 2 of Thiocyanate methyltransferase 1

25.3

4.82

O24456

Guanine nucleotide-binding protein subunit beta-like protein A

35.7

7.71

Q41963

Aquaporin TIP1-2

25.8

5.06

Q8LAA6

Probable aquaporin PIP1-5

30.6

8.82

Q96291

2-Cys peroxiredoxin BAS1, chloroplastic

29.1

7.44

P42742

Proteasome subunit beta type-1

24.6

7.40

Q9LS02

Allene oxide cyclase 2, chloroplastic

27.6

7.43

P42758

Dehydrin Xero 2

20.9

9.38

O23016

Probable voltage-gated potassium channel subunit beta

36.5

7.42

P46422

Glutathione S-transferase F2

24.1

6.35

Q9SRH5

Mitochondrial outer membrane protein porin 1

29.4

8.73

Q9LHA7

Peroxidase 31

35.3

9.06

Q9ZRW8

Glutathione S-transferase U19

25.6

6.04

O04834

GTP-binding protein SAR1A

22.0

7.53

P43297

Cysteine proteinase RD21a

50.9

5.41

Q9ZTW3

Vesicle-associated membrane protein 721

24.7

8.75

P28186

Ras-related protein RABE1c

23.8

7.83

P41916

GTP-binding nuclear protein Ran-1

25.3

6.86

P41088

Chalcone--flavonone isomerase 1

26.6

5.50

Q39258

V-type proton ATPase subunit E1

26.0

6.40

P94040

Germin-like protein subfamily 3 member

21.5

9.20

O64518

Metacaspase-5

44.8

6.61

Q84W80-2

Isoform 2 of F-box/LRR-repeat protein

22.8

8.22

O81147

Proteasome subunit alpha type-6-B

27.3

6.09

Q42592

L-ascorbate peroxidase S, chloroplastic/mitochondrial

40.4

8.28

Q8LE52

Glutathione S-transferase DHAR3, chloroplastic

28.5

7.74

P43286

Aquaporin PIP2-1

30.5

8.40

P42760

Glutathione S-transferase F6

23.56.23P19366ATP synthase subunit beta, chloroplastic53.95.50

Table 1: Protein identities following Mass Spectrometry of gel slicesSlide19

Figure

9A, B, C & D

:

2D-PAGE gels (11.25%) of ergosterol-treated samples following

IEF,on

a pH 4-7 IPG strip.

Figure A shows spots resulting from the untreated control and those in figure B show those resulting from a 0 hour ergosterol

treatment. Figures C and D show spots resulting from a 6

h

r and 12 hr ergosterol treatment respectively.

A B

C D

pH 4 - 7

pH 4 - 7

pH 4 - 7

pH 4 - 7Slide20

Western Blotting –

Anti phosphotyrosineFigure 10: Autoradiography films showing Tyrosine-phosphorylated proteins following Western blotting. The dotted yellow boxes indicate a ~27 kDa protein that exhibits a strong binding signal to the anti-active phosphotyrosine antibody.

~27 kDa

~40 kDa

UT

0hr 6hr 12hr 24hr 48 hr 72hr 7 daysSlide21

Western blotting – Anti active MAPKFigure 11: Autoradiography film showing the presence of MAPKs at 42 – 45 kDa.

~ 40 - 45 kDa

~ 15 - 25 kDa

UT

0hr 6hr 12hr 24hr Slide22

MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry

Preliminary analysis of phosphopeptide enrichment.DHB and CHCA matrices.α-casein/BSA standard + samples + calibration peptides.Bruker Daltonics

AutoFlex

at the CSIR, Biosciences.Nitrogen laser/ positive ion mode.Slide23

MALDI-TOFFigure 12: MALDI-TOF spectra of phosphopeptide standard (

α-casein/BSA) and PolyMAC enriched sample.Slide24

ConclusionsPreliminary MALDI analysis indicates successful phosphopeptide enrichment.

Anti-PhosphoTyr = specific phosphoproteins.~27 kDa protein across samples = phosphorylated protein. Confirm identity.

Ergosterol-specific proteins = germin-like protein.

Defense and stress-related proteins are evident =

aquaporins

, LRR, calcium binding, Ras

-related protein.

(Klemptner

et al.,

2014)Slide25

Further studies and research outcomesFinal LC-MS/MS analysis = CSIR (Pretoria)/CPGR (Cape Town).

Identify total differentially expressed proteins.Compare to western blots, SDS-PAGE and 2D.Compare enrichment of in-gel digested proteins to proteins in solution – efficiency of dendrimer-based enrichments.Compare genomic, proteomic and metabolomic data.Slide26

Dr. L. Piater, Prof. Dubery, Prof. R. Meijboom.Prof. A.W. Tao – Tymora Analytical/ Purdue University – Indiana, USA.

National Research Foundation.Dr. Stoyan Stoychev – CSIR Biosciences, Pretoria.Dr. Salome Snyman – Stellenbosch University.

AcknowledgementsSlide27

References

Avrova, A.O., Taleb, N., Rokka, V-M., Heilbronn, J., Campbell, E., Hein, I., Gilroy, E.M., Cardle, L., Bradshaw, J.E., Stewart, H.E., Fakim, Y.J., Loake, G. and Birch, P.R.J. (2004) Potato oxysterol binding protein and cathepsin B are rapidly up-regulated in independent defense pathways that distinguish R-gene-mediated and field resistance to Phytophthora infestans. Molecular Plant Pathology, 5: 45-56.Boller T. and He Y.S, (2009) Innate Immunity in Plants: An Arms Race Between Pattern Recognition Receptors in Plants and Effectors in Microbial Pathogens.

Journal of Science,

324: 742-744.

Dodds, P. N., & Rathjen, J. P. (2010). Plant immunity: towards an integrated view of plant-pathogen interactions. Nature reviews. Genetics, 11 (8), 539-48.

Fairbanks G, Steck TL, W. D. (1971). Electrophoretic analysis of the major polypeptides of the human erythrocyte membrane. Biochemistry, 10 (13), 2606-17.

Godfray, H. C. J., Beddington, J. R., Crute, I. R., Haddad, L., Lawrence, D., Muir, J. F., Pretty, J., et al. (2010). Food security: the challenge of feeding 9 billion people.

Science

, 327 (5967), 812-8.

Goldring, J. P., & Ravaioli, L. (1996). Solubilization of protein-dye complexes on nitrocellulose to quantify proteins spectrophotometrically.

Analytical biochemistry

, 242 (2), 197-201.

Holister

, P., Vas, C.R., Harper, T., (2003) Dendrimers.

Clientifica

,

New York, pg 2-15.

Iliuk, A. B., Martin, V. A, Alicie, B. M., Geahlen, R. L., & Tao, W. A. (2010). In-depth analyses of kinase-dependent tyrosine phosphoproteomes based on metal ion-functionalized soluble nanopolymers.

Molecular & Cellular Proteomics

, 9 (10): 2162-72.

Klajnert, B., & Bryszewska, M. (2001). Dendrimers: properties and applications.

Acta biochimica Polonica

, 48 (1), 199-208.

Klemptner, R.L., Sherwood, J. S., Tugizimana, F., Piater, L. A., & Dubery, I. A. (2014). Ergosterol, an orphan fungal microbe-associated molecular pattern (MAMP).

Molecular Plant PathologySlide28

Lochman J. and Mikes V., (2006) Ergosterol treatment leads to the expression of a specific set of

defence-related genes in tobacco. Journal of Plant Molecular Biology, 62:43–51.Mandeville, J. S., & Tajmir-Riahi, H. A. (2010). Complexes of dendrimers with bovine serum albumin. Biomacromolecules, 11 (2): 465-72.

Meimoun

, P.,

Ambard-Bretteville, F., Colas-des Francs-Small, C., Valot, B., & Vidal, J. (2007). Analysis of plant phosphoproteins. Analytical biochemistry

, 371 (2): 238-46.

Peters, E. C. (2005). A polymeric solution for enriching the phosphoproteome Insect transgenesis by site-specific.

Nature Methods

, 2

(8): 579-580.

Rossard S., Roblin G. and Atanassova R., (2010) Ergosterol triggers characteristic elicitation steps in

Beta

vulgaris

leaf tissues.

Journal of Experimental Botany,

61: 1807–1816.

Schulze, W. X. (2010). Proteomics approaches to understand protein phosphorylation in pathway modulation.

Current opinion in plant biology

, 13

(3): 280-87.

Tao, W. A., Wollscheid, B., Brien, R. O., Eng, J. K., Li, X.-jun, Bodenmiller, B., Watts, J. D.,

et al

. (2005). Quantitative phosphoproteome analysis using a dendrimer conjugation chemistry and tandem mass spectrometry.

Nature Methods

, 2

(8): 591-598.

Thurston G., Regan S., Rampitsch C., Xing T., (2005) Proteomic and phosphoproteomic approaches to understand plant–pathogen interactions.

Journal of Physiological and Molecular Plant Pathology,

66: 3–11.

Wang, W., Vignani, R., Scali, M., & Cresti, M. (2006). A universal and rapid protocol for protein extraction from recalcitrant plant tissues for proteomic analysis.

Electrophoresis

, 27

(13): 2782-6.

Weete

J.D.,

Abril

M.,

Blackwel

M. (2010)

Phylogenetic

Distribution of Fungal Sterols.

PLoS

One

. 5: 1-6.

Yang Y., Shah J., and Klessig D.F. (1997) Signal perception and transduction in plant

defence

response

. Journal of Genes and development

,

12: 1621-1628.Slide29

Thank you