A Membrane Binding Domain in the Ste5 Scaffold Synergizes with Gβγ Binding to Control Localization and Signaling in Pheromone Response

Department of Molecular Genetics and Microbiology, University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA 01605, USA.
Molecular Cell (Impact Factor: 14.02). 11/2005; 20(1):21-32. DOI: 10.1016/j.molcel.2005.08.020
Source: PubMed


Activation of mitogen-activated protein (MAP) kinase cascade signaling by yeast mating pheromones involves recruitment of the Ste5 scaffold protein to the plasma membrane by the receptor-activated Gbetagamma dimer. Here, we identify a putative amphipathic alpha-helical domain in Ste5 that binds directly to phospholipid membranes and is required for membrane recruitment by Gbetagamma. Thus, Ste5 signaling requires synergistic Ste5-Gbetagamma and Ste5-membrane interactions, with neither alone being sufficient. Remarkably, the Ste5 membrane binding domain is a dual-function motif that also mediates nuclear import. Separation-of-function mutations show that signaling requires the membrane-targeting activity of this domain, not its nuclear-targeting activity, and heterologous lipid binding domains can substitute for its function. This domain also contains imperfections that reduce membrane affinity, and their elimination results in constitutive signaling, explaining some previous hyperactive Ste5 mutants. Therefore, weak membrane affinity is advantageous, ensuring a normal level of signaling quiescence in the absence of stimulus and imposing a requirement for Gbetagamma binding.

9 Reads
  • Source
    • "Using this system, ePDZb-Ste5DN (lacking a G-protein binding domain) and ePDZb-Ste11 could be recruited to the plasma membrane-localized AsLOV2 protein upon light stimulation, resulting in mating pathway activation (monitored by PFUS1-DsRed) and cellcycle arrest. This result was consistent with a previous study reporting that Ste5 or Ste11 tethered to the plasma membrane robustly activate the mating MAPK pathway (Winters et al., 2005). Thus, this tool opens the possibility for spatial and temporal control of the yeast signalling pathways using light. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: All living cells respond to external stimuli and execute specific physiological responses through signal transduction pathways. Understanding the mechanisms controlling signalling pathways is important for diagnosing and treating diseases and for reprogramming cells with desired functions. Although many of the signalling components in the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae have been identified by genetic studies, many features concerning the dynamic control of pathway activity, cross-talk, cell-to-cell variability or robustness against perturbation are still incompletely understood. Comparing the behaviour of engineered and natural signalling pathways offers insight complementary to that achievable with standard genetic and molecular studies. Here, we review studies that aim at a deeper understanding of signalling design principles and generation of novel signalling properties by engineering the yeast mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathways. The underlying approaches can be applied to other organisms including mammalian cells and offer opportunities for building synthetic pathways and functionalities useful in medicine and biotechnology.
    Molecular Microbiology 03/2013; 88(1). DOI:10.1111/mmi.12174 · 4.42 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "After pheromone stimulus, the Ste5 scaffold is rapidly translocated to the plasma membrane by Gβγ [13,14], where it initiates and amplifies mating signalling [15]. Ste5 membrane binding additionally depends on two membrane-binding regions, an N-terminal amphipathic helix and a PH domain [16,17]. Ste5 also binds the Cdc42 GEF Cdc24, which may contribute to its re-localization to the cell cortex [7]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Many cells are able to orient themselves in a non-uniform environment by responding to localized cues. This leads to a polarized cellular response, where the cell can either grow or move towards the cue source. Fungal haploid cells secrete pheromones to signal mating, and respond by growing a mating projection towards a potential mate. Upon contact of the two partner cells, these fuse to form a diploid zygote. In this review, we present our current knowledge on the processes of mating signalling, pheromone-dependent polarized growth and cell fusion in Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Schizosaccharomyces pombe, two highly divergent ascomycete yeast models. While the global architecture of the mating response is very similar between these two species, they differ significantly both in their mating physiologies and in the molecular connections between pheromone perception and downstream responses. The use of both yeast models helps enlighten both conserved solutions and species-specific adaptations to a general biological problem.
    Open Biology 03/2013; 3(3):130008. DOI:10.1098/rsob.130008 · 5.78 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Finally, to test the hypothesis that heterotrimeric G-protein signaling was down-regulated in the initial projection under high α-factor conditions , we quantified the amount of polarized Ste5-GFP in the first projection at 1 and 2 h (Figure 8A). Proper Ste5 membrane localization depends on binding to free Gβγ (Winters et al., 2005). Under uniform 100 nM conditions, most cells at both time points contained a single projection. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Yeast cells polarize by projecting up mating pheromone gradients, a classic cell polarity behavior. However, these chemical gradients may shift direction. We examined how yeast cells sense and respond to a 180(o) switch in the direction of microfluidically-generated pheromone gradients. We identified two behaviors: at low concentrations of α-factor, the initial projection grew by bending, whereas at high concentrations, cells formed a second projection toward the new source. Mutations that increased heterotrimeric G-protein activity expanded the bending growth morphology to high concentrations; mutations that increased Cdc42 activity resulted in second projections at low concentrations. Gradient sensing projection bending required interaction between Gβγ and Cdc24, whereas gradient non-sensing projection extension was stimulated by Bem1 and hyper-activated Cdc42. Interestingly, a mutation in Gα affected both bending and extension. Finally, we searched for a genetic perturbation that would exhibit both behaviors; overexpression of the formin Bni1, a component of the polarisome, made both bending growth projections and second projections at low and high α-factor concentrations suggesting a role for Bni1 downstream of the heterotrimeric G-protein and Cdc42 during gradient sensing and response. Thus, we demonstrated that G-proteins modulate in a ligand-dependent manner two fundamental cell polarity behaviors in response to gradient directional change.
    Molecular biology of the cell 12/2012; 24(4). DOI:10.1091/mbc.E12-10-0739 · 4.47 Impact Factor
Show more

Preview (2 Sources)

9 Reads
Available from