Vol. 91, No. 4, 1979 December
BIOCHEMICAL
AND BIOPHYSICAL
RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS
28,1979
ISOLATION
Pages
AND PARTIAL Peter
Institut Received
Adamietz,
fiir
October
CHARACTERIZATION OF THE ADP-RIBOSYLATED FROM EHRLICH ASCITES TUMOR CELLS Karin
Physiologische
23,
Klapproth Chemie,
and Helmuth
Universitat
1232-1238
NUCLEAR PROTEINS
Hilz
Hamburg,
Germany
1979
SUMMARY The (ADP-ribose)n protein conjugates formed by incubation of Ehrlich ascites tumor cell nuclei with 1 mM (3H)NAD were isolated by chromatography on boronate cellulose columns with a yield of >85%. Possible contamination by glycoproteins was excluded by rechromatography after specific release of the (ADPribose), residues from their acceptors. Dodecyl sulfate gel electrophoresis revealed numerous protein bands which coincided with the (3H)ADP-ribose bands obtained by fluorography of the gels. 40% of the acceptor proteins were identified as the nucleosomal core histones. Most of these histones, however, appeared in the non-histone fraction because of extensive modification by poly(ADP-ribose). Drastic changes in properties were also seen in the true non-histone proteins which comprised 60% of the total conjugated protein. Besides several prominent acceptor proteins (Mr = 12,000; 31,000; 125,000) numerous proteins were detected indicating a considerable heterogeneity of non-histone acceptors. INTRODUCTION Covalent
modification
moiety
from
(ADPR), ion
has been (for
jugates
gates
implied
in the
see 1, 2). extract)
reports
from
EAT cells
for
leading
So far, of rat
liver
isolation
histones
partial
of all
major
of the
The re-
of gene express-
(ADPR), except
protein
con-
of a selected
(3).
of the nuclear
(ADPR)n
characterization. changes
and polymeric cells.
forms
has been described nuclei
of the ADPR
monomeric
eukaryotic
no isolation
and non-histone
to drastic
with all
transfer
proteins
protein
The procedure serve
conjuallow-
as acceptors
in the properties
of the modi-
Preparation of nuclei: Nuclei of Ehrlich ascites tumor cells transplantation into Balb/c mice) were prepared as described modified by inclusion of 1 mM phenylmethyl sulfonyl fluoride buffers following lysis.
(6 days after previously (4), (PMSF) in all
fied
groups
conjugates
regulation
and their that
by enzymic
in nearly
proteins
the first
ed to demonstrate, (ADPR),
forming
of non-modified (HCl
paper
proteins
has been detected
reviews free
subfraction This
NAD to proteins
residues
action
of nuclear
proteins.
MATERIALS
AND METHODS
ABBREVIATIONS: EAT cells = Ehrlich ascites tumor cells; ADPR = adenosine diphosphate ribose; (ADPR), = oligomer and polymer of ADPR with n units 0006-291X/79/241232-07$01.00/0 Copyrighr Ail rights
@ 1979
by Academic Press. Inc. in any form reserved.
of reproducrion
1232
Vol. 91, No. 4, 1979
BIOCHEMICAL
AND BIOPHYSICAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS
Labeling of (3H)(ADPR)n residues: EAT nuclei (~26 mg DNA) were incubated at 25" with 1 mM ('H)NAD (29.6xlOo dpm/umol), 50 mM Tris - HCl pH = 8.2, 45 mM KCl, 5 mM MgCIP, 1 mM PMSF and 5 mM dithiothreitol (DTT) in a final volume of 6 ml. After 15 min the reaction was stopped by the addition of an equal volume of 10% perchloric acid and washed twice with 10 ml of 5% perchloric acid. Boronate cellulose chromatography: The perchloric acid precipitate (100 mg protein) was solubilized in 20 ml 50 mM sodium phosphate pH 6.5 - 6 M guanidine hydrochloride - 5 mM DTT, and centrifuged for 18 h at 210000g and 4°C. The DNA-free supernatant was adjusted to pH 8.2 with morpholine ( 50 mM final concentration) and applied to a boronate cellulose (E. Merck, Darmstadt) column ( 1.3 x 25 cm). The resin was washed (40 ml/h) protein free (< 1 ug/ml) with 50 mM morpholine pH 8.2, 6 M guanidine hydrochloride, 1 mM DTT. The retained material was eluted with 0.2 M sodium phosphate pH 5.5, 6 M guanidine hydrochloride, 1 mM DTT (cf. 5). Gel electrouhoresis: a) The dodecyl sulfate system of Laemmli ( 6) was modified by inclusion of 6 M urea in sample and gel buffers. 100 ul samples containing 5-80 ug protein were put onto 14x9x0.15 cm flat gels consisting of 7.5- 15% polyacrylamide (exponential gradients). 18 V/cm were applied for 3 h. b) The 0.9 M acetic acid / 2.5 M urea system of Panyim and Chalkley ( 7) was used on 15% polyacrylamide flat gels (cf. a) without and c) with the inclusion of 0.4% Triton X 100 ( 8). Separation was terminated after 6 h at 15 V/cm. Separation of histones and non-histone proteins was performed according to Levy et al. (9) using BioRex 70 chromatography. Release of (3H)(ADPR)n from protein: a) (ADPR)n protein conjugates (1 mg/ml protein) were incubated for 40 min at 37°C with 0.2 M NaOH. Protein was preb) (ADPR)n attachcipitated with 20% trichloroacetic acid before analysis. ed to 1 mg protein was digested with 10 pg purified phosphodiesterase I during 4 h at 37°C in the presence of 50 mM Tris . HCl pH 8.4 - 4 mM urea in a total volume of 1 ml. Purification of phosohodiesterase I (E. Merck, Darmstadt) was achieved by affinity chromatography on Reactive Blue Sepharose (Sigma, Miinchen) similar to (10) (unpublished experiments). Fluoroqraphy: Gels were processed as described in (11) and exposed to Kodak royal X-omat film for 10 days at -80°C. Protein determination was performed act. to Lowry (12). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 1.
Purification
Nuclear cell
of (ADPR)n protein -
acceptor nuclei
chloric
proteins
with
acid
were
ADP-ribosylated
1 mM (3H)NAD
which
conjugates
(4 ).
at the same time
ated
conjugates
(13).
than
95% of the
protein
dine
hydrochloride
and freed
The reaction extracted
The perchloric bound
acid
(ADPR), from
by a short
was stopped
histone insoluble
residues
incubation with
HI and its material
of EAT 5% perADP-ribosyl-
containing
was solubilized
more
in 6 M guani-
DNA by ultracentrifugation.
The supernatant
was subjected to boronate cellulose chromatography (cf.5,3), Most of the protein eluted from the column without retention. Only a small fraction was retained together
with
nearly
washing,
the
labeled
linkage purification
to boronic
all
of the
(ADPR), acid
procedure
3H-labeled
protein
by lowering are
summarized
(ADPR),
conjugates the
pH. in table
1233
were
residues. released
The quantitative 1.
After from
extensive the covalent
aspects
It shows that
of the
purification
Vol. 91, No. 4, 1979
Table
1:
BIOCHEMICAL
Purification
AND BIOPHYSICAL
of (ADPR), protein
conjugates
formed in EAT cell
Protein
(3H)ADPR Residues [dpmx 10m61 [%I
Fraction
RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS
(~H)ADPR
mg protein
Imgl
[Xl
113
100
.30
95
.30
HC104 Insoluble
33.8
100
DNA Supernatant
32.1
95
107.2
28.8
85.2
4.3
3.8
2.0
5.8
96.8
85.6
Boronate
nuclei.
Column
- binding
fraction
- non-binding
fr.
ADPR residues and processed
were labeled as described
by the boronate
column
by incubation in Methods.
was about
25 fold
6.7 .02
of nuclei
(26 ug DNA) with
as judged
by the
(3H)NAD
increase
in specific
labeling. A small
subfraction
column
and appeared
peak.
This
it
with
for
possible
released
from
zymic
digestion
with
the
on boronate
table
2.
6-8%
still
was incomplete
ciated
with
ment),
contamination
comprised
about
protein-bound
conjugates
of n = 20.
diol
by mild
acceptor
in the
to the
which nuclear
run
boronate
treatments
alkali
(4% of the be less
proteins,
e.g.
were
specifi-
treatment
(5),
or by en-
and then
rechroma-
which
had lost
fraction Since (ADPR),
as shown removal
in
of ADPR
remaining
phosphodiesterase than
that
formation.
compounds
proteins off
resin.
, and 5% after must
ester
containing
alkaline
run through
suggesting
boronate
the ADPR residues
The (ADPR),
both
the
to the boronate
in the
venom phosphodiesterase,
(ADPR), - protein
4% of the total (ADPR),
either
by glycoproteins
of isolated protein
after
cis
Therefore
bound
bind
non-ADP-ribosylated
now appeared
with
the proteins
The (ADPR)n
a value
resin
protein
with
with
snake
not
when rechromatographed
retains
cellulose.
to the
Analysis
bind
conjugates
did
unmodified
interfering
generally
purified
affinity
2.
not
contamination
their residues
also
material
the
, was required.
cally
Only
with
features
column
glycoproteins
tographed
did
structural
the boronate
analysis
together
fraction
contained
Since
of (ADPR),-containing
asso-
treat-
4%.
conjugates
were
obtained protein.
by boronate chromatography The mean chain length of the
residues was determined by the method of Reeder (14) giving The conjugates revealed an extreme tendency to aggregate.
1234
Vol. 91, No. 4, 1979
Table
2:
BIOCHEMICAL
Chromatography fore and after
AND BIOPHYSICAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS
of (ADPR), protein conjugates on boronate columns bealkaline or enzymic release of the (ADPR), residues.
Boronate Treatment
Chromatography Non-Binding [ug protein] [%I
Binding [ug protein]
WI
-A: 880
100
10
1
NaOH
70
8
780
88
none
780
10
1
720
92
-B: phosphodiesterase
100
6
50
(ADPRJnproteinconjugate samples containing 900 and 800 ug protein, respectively, were treated with alkali or with phosphodiesterase I and subjected to boronate cellulose chromatography according to methods,using 0.7x3.0 cmcolumns.
Therefore,
analytical
of guanidine
procedures
hydrochloride,
required
urea
When gel
electrophoretic
analysis
presence
of 0.1% dodecyl
sulfate
ed (fig.
1).
rent
Staining
molecular
In order residues
fluorography of the
cating
covalent
The varying
3.
label
extent
Nucleosomal
(fig.
same gel
of the
in the
was largely
prevent-
over
radioactively
was performed
seen in these
IB). the
The
indi-
bands.
points
acceptor
appa-
distri-
stain
protein
experiments
proteins
with daltons. (ADPR),
the protein
with
of different
and non-histone
bands 100000
labeled
(fig. with
thereof.
was performed numerous
to far
(ADPR),, residues
ratio
histones
10000
concentrations
or combinations
material
correlates
of ADP-ribosylation
core
of high
1A) revealed with
generally
protein
sulfate,
intact
from about
the association
attachment
(3H)ADPR/
in the
of the
protein
of the
tritium
or dodecyl
presence
and 6 M urea,'aggregation
ranging
to demonstrate
bution
ences
for
weights
the
to differ-
proteins.
as acceptors
of
(ADPR), - residues When the
isolated
in order
to separate
total
(ADPR),
fraction.
conjugates
residues
The bulk
Since
it
teins
progressively
were
the histones
subjected from
to cation
non-histone
and 14% of the total of the
was to be expected alters
conjugates that their
protein
appeared
increasing
were
to represent
ADP-ribosylation
physico-chemical
1235
exchange protein
properties,
chromatography
(9), found
only
6% of the
in the histone
non-histone
proteins.
of the acceptor both
fractions
pro-
Vol.
91,
No.
4, 1979
BIOCHEMICAL
AND
BIOPHYSICAL
RESEARCH
COMMUNICATIONS
-
130
KD
-
68
KD
-
43 40
KD KD
-
31
KD
-18.7
KD
-11.8
KD
f
H3
L
HZ8 HZA H4
A
01
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
0
B
2
SDS gel electrophoretic analysis of the (ADPR) protein -11 nuclei - 80 ug of isolated (ADPR) protein"conjugates lo5 dpm) were analized on 7.5 - 15% gradient gel!! as described in A: coomassie blue stain, B: fluorography.
conjugates (5.4 x methods.
Figure 2. SDS gel electrophoretic analysis of histone and nonhistone subfractions. - (ADPR) protein conjugates were separated into a histone and a nonhistone fraction "(cf. methods). Samples with and without alkaline treatment were analyzed on polyacrylamide gradient gels. A: 80 ug (ADPR) protein conB: Histone fraction derived from A) by Bio Rex 70 chr8matography. jugates. C: Histone fraction after treatment with alkali. D: Non-histone fraction derived from A) by Bio Rex 70 chromatography. E: Non-histone fraction after 30 ug of purified core histones isolated from EAT treatment with alkali. F: Molecular weight markers: B-Galactosidase (130 KD), bovine albumin cells. G: (68 KD), ovalbumin (43 KD), aldolase A subunit (40 KD), DNAase I (31 KD), B-lactoglobuline (18.7 KD), cytochrome C (11.8 KD).
were as
analyzed shown
besides
in some
H2A and H4. protein
stain
Identification
again
fig.
after
2 (Band
minor
of
these
0.4% Triton
X 100 (8)
the duced
SDS gel an
even
true
histone
the
expense
the
of a whole
fraction
migrating
histones
(not
comprised
slightly
as
the
behind
by mild
of the
the acetic
system
bands
histones
H2B/
treatment core
proteins
acid/urea
two main
authentic
alkaline
nucleosomal
acceptor
only
Indeed,
the
(fig.
2C).
histones
was
with
shifted
confirmed
(7)
by
elec-
and without
shown). (fig.
electrophoresis fraction.
histone
positions
using
fraction
higher
of the ADPR residues.
detachment
of the ADPR residues
to the exact analysis
non-histone
C),
components
Release
trophoretic
The
specific
2D)
was
system.
amount The
series
of
free
appearance of fine
also
treated
The removal core
with
of the
histones
(fig.
of the core protein
1236
bands
alkali
2E)
histones with
and
(ADPR), than
found
occurred apparent
analyzed
residues
in
proin
mainly molecular
the
at
BIOCHEMICAL
Vol. 91, No. 4, 1979
weights
between
the modified total
10 and 30 KD.
histones
acceptor
dramatically
changed
of poly(ADPR) Additional
the
conjugates
X 100)
relative
in the non-histone data
properties
of the
shifting
the
analyses
together
staining
with
Most
in the non-histone
did
not
removed
by alkali,
25000;
31000;
rying
chain
region, the
belong
35000)
ADPR residues
with
Less
size
Hl being than
and less et al.,
ating
soluble
of the
according
conjugates),
(ADPR),
(Mr = 12000;
conjugates
residues
(ADPR),
in the unaffected
to high-
H2B and H3. protein
of polymeric
+
a definitely
appeared
to the decreasing
protein
acid
residues
high
were
22000;
residues
of va-
molecular
weight
by the removal
resolving
was not
were
power
included
associated
was modified
groups
diol
derivative,
(5)
of
of the
system
in this
with
study.
the HI fraction,
by ADP-ribosylation
(Braeuer
and free
of contamin-
histones
most of these also
terogeneous past
proteins
fraction.
Analyses only
status
presented
ADPR residues separation of the
after
selective
the first
time
into
non-histone
have therefore and their
to the
removal that
value
of ADP-ribosylation.
1237
the
separation
of the
and groups
nucleosomal
properties Drastic
represent
shift-
changes a rather
as performed
to individual
of
histones
conjugates
their
fractions
respect
boro-
of the modifying
fraction. which
nuclear with
for
protein
changed
This inter-
an immobilized
modification
proteins
of selected
et al.
study.
specific
of ADP-ribosylated
the non-histone
limited
in this on the
with
(ADPR),
completely
acceptor
yield
was based
by McCutchan
ADP-ribosylation
conjugates
seen with
in the
Subfractionation and for
by poly
an analysis
introduced
analysis
unequivocally
in high
procedure
present
and applied
(3).
electrophoretic
for
isolation
a reaction
nucleotides
their
conjugates
was a prerequisite
of cis
showed
the
that,
gels
When the
to be rather
(3H)ADPR
(ADPR)n
by Okayama et al.
ing
loss
Hl population
when the
oligo
were
total
was achieved
action
core
class.
in 5% perchloric
2% of the
proteins
nate
urea
in preparation).
Isolation goal
fraction.
of the molecules.
2% of the than
(acid
(60% of the total
of the
appeared
due presumably
increasing
Histone
hand,
in the case
fractionthanhistones
new bands the
25% of the
the non-histone
indicated
that
ADP-ribosylation
especially
systems
controls
histone
The position
length.
that
H2A and H4 comprised histone
indicating
on the other
into
showed
comprised
histones,
in different
prominent
procedure
fraction
core
fraction
to the
several
Lowry
can be deduced
histones
histones
of the ADP-ribosylated
however,
it
appropriate
intensities,
er proportion proteins
by the
From these
electrophoretic
Triton
Quantitation
present
protein.
AND BIOPHYSICAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS
hein
acceptor
Vol. 91, No. 4, 1979
BIOCHEMICAL
Our data
with
clear
are
compatible
proteins
changes involved
by transfer
in properties in the
the
notion
that
of ADPR residues
and function
regulation
AND BIOPHYSICAL
of various
postsynthetic being
modification
associated
of the affected forms
RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS
with
chromosomal
of nu-
drastic
proteins
is
of gene expression.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We thank
Frau
supported
E. Spikofski
by the Deutsche
for
propagating
the tumor
cells.
This
work
was
Forschungsgemeinschaft.
REFERENCES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. L: 9. IO. 11. 12. 13. 14.
Hilz, H. and Stone, P. (1976) Rev. Physiol. Biochem. Exp. Pharmacol. 76, l-59, Springer Verlag, Berlin, New York Hayaishi, OFand Ueda, K. (1977) Ann. Rev. Biochem. 4&, 95-116 Okayama, H., Ueda, K. and Hayaishi, 0. (1978) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 75, 1111-1115 Adamietz, P., Bredehorst, R. and Hilz, H. (1978) Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 81, 1377-1383 McCutchan, T.F., Gilham, P.R. aa Still, D. (1975) Nucleic Acid Res. 2, 853-885 Laemmli, U.K. (197U) Nature (Lond.) 227, 680-685 Panyim, S. and Chalkley,'R. (1969) A??fi. Biochem. Biophys. 130, 337 Alfagune, C., Zweidler, A., Mahowald, A. and Cohen, L. (197r J. Biol. Chem. -249, 3729 Levy, S., Simpson, R.T. and Sober, H.A. (1972) Biochemistry 11, 1547-1554 Heyns, W. and DeMoor, P. (1974) Biochim. Biophys. Acta 358, r Bonner, W.M. and Laskey, R.A. (1974) Eur. J. Biochem. 4K83-88 Farr, A.L. and Randal1,T.J. (1951) Lowry, D.H., Rosebrough, N.J., J. Biol. Chem. 193, 265-275 R. and Hilz, H. (1978) Adamietz, P., B*ehorst, Eur. J. Biochem. 5, 317-326 Y. and Hayaishi, 0. (1967) Reeder, R.H., Ueda, K., Honjo, T., Nishizuka, J. Biol. Chem. 242, 3172-3179
1238