BIOCHEMICAL AND BIOPHYSICAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS
Vol. 37, No. 4, 1969
SUBCELLULARSITE OF GLYCOPROTEINSYNTHESIS IN LIVER J. Molnarl,
M . Tetas*
and H. Chao
Department of Biological Chemistry University of Illinois College of Medicine
ReceivedSeptember 19, 1969 SUMMARY
The smooth and rough m icrosomal fractions of rat and rabbit liver were shown to carry out transfer of N-acetylhexosamine, galactose and mannose to endogenous protein acceptors from correThe rough m icroeomal fraction was sponding Sugar-nUCleotideS. more active than the Smooth m icrosomal fraction for the incorpoas active ration of hexosamine and mannose, but only one-third for the incorporation of galactose. Data also are presented which suggest that among the subcellular fraction8 only the m icrosomal fractions are active in the hexosamine and mannose transfer reactions. Regarding lian
researcher8
tissues,
these
the mechanism of glycoprotein
complex proteins
tablished
agree that
and completion
hypotheses
have been suggested.
chain
is built
by a multienzyme
according
According
cisternae
complex of carbohydrate
This
is based on the original
observation8
and found
that
3H-labeled
macromolecules,
glucose
other
chains
transferases,
region
(1) who injected
side
two
of mammalian cells
in the membranes of this
Leblond
es-
to one the carbohy-
localized idea
backbone of
to the well
of the oligosaccharide
up in the Golgi
in mamma-
As to the glycosylation
SyntheSi8.
of protein
drate
the polypeptide
is assembled
pathway of protein
formation
which
(single-site
hypothesis).
of Neutra
or galactose
than glycogen,
is
and in rats,
were labeled
% ,his investigation was supported by Public Health Service Grant No. PHS ROl-HD-02591 and a Career Development Award 5-K3-Ca-11, 158. *Leave of absence from University
of Chile, 684
Santiago,
Chile.
Vol. 37, No. 4, 1969
BIOCHEMICAL AND BIOPHYSICAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS
only
in the Golgi
this
interpretation,
and Eylar
zone of liver
Wagner and Cynkin
(3) have reported
glucosamine
observations
is initiated
(rich
fractions
were reported
According
to the other in liver
of rat
membranes (9)
out by
fragments)
but not
The purpose
the Golgi
region,
of sugars
thus
from experiments
the
However,
the
is assembled within
experiments
to endogenous acceptors
supporting
of protein8
tumor (8) during
multi-site
both the rough and smooth m icrosomal
Simi-
(4).
on the ribosomes. chain
of the present
liver.
glycosylation
of the rough and smooth endoplasmic
(which may include
conditions,
is carried
HeLa cells
and plasma cell
of the oligosaccharide
transfer
of N-acetyl-
and rabbit
by using
chain
Supporting
and Caccam, Jackson,
in Golgi
hypothesis
(S-7)
of the polypeptide
remainder
(21,
incorporation
fractions
by the rough m icrosomal
growth
that
tissues.
and mannose in endogenous proteins
the smooth m icrosomal
lar
and other
reticulum hypOtheSi8).
is
to show that
are carried
fractions
the multi-site
the
out by
under --in vitro
hypothesis
derived
in vivo. -MATERIALS AND METHODS
Smooth and rough m icrosomal Dallner
procedure
had been starved
fractions
(10) from the livers for
20 hr.
Isolation
were prepared
of rats
and rabbits
of subcellular
and measurements
of protein,
were described
previously
UDP-N-acetylhexo8amine-14C
CrC/pmole, glucosamine-14C:galactosamine-14C by incubating
Ehrlich
UDP-galacto8e-3H purchased
Ascites
Tumor with
and GDP-manno8e-14C (both
from New England Nuclear
which
fractions,
enzyme assays,
(5).
by the
RNA and radioactivity
= 3:l)
(4-5
was prepared
glucosamine-
14c (11);
10 pC/pmole> were
Corporation.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION In order
to determine
which
of the subcelluar 685
component8
BIOCHEMICAL AND BIOPHYSICAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS
Vol. 37, No. 4, 1969
TABLE I DISTRIBUTION
OF SUGAR TRANSFERASE, AND MARKER ENZYME-ACTIVITIES AMONG SUBCELLULAR FRACTIONS OF RAT LIVER Sugar Transferase'
Fraction
hNAc3 Debris1 Heavy mitochondria Light mitochondria Microsomes 106,OOOg supernatant Results
are
Marker
t:
;3 20 40 0
k28 2
expressed
g-6-Pase
Man
in
Scc.Dh
E 4 of
8Gal.ase
24 55 16 5 0
2':
percent
Enzyme
recovered
fi 41 8 8
activity.
when the debris fraction was further separated according to Blobel and Potter (16) to nuclei and mixed membranous fraction (cell membrane; residual mitochondria and microsomes) no sugar transferase, or glucose-6-Pase activity was found in the nuclear fraction. 2 The mixtures in 0.5 ml volume contained: 5mM MgC12, 5 m M MnC12, 1mM EDTA, O.lM Na-maleate, pH 6.9, O.OlM KCl, 1% Triton X-100 (Triton caused 2-3 fold increase in the incorporation of sugars for each fraction), 3 membrane protein and 35,000 dpm of y4C (4 uC/umole) or 100 000 dpm of GDPReactions were c:rried out at 30' for 15 min and stopped by tie addition of 2 ml of 10% CC1 COOH. The precipitates were washed 5 times with 5 ml portions o % 10% CC13COOH, once with chloroform-methanol (2:l) and then with 95% ethanol; they were finally dissolved in 0.5 ml of 0.2N NaOH and counted in a liquid scintillation counting system. 3 hNAc, Scc.Dh,
could
acetylhexosamine; Man, succinic dehydrogenase;
carry
genous
measurable
acceptors,
to yield somal
out
debris, and cell
14C as well genase
for
livers heavy
mitochondria,
and glucose-6-Pase sentative tivity
for
experiment for
both
sugar of
sugars
transfer
rats
light
were
were
12;
8-galactosidase
I)
parallels
show that the 686
fractionated micro-
(succinic for
the
distribution
mannosedehydro-
lysosomes,
The results
5).
endo-
of hNAc-14C,
determined
microsames,
into
mitochondrial,
Incorporation
enzymes
(Table
reactions
and rabbits
mitochondrial,
sap fractions.
as marker
mannose; G-6-Pase, glucose-6-Pase; PGal.ase, P-galactosidase.
13;
of
a repre-
incorporation
ac-
of
glucose-6-
BIOCHEMICAL AND BIOPHYSICAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS
Vol. 37, No. 4, 1969
TABLE II EFFECT OF WASHING ON THE ENZYMEACTIVITIES M ITCCHONDRIALFRACTION Sugar Transferase
OF THE
Marker Enzyme
hNAc
Man
G-6-Pase
Scc.Dh.
PGal.ase
M itochondria
42
51
40
95
88
M icrosomes
58
50
60
5
12
Data are given
as % of recovered
activity
The combined light and heavy m itochondrial fraction of a rabbit liver (about 500 mg protein, containing about 50% of the G-6-Pase and hNAc-transferase activity of the liver fractions) was suspended in 60 m l of 0.25 M sucrose containing 1 O m MTris-HCl, pH 7.6, and centrifuged at 15,000 rpm for 10 m in (Sorvall RC 2B, SS-34 rotor). The sediment was treated with fresh sucrose two more times. The combined supernatants were centrifuged further at 30,000 rpm for 1 hr (Beckman L2 centrifuge, No. 30 rotor). phosphatase chondrial three
fractions
washings
activities devoid
The relatively
activity.
could
be reduced
of succinic
activity
6-Pase activity.
the m icrosomal
structures
the hexosamine
and mannose transfer
subcellular
explain
fractions
(14).
In subsequent
activity were also
After
washings.
fraction
These results cell
(Table
II)
60% of
suggest
that
constituents
the m icrosomes
of the other
were further
to rough and smooth m icnosomes and incorporation
with
rabbits
In I.9 experiments
as the smooth m icrosomes more active
with
the rough m icrosomes (Table
III).
than smooth m icrosomes 687
in
Thus contamination
reactions.
most of the activities
experiments
sugars were determined. periments
of the m ito-
but containing
are the principle
could
fractionated
by repeated
in a new m icrosomal
dehydrogenase
glucose
by m icrosomes
activity
58% of the hNAc and 50% of the mannose transferase
were recovered
the original
high
rats
of
and 5 ex-
showed twice
as much
Rough m icrosomes in the incorporation
Vol. 37, No. 4, 1969
BIOCHEMICAL AND BIOPHYSICAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS
TABLE III INCORPORATIONOF SUGARS INTO PROTEINS OF SMOOTHAND ROUGH M ICROSOMALFRACTIONS Source of Liver
Additions' UDP-N-Acetylhexosamine-14C
Smooth'
Rough
No. of EXP .
100 (60-140)
200 (113-300)
19
Rat
UDP-N-Acety hi hexosamineC
156 (130-200)
270 (255-300)
5
Rabbit
GDP-Mannose-14C
Rabbit
130
190
3
UDP-Galacto8e-3H
Rabbit
300
90
2
UDP-Galacto8e-3H+ fetuin acceptor3
Rabbit
1900
450
1
The results are expressed as dpm/mg protein in average obtained in the number of experiments indicated.
value8
The 'The reaction8 were Carrie out as described in Table I. activity of UDP-galactose- 4 H was 100,000 dpm (10 pC/pmole>. 2The incorporation of sugars by a m ixture m icrosomal fractions was additive. 'Fetuin (CalBiochem) was desialized after periodate oxidation according
of mannose- 14C . times
faster
On the other
rough fraction
for
exogenous acceptor It
more active
of galactose
when tested
the probable
synthesized
are the plasma glycoproteins
In the oligosaccharide
chains 688
basis
with
(5.6)
for
these
fractions.
carbohydrate
forms are assumed to be the major
study.
than the
from fetuin.
to consider
the most rapidly
macromolecules
sent
prepared
than by rough m icrosomes.
seen to be far
incorporation
removed
was taken up 3-4
between smooth and rough m icrosomal
the liver
complete
hand galactose-3H
was also
is of interest
difference8
and its galactose to Spiro (17).
by the Smooth m icrosome
The smooth fraction
of smooth and rough
In
containing and their
acceptor8
in-
in the pre-
of most of these
pro-
an
BIOCHEMICAL AND BlOPHYSlCAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS
Vol. 37, No. 4, 1969
teins,
the glucosamine
polypeptide
backbone than the galactose,
According
(15). studies
and mannose apparently
(5,6),
to the multi-site it
than galactose
findings
agree with
Cynkin
previously (2)
prediction
rather only
with
and mannose
The present
than that
of the
the smooth m icrosomes transferase
the reports
(3) who claim
have no glucosamine
Presently
based on --in vivo
paper and those of -in vivo disagree
to the
and fucose
or fucose).
carbohydrate
and Caccam et al.
somal fractions tivities.
(5,6)
acid,
glucosamine
acid,
from which
of this
closer
by the rough m icrosomal
(or sialic
to display
The results scribed
this
hypothesis,
would be expected
that
more efficiently
fraction
single-site
sialic
hypothesis,
would be expected
would be incorporated
lie
that
activity. studies
de-
of Wagner and
the rough m icro-
and mannose transferase
we have no explanation
for
this
ac-
discrepancy.
References 1.
M . Neutra
2.
R.R. Wagner and M .A. Cynkin, 35, 139 (1969).
3.
J.F. Caccam, J.J. Jackson and E.H. Eylar, Res. Commun. 35, 505 (1969).
Biochem.
4.
H.B. Bosmann, A. Hagopian Biophys. 128, 51 (1968).
Arch.
5.
J. Molnar, G.B. Robinson 240, 1882 (1965).
6.
G.R. Lawford (1966).
7.
J. Molnar
8.
F. Melchers and P.M. Knopf, Biol. 32, 255 (1967).
9.
E.J. Sarcione, (1964).
10. G. Dallner, 11. J. Molnar, In press.
and C.P.Leblond,
J. Cell
Biol.
Biochem.
and R.J. J.
and D. Sy, Biochemistry
Winzler, Biol.
689
Biophys.
Biochem.
J. Biol.
Chem. 5408
2, 1941 (1967).
M . Bohne and M . Leahy,
H. Chao and G. Markovic,
Res. Commun.
Chem. 241,
Cold Spring
M icrobial.
137 (1966).
Biophys.
and E.H. Eylar,
and H. Schachter,
Acta Path.
30,
Harbor
Symp. Quant.
Biochemistry
Stand. Arch.
Suppl.
3, 1973 166,
Biochem.
(1963).
Biophys.
BIOCHEMICAL AND BIOPHYSICAL RESEARCH COMMUNICATIONS
Vol. 37, No. 4, 1969
12. E.C. 13. T.J. 312 14.
H.B.
Slater
and W.D. Bonner,
Langley
and F.R.
Biochem.
Jevons,
Arch.
J. 2,
185 (1952).
Biochem.
Biophys.
(1968).
Bosmann and S.S. Martin,
15. N. Sharon, 16. G. Blobel 17. R.G. Spiro,
Science
Ann. Rev. Biochem. and V.R. J. Biol.
Potter,
35,
Science
Chem. 239,
690
3,
190 (1969).
623 (1966). 154,
1662 (1966).
567 (1964).
128,