In mammalian cells, most integral membrane proteins are initially inserted into the endoplasmic reticulum membrane by the so-called Sec61 translocon. However, recent predictions suggest that many transmembrane helices (TMHs) in multispanning membrane proteins are not sufficiently hydrophobic to be recognized as such by the translocon. In this study, we have screened 16 marginally hydrophobic TMHs from membrane proteins of known three-dimensional structure. Indeed, most of these TMHs do not insert efficiently into the endoplasmic reticulum membrane by themselves. To test if loops or TMHs immediately upstream or downstream of a marginally hydrophobic helix might influence the insertion efficiency, insertion of marginally hydrophobic helices was also studied in the presence of their neighboring loops and helices. The results show that flanking loops and nearest-neighbor TMHs are sufficient to ensure the insertion of many marginally hydrophobic helices. However, for at least two of the marginally hydrophobic helices, the local interactions are not enough, indicating that post-insertional rearrangements are involved in the folding of these proteins.

No abstract

Aromatic tuning, i.e. repositioning aromatic residues found at the cytoplasmic end of transmembrane (TM) domains within bacterial receptors, has been previously shown to be an efficient way to modulate signal output from the aspartate chemoreceptor (Tar) and the major osmosensor EnvZ of Escherichia coli. In the case of Tar, changes in signal output consistent with the vertical position of the native Trp-Tyr aromatic tandem within TM2 were observed. In contrast, within EnvZ, where a Trp-Leu-Phe aromatic triplet was repositioned, the surface that the triplet resided upon was shown to be the major determinant governing signal output. However, these previous studies failed to determine whether moving the aromatic residues within TM2 of Tar or EnvZ was sufficient to physically reposition the TM helix within a membrane. Recent coarse-grained molecular dynamics (CG-MD) simulations predicted displacement of Tar TM2 upon moving the aromatic residues at the cytoplasmic end of TM2. Here, we have employed a glycosylation-mapping technique to demonstrate that repositioning the Trp-Tyr tandem within Tar TM2 is sufficient to displace the C-terminal boundary of the helix relative to the membrane. In a similar analysis of EnvZ, an abrupt initial displacement of TM2 was observed but no subsequent movement was seen, suggesting that the vertical position of TM2 is not governed by the location of the Trp-Leu-Phe triplet. In summary, our results support recent CG-MD simulations with aromatically tuned Tar segments that demonstrated the Trp-Tyr tandem is sufficient to displace TM2 within a membrane. Our results also provide another set of experimental data, i.e. the resistance of EnvZ TM2 to being displaced upon aromatic tuning, which could be useful for subsequent refinement of the initial CG-MD simulations. We suggest that differences observed between the behavior of helices is due to the inherently different properties of the residues being repositioned (i.e. Trp or Tyr versus Phe). Finally, we discuss the limitations of these methodologies, how moving flanking aromatic residues might impact steady-state signal output and the potential to employ aromatic tuning in other bacterial membrane-spanning receptors.

No abstract

Edited by Karen G. Fleming Astrotactin 1 (Astn1) and Astn2 are membrane proteins that function in glial-guided migration, receptor trafficking, and synaptic plasticity in the brain as well as in planar polarity pathways in the skin. Here we used glycosylation mapping and protease protection approaches to map the topologies of mouse Astn1 and Astn2 in rough microsomal membranes and found that Astn2 has a cleaved N-terminal signal peptide, an N-terminal domain located in the lumen of the rough microsomal membranes (topologically equivalent to the extracellular surface in cells), two transmembrane helices, and a large C-terminal lumenal domain. We also found that Astn1 has the same topology as Astn2, but we did not observe any evidence of signal peptide cleavage in Astn1. Both Astn1 and Astn2 mature through endoproteolytic cleavage in the second transmembrane helix; importantly, we identified the endoprotease responsible for the maturation of Astn1 and Astn2 as the endoplasmic reticulum signal peptidase. Differences in the degree of Astn1 and Astn2 maturation possibly contribute to the higher levels of the C-terminal domain of Astn1 detected on neuronal membranes of the central nervous system. These differences may also explain the distinct cellular functions of Astn1 and Astn2, such as in membrane adhesion, receptor trafficking, and planar polarity signaling.