The elucidation of the subcellular distribution of proteins under different conditions is a major challenge in cell biology. This challenge is further complicated by the multicompartmental and dynamic nature of protein localization. To address this issue, quantitative proteomics workflows have been developed to reliably identify the protein complement of whole organelles, as well as for protein assignment to subcellular location and relative protein quantification based on different cell culture conditions. Here, we review quantitative MS-based approaches that combine cellular fractionation with proteomic analysis. The application of these methods to the characterization of organellar composition and to the determination of the dynamic nature of protein complexes is improving our understanding of protein functions and dynamics.

Pseudogenes are mutated copies of protein-coding genes that cannot be translated into proteins, but a small subset of pseudogenes has been detected at the protein level. Although ubiquitin pseudogenes represent one of the most abundant pseudogene families in many organisms, little is known about their expression and signaling potential. By re-analyzing public RNA-sequencing and proteomics datasets, we here provide evidence for the expression of several ubiquitin pseudogenes including UBB pseudogene 4 (UBBP4), which encodes Ub KEKS (Q2K, K33E, Q49K, N60S). The functional consequences of Ub KEKS conjugation appear to differ from canonical ubiquitylation. Quantitative proteomics shows that Ub KEKS modifies specific proteins including lamins. Knockout of UBBP4 results in slower cell division, and accumulation of lamin A within the nucleolus. Our work suggests that a subset of proteins reported as ubiquitin targets may instead be modified by ubiquitin variants that are the products of wrongly annotated pseudogenes and induce different functional effects.

The minichromosome maintenance complex (MCM) proteins are required for processive DNA replication and are a target of S-phase checkpoints. The eukaryotic MCM complex consists of six proteins (MCM2–7) that form a heterohexameric ring with DNA helicase activity, which is loaded on chromatin to form the pre-replication complex. Upon entry in S phase, the helicase is activated and opens the DNA duplex to recruit DNA polymerases at the replication fork. The MCM complex thus plays a crucial role during DNA replication, but recent work suggests that MCM proteins could also be involved in DNA repair. Here, we employed a combination of stable isotope labeling with amino acids in cell culture (SILAC)-based quantitative proteomics with immunoprecipitation of green fluorescent protein-tagged fusion proteins to identify proteins interacting with the MCM complex, and quantify changes in interactions in response to DNA damage. Interestingly, the MCM complex showed very dynamic changes in interaction with proteins such as Importin7, the histone chaperone ASF1, and the Chromodomain helicase DNA binding protein 3 (CHD3) following DNA damage. These changes in interactions were accompanied by an increase in phosphorylation and ubiquitination on specific sites on the MCM proteins and an increase in the co-localization of the MCM complex with γ-H2AX, confirming the recruitment of these proteins to sites of DNA damage. In summary, our data indicate that the MCM proteins is involved in chromatin remodeling in response to DNA damage.

No abstract

The extensive identification of protein-protein interactions under different conditions is an important challenge to understand the cellular functions of proteins. Here we use and compare different approaches including affinity purification and purification by proximity coupled to mass spectrometry to identify protein complexes. We explore the complete interactome of the minichromosome maintenance (MCM) complex by using both approaches for all of the different MCM proteins. Overall, our analysis identified unique and shared interaction partners and proteins enriched for distinct biological processes including DNA replication, DNA repair, and cell cycle regulation. Furthermore, we mapped the changes in protein interactions of the MCM complex in response to DNA damage, identifying a new role for this complex in DNA repair. In summary, we demonstrate the complementarity of these approaches for the characterization of protein interactions within the MCM complex.