Molecular pathogenesis of human parechovirus 1 infection

The Parechoviruses (HPEV) belong to the family Picornaviridae of positive-stranded RNA viruses. Although the parechovirus genome shares the general properties of other picornaviruses, the genus has several unique features when compared to other family members. We found that HPEV1 attaches to αv integrins on the cell surface and is internalized through the clathrin-mediated endocytic pathway. During he course of the infection, the Golgi was found to disintegrate and the ER membranes to swell and loose their ribosomes. The replication of HPEV1 was found to take place on small clusters of vesicles which contained the trans-Golgi marker GalT as well as the viral non-structural 2C protein. 2C was additionally found on stretches of modified ER-membranes, seemingly not involved in RNA replication. The viral non-structural 2A and 2C proteins were studied in further detail and were found to display several interesting features. The 2A protein was found to be a RNA-binding protein that preferably binds to positive sense 3 UTR RNA. It was found to bind also duplex RNA containing 3 UTR(+)-3 UTR(-), but not other dsRNA molecules studied. Mutagenesis revealed that the N-terminal basic-rich region as well as the C-terminus, are important for RNA-binding. The 2C protein on the other hand, was found to have both ATP-diphosphohydrolase and AMP kinase activities. Neither dATP nor other NTP:s were suitable substrates. Furthermore, we found that as a result of theses activities the protein is autophosphorylated. The intracellular changes brought about by the individual HPEV1 non-structural proteins were studied through the expression of fusion proteins. None of the proteins expressed were able to induce membrane changes similar to those seen during HPEV1 infection. However, the 2C protein, which could be found on the surface of lipid droplets but also on diverse intracellular membranes, was partly relocated to viral replication complexes in transfected, superinfected cells. Although Golgi to ER traffic was arrested in HPEV1-infected cells, none of the individually expressed non-structural proteins had any visible effect on the anterograde membrane traffic. Our results suggest that the HPEV1 replication strategy is different from that of many other picornaviruses. Furthermore, this study shows how relatively small differences in genome sequence result in very different intracellular pathology.

Structure-Function Studies of GDNF Family Ligand-RET signalling

Glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) and its family members neurturin (NRTN), artemin (ARTN) and persephin (PSPN) are growth factors, which are involved in the development, differentiation and maintenance of many neuron types. In addition, they function outside of the nervous system, e.g. in the development of kidney, testis and liver. GDNF family ligand (GFL) signalling happens through a tetrameric receptor complex, which includes two glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI)-anchored GDNF family receptor (GFRα) molecules and two RET (rearranged during transfection) receptor tyrosine kinases. Each of the ligands binds preferentially one of the four GFRα receptors: GDNF binds to GFRα1, NRTN to GFRα2, ARTN to GFRα3 and PSPN to GFRα4. The signal is then delivered by RET, which cannot bind the GFLs on its own, but can bind the GFL-GFRα complex. Under normal cellular conditions, RET is only phosphorylated on the cell surface after ligand binding. At least the GDNF-GFRα1 complex is believed to recruit RET to lipid rafts, where downstream signalling occurs. In general, GFRαs consist of three cysteine-rich domains, but all GFRα4s except for chicken GFRα4 lack domain 1 (D1). We characterised the biochemical and cell biological properties of mouse PSPN receptor GFRα4 and showed that it has a significantly weaker capacity than GFRα1 to recruit RET to the lipid rafts. In spite of that, it can phosphorylate RET in the presence of PSPN and contribute to neuronal differentiation and survival. Therefore, the recruitment of RET to the lipid rafts does not seem to be crucial for the biological activity of all GFRα receptors. Secondly, we demonstrated that GFRα1 D1 stabilises the GDNF-GFRα1 complex and thus affects the phosphorylation of RET and contributes to the biological activity. This may be important in physiological conditions, where the concentration of the ligand or the soluble GFRα1 receptor is low. Our results also suggest a role for D1 in heparin binding and, consequently, in the biodistribution of released GFRα1 or in the formation of the GFL-GFRα-RET complex. We also presented the crystallographic structure of GDNF in the complex with GFRα1 domains 2 and 3. The structure differs from the previously published ARTN-GFRα3 structure in three significant ways. The biochemical data verify the structure and reveal residues participating in the interactions between GFRα1 and GDNF, and preliminarily also between GFRα1 and RET and heparin. Finally, we showed that, the precursor of the oncogenic MEN 2B (multiple endocrine neoplasia type 2) form of RET gets phosphorylated already during its synthesis in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER). We also demonstrated that it associates with Src homology 2 domain-containing protein (SHC) and growth factor receptor-bound protein (GRB2) in the ER, and has the capacity to activate several downstream signalling molecules.

The biological functions of mouse twinfilin isoforms

The actin cytoskeleton is essential for many cellular processes, including motility, morphogenesis, endocytosis and signal transduction. Actin can exist in monomeric (G-actin) or filamentous (F-actin) form. Actin filaments are considered to be the functional form of actin, generating the protrusive forces characteristic for the actin cytoskeleton. The structure and dynamics of the actin filament and monomer pools are regulated by a large number of actin-binding proteins in eukaryotic cells. Twinfilin is an evolutionarily conserved small actin monomer binding protein. Twinfilin is composed of two ADF/cofilin-like domains, separated by a short linker and followed by a C-terminal tail. Twinfilin forms a stable, high affinity complex with ADP-G-actin, inhibits the nucleotide exchange on actin monomers, and prevents their assembly into filament ends. Twinfilin was originally identified from yeast and has since then been found from all organisms studied except plants. Not much was known about the role of twinfilin in the actin dynamics in mammalian cells before this study. We set out to unravel the mysteries still covering twinfilins functions using biochemistry, cell biology, and genetics. We identified and characterized two mouse isoforms for the previously identified mouse twinfilin-1. The new isoforms, twinfilin-2a and -2b, are generated from the same gene through alternative promoter usage. The three isoforms have distinctive expression patterns, but are similar biochemically. Twinfilin-1 is the major isoform during development and is expressed in high levels in almost all tissues examined. Twinfilin-2a is also expressed almost ubiquitously, but at lower levels. Twinfilin-2b turned out to be a muscle-specific isoform, with very high expression in heart and skeletal muscle. It seems all mouse tissues express at least two twinfilin isoforms, indicating that twinfilins are important regulators of actin dynamics in all cell and tissue types. A knockout mouse line was generated for twinfilin-2a. The mice homozygous for this knockout were viable and developed normally, indicating that twinfilin-2a is dispensable for mouse development. However, it is important to note that twinfilin-2a shows similar expression pattern to twinfilin-1, suggesting that these proteins play redundant roles in mice. All mouse isoforms were shown to be able to sequester actin filaments and have higher affinity for ADP-G-actin than ATP-G-actin. They are also able to directly interact with heterodimeric capping protein and PI(4,5)P2 similar to yeast twinfilin. In this study we also uncovered a novel function for mouse twinfilins; capping actin filament barbed ends. All mouse twinfilin isoforms were shown to possess this function, while yeast and Drosophila twinfilin were not able to cap filament barbed ends. Twinfilins localize to the cytoplasm but also to actin-rich regions in mammalian cells. The subcellular localizations of the isoforms are regulated differently, indicating that even though twinfilins biochemical functions in vitro are very similar, in vivo they can play different roles through different regulatory pathways. Together, this study show that twinfilins regulate actin filament assembly both by sequestering actin monomers and by capping filament barbed ends, and that mammals have three biochemically similar twinfilin isoforms with partially overlapping expression patterns.

Participes présents et gérondifs en traduction finnoise : perte ou changement de valeur ?

Les participes présents apparaissent, entre autres, dans des constructions à prédication seconde détachées : (1) Intervenant hier soir à Ankara, […], Vladimir Poutine s’est risqué à […]. (Le Figaro 7.12.2004 : 4) Même si les gérondifs, formes adverbiales du verbe (« converbes », cf. Haspelmath & König 1995), n’ont pas d’incidence nominale, contrairement aux participes présents, formes adjectivales du verbe, et ne sont donc pas toujours comptés parmi les constructions à prédication seconde (p.ex. Neveu 1998), les deux ont des emplois assez proches : dans des énoncés du type (2a-b), le participe adjoint peut être paraphrasé par un gérondif, même si son statut fonctionnel n’est pas le même (Halmøy, 2003 : 156-157) : (2a) Arrivant à Paris, Emile a proposé à Léa de [...]. (2b) En arrivant à Paris, Emile a proposé à Léa de[...]. (Halmøy, 2003 : 157) Le finnois ne connaît ni ce genre de constructions détachés ni de forme appelée ‘gérondif’, et les deux participes présents finnois (actif et passif) ne correspondent jamais à un participe présent détaché français : en plus de subordonnées, on trouve à leur place le deuxième infinitif, soit à l’inessif, soit à l’instructif, formes nominales qu’on trouve également dans la traduction des gérondifs : (3a) […] ? me demanda-t-elle sèchement en me montrant l’une des lignes incriminées. (Nothomb, p. 62) […] : hän kysyi minulta kuivakkaasti näyttäen erästä Unajin moittimaa riviä. (Suni, p. 4) (3b) L’espace d’un instant, il sourit, croyant que […] je m’étais trompée de commodités. (Nothomb, p. 138-139) Hetken hän hymyili luullen, että minä […] olin erehtynyt mukavuuslaitoksesta. (Suni, p. 94) : Dans cette communication, nous examinerons quatre traductions littéraires en nous demandant dans quels cas et de quelle manière la différence entre le participe et le gérondif a éventuellement été prise en considération.