Volume 43, Issue 3, Pages (August 2011)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Volume 60, Issue 6, Pages (December 2015)
Advertisements

Volume 49, Issue 2, Pages (January 2013)
Volume 10, Issue 4, Pages (October 2009)
Volume 55, Issue 1, Pages (July 2014)
Volume 45, Issue 5, Pages (March 2012)
Volume 138, Issue 4, Pages (August 2009)
Global Mapping of Human RNA-RNA Interactions
Volume 5, Issue 2, Pages (August 2009)
Phosphorylation of Cdc20 by Bub1 Provides a Catalytic Mechanism for APC/C Inhibition by the Spindle Checkpoint  Zhanyun Tang, Hongjun Shu, Dilhan Oncel,
Quantitative Live Cell Imaging Reveals a Gradual Shift between DNA Repair Mechanisms and a Maximal Use of HR in Mid S Phase  Ketki Karanam, Ran Kafri,
Volume 38, Issue 4, Pages (May 2010)
A perspective on proteomics in cell biology
Volume 57, Issue 6, Pages (March 2015)
Volume 31, Issue 3, Pages (August 2008)
Volume 44, Issue 1, Pages (October 2011)
Takashi Kubota, Kohei Nishimura, Masato T. Kanemaki, Anne D. Donaldson 
N6-Methyladenosines Modulate A-to-I RNA Editing
Volume 35, Issue 2, Pages (July 2009)
Volume 4, Issue 1, Pages (July 2013)
Toward a Molecular Structure of the Eukaryotic Kinetochore
The Translational Landscape of the Mammalian Cell Cycle
Ultrasensitivity in the Regulation of Cdc25C by Cdk1
Volume 21, Issue 1, Pages (January 2006)
Elif Nur Firat-Karalar, Navin Rauniyar, John R. Yates, Tim Stearns 
Volume 19, Issue 10, Pages (May 2009)
Volume 38, Issue 4, Pages (May 2010)
Phospho-Pon Binding-Mediated Fine-Tuning of Plk1 Activity
Volume 31, Issue 3, Pages (August 2008)
Volume 44, Issue 2, Pages (October 2011)
Volume 49, Issue 2, Pages (January 2013)
Volume 9, Issue 5, Pages (December 2014)
Volume 19, Issue 10, Pages (May 2009)
Volume 127, Issue 3, Pages (November 2006)
Volume 20, Issue 1, Pages 9-19 (October 2005)
SUMO-2 Orchestrates Chromatin Modifiers in Response to DNA Damage
Volume 53, Issue 5, Pages (March 2014)
Yutian Peng, Lois S. Weisman  Developmental Cell 
Volume 21, Issue 5, Pages (March 2006)
Volume 8, Issue 5, Pages (September 2014)
Is Proteomics the New Genomics?
The principle of the immuno-SILAC method.
What Determines the Specificity and Outcomes of Ubiquitin Signaling?
Targeted Proteomic Study of the Cyclin-Cdk Module
Shijiao Huang, Danming Tang, Yanzhuang Wang  Developmental Cell 
Volume 48, Issue 4, Pages (November 2012)
Laura Lande-Diner, Jianmin Zhang, Howard Cedar  Molecular Cell 
Volume 55, Issue 3, Pages (August 2014)
Volume 23, Issue 4, Pages (April 2018)
SUMO-2 Orchestrates Chromatin Modifiers in Response to DNA Damage
Volume 47, Issue 5, Pages (September 2012)
Volume 45, Issue 5, Pages (March 2012)
Yi Tang, Jianyuan Luo, Wenzhu Zhang, Wei Gu  Molecular Cell 
Volume 39, Issue 2, Pages (July 2010)
The Coming Age of Complete, Accurate, and Ubiquitous Proteomes
Volume 24, Issue 2, Pages (July 2018)
H2B Ubiquitylation Promotes RNA Pol II Processivity via PAF1 and pTEFb
Volume 26, Issue 1, Pages (April 2007)
Yun Wah Lam, Angus I. Lamond, Matthias Mann, Jens S. Andersen 
Volume 47, Issue 3, Pages (August 2012)
Volume 18, Issue 1, Pages (January 2011)
Brandon Ho, Anastasia Baryshnikova, Grant W. Brown  Cell Systems 
Maria S. Robles, Sean J. Humphrey, Matthias Mann  Cell Metabolism 
Volume 65, Issue 3, Pages e3 (February 2017)
Volume 15, Issue 2, Pages (April 2016)
Volume 27, Issue 11, Pages e5 (June 2019)
Volume 39, Issue 2, Pages (July 2010)
Volume 10, Issue 1, Pages (January 2017)
Volume 55, Issue 1, Pages (July 2014)
Volume 65, Issue 5, Pages e4 (March 2017)
Volume 127, Issue 3, Pages (November 2006)
Presentation transcript:

Volume 43, Issue 3, Pages 406-417 (August 2011) Quantitative Proteomics Reveals the Basis for the Biochemical Specificity of the Cell- Cycle Machinery  Felicia Walton Pagliuca, Mark O. Collins, Agata Lichawska, Philip Zegerman, Jyoti S. Choudhary, Jonathon Pines  Molecular Cell  Volume 43, Issue 3, Pages 406-417 (August 2011) DOI: 10.1016/j.molcel.2011.05.031 Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 1 Identification of the Protein Interaction Network of Human Cyclins by Immunoprecipitation and Quantitative Mass Spectrometry (A) Schematic of the experimental strategy. HeLa cells expressing tagged cyclins were metabolically labeled with three different combinations of isotopic lysine and arginine, synchronized, and immunoprecipitated with control or anti-FLAG antibodies. Immunoprecipitates were pooled and analyzed simultaneously by mass spectrometry. Peptides arising from each cell population were quantified by measurement of the relative intensity of light (K0/R0), intermediate (K4/R6), and heavy (K8/R10) peaks with MaxQuant. Example schema is for cyclin A: intermediate-labeled S phase cells and heavy-labeled cells G2 phase. For cyclin E, intermediate-labeled cells were G1 phase and heavy-labeled cells were S phase. For cyclin B, intermediate-labeled cells were G2 phase and heavy-labeled cells were M phase. (B) Cyclin E complexes were isolated from G1 and S phase cells and analyzed by mass spectrometry. Identified proteins are shown. Solid colored lines indicate the cutoff score for the ratio of FLAG to control IP for either G1 phase or S phase (M/L: medium/light cell populations; H/L: heavy/light populations). Each point indicates one protein identified and its color reflects the average S/G1 phase ratio (the heavy/medium ratio) of the replicate experiments. Grey points indicate the identified protein was nonspecific (not enriched above the control IP.) Purple points indicate the protein was identified in both phases, yellow, red, blue, or green shading indicates the interaction was enriched in G1, S, G2, or M phase, respectively. Note that ratios could not be calculated for all interactors as very specific interactors appear solely as heavy or medium-weight peaks with no light peak from the control sample. (C) Cyclin A complexes were isolated from S and G2 phase cells. (D) Cyclin B complexes were isolated from G2 and M phase cells. For complete protein identification and quantification, see Tables S1 and S5. See also Figures S1, S2, and S3, Tables S1, S2, and S5, and Movies S1, S2, and S3. Molecular Cell 2011 43, 406-417DOI: (10.1016/j.molcel.2011.05.031) Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 2 Different Interactors Bind Distinct Cyclins and Contribute to Cell-Cycle Progression Cyclin interaction data were compared to phenotypic data from siRNA depletion studies. On the left, black shading indicates that the protein in that row was identified with that cyclin (E, A, or B) in that cell-cycle phase (G1, S, G2, or M). On the right, increases or decreases in cell number (CN) or in the proportion of cells abnormally accumulating in different cell-cycle phases (G1, S, or G2/M) after siRNA depletion is indicated by red (increase) to green (decrease) shading, according to data from Kittler et al. (2007) (see Table S1). (A) Interactors that bind both cyclins E and A. (B) Cyclin A-specific interactors. (C) Cyclin B-specific interactors. (D) Interactors that bind all three cyclins. (E) Interactors that bind cyclins A and B. (F) The cyclin interactome shows the specificity of cyclin interactions. Many interactions are temporally dynamic and enriched in one cell-cycle phase, indicated by yellow (G1), red (S), blue (G2), or green (M) connecting lines. See also Tables S1 and S5. Molecular Cell 2011 43, 406-417DOI: (10.1016/j.molcel.2011.05.031) Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 3 Cyclin/Cdk Complexes Bind Proteins of Varied Biological Function, and These Proteins Are Enriched in Specific Cell-Cycle Phase Contexts and with Specific Cyclins No shading indicates that the protein was not identified with that cyclin or was not enriched above the control. Black shading indicates identification in all phases analyzed with no enrichment in any one phase. Phase-enriched hits (ratio < 0.5 or > 2) are colored according to the schema shown (yellow G1, red S, blue G2, green M). A subset of representative interactors is shown; for complete data, refer to Figure S4 and Tables S1 and S5. See also Figures S2, S3, and S4 and Tables S1 and S5. Molecular Cell 2011 43, 406-417DOI: (10.1016/j.molcel.2011.05.031) Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 4 Cyclin A-Specific Interactor c15orf42 is the Human Homolog of DNA Replication factor Sld3 (A) Comparison of cdk sites in S. cerevisiae Sld3, human c15orf42, Xenopus treslin, and zebrafish ticrr. (B) c15orf42 has homology to yeast Sld3. Black shading indicates identical amino acid residues. (C) Cyclin A-associated c15orf42 is phosphorylated at cdk sites in vivo. A representative phosphopeptide fragmentation spectra of c15orf42 shows phosphorylation at T1260. See also Tables S3 and S6. (D) A model of human DNA replication including c15orf42/Sld3. All colored proteins were identified in purifications of cyclin A protein complexes. See also Figure S5 and Tables S3 and S4. Molecular Cell 2011 43, 406-417DOI: (10.1016/j.molcel.2011.05.031) Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions

Figure 5 Cyclins A and B Share Many Protein Partners, but the Interactions Are Temporally Coordinated (A) The protein interaction networks of cyclins A and B overlap. (B) Interactors specific to cyclins A and B bind to cyclin A in interphase (red, S; blue, G2) and cyclin B primarily in mitosis (green). Each horizontal bar represents one protein and a representative subset of total cyclin A and B shared interactors is shown (complete data are in Table S1; median calculated from complete set of quantified proteins). The width of the bar in each color represents the relative amount of protein immunoprecipitated from each phase (calculated from the H/M ratio). The median contributions from S (red) and G2 (blue) for the total quantified cyclin A interactors are nearly 1 to 1 (median G2/S ratio = 1.2), whereas the same interactors are mitotic enriched with cyclin B (median M/G2 ratio = 5.4). See also Figures S4 and S7 and Tables S1 and S5. Molecular Cell 2011 43, 406-417DOI: (10.1016/j.molcel.2011.05.031) Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. Terms and Conditions