Limits...
Phosphoproteomic analyses reveal novel cross-modulation mechanisms between two signaling pathways in yeast.

Vaga S, Bernardo-Faura M, Cokelaer T, Maiolica A, Barnes CA, Gillet LC, Hegemann B, van Drogen F, Sharifian H, Klipp E, Peter M, Saez-Rodriguez J, Aebersold R - Mol. Syst. Biol. (2014)

Bottom Line: We observed a pheromone-induced down-regulation of Hog1 phosphorylation due to Gpd1, Ste20, Ptp2, Pbs2, and Ptc1.Distinct Ste20 and Pbs2 phosphosites responded differently to the two stimuli, suggesting these proteins as key mediators of the information exchange.Our results show that the integration of the response to different stimuli requires complex interconnections between signaling pathways.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Biology, Institute of Molecular Systems Biology ETH Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Hog1 and Fus3 activation sites
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4300490&req=5

fig05: Hog1 and Fus3 activation sites

Mentions: According to the classification introduced above, we analyzed the behavior of the pathway MAPKs after co-stimulation with the respective opposite pathway: ppHog1 from pheromone and Fus3_T180_Y182 (ppFus3) from NaCl stimulation (Fig4C). Surprisingly, ppHog1 underwent an Intensity Effect displayed by a strong and short-lived down-regulation 1′ after pheromone stimulation (Fig5A), before recovering its full intensity within the next 4 min (Fig5B). This brief inhibitory effect of pheromone on the HOG pathway MAPK is an unexpected behavior, since the osmotic shock response is of higher priority for the cell compared to the mating response. ppHog1 maximum intensity was not reduced when cells were harvested 1 min after mock pheromone stimulation (Supplementary Fig S3). The intensity reached by ppHog1 in the mock_1′_Phe time course was, indeed, comparable to those measured for all the time courses of our matrix experiments, except for the one relative to 1′ pheromone stimulation. When comparing the dynamics of the mock_1′_Phe time course to that of the first row of our matrix, where no pheromone stimulation was applied, we observed similar curves both reaching comparable intensities (Supplementary Fig S3). These results suggest that the down-regulation of ppHog1 observed 1′ after pheromone stimulation is due to the stimulation itself rather than to a stress response induced by culture handling.


Phosphoproteomic analyses reveal novel cross-modulation mechanisms between two signaling pathways in yeast.

Vaga S, Bernardo-Faura M, Cokelaer T, Maiolica A, Barnes CA, Gillet LC, Hegemann B, van Drogen F, Sharifian H, Klipp E, Peter M, Saez-Rodriguez J, Aebersold R - Mol. Syst. Biol. (2014)

Hog1 and Fus3 activation sites
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4300490&req=5

fig05: Hog1 and Fus3 activation sites
Mentions: According to the classification introduced above, we analyzed the behavior of the pathway MAPKs after co-stimulation with the respective opposite pathway: ppHog1 from pheromone and Fus3_T180_Y182 (ppFus3) from NaCl stimulation (Fig4C). Surprisingly, ppHog1 underwent an Intensity Effect displayed by a strong and short-lived down-regulation 1′ after pheromone stimulation (Fig5A), before recovering its full intensity within the next 4 min (Fig5B). This brief inhibitory effect of pheromone on the HOG pathway MAPK is an unexpected behavior, since the osmotic shock response is of higher priority for the cell compared to the mating response. ppHog1 maximum intensity was not reduced when cells were harvested 1 min after mock pheromone stimulation (Supplementary Fig S3). The intensity reached by ppHog1 in the mock_1′_Phe time course was, indeed, comparable to those measured for all the time courses of our matrix experiments, except for the one relative to 1′ pheromone stimulation. When comparing the dynamics of the mock_1′_Phe time course to that of the first row of our matrix, where no pheromone stimulation was applied, we observed similar curves both reaching comparable intensities (Supplementary Fig S3). These results suggest that the down-regulation of ppHog1 observed 1′ after pheromone stimulation is due to the stimulation itself rather than to a stress response induced by culture handling.

Bottom Line: We observed a pheromone-induced down-regulation of Hog1 phosphorylation due to Gpd1, Ste20, Ptp2, Pbs2, and Ptc1.Distinct Ste20 and Pbs2 phosphosites responded differently to the two stimuli, suggesting these proteins as key mediators of the information exchange.Our results show that the integration of the response to different stimuli requires complex interconnections between signaling pathways.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Biology, Institute of Molecular Systems Biology ETH Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus