Phosducin-like protein (PhLP) binds G-protein beta gamma subunits and is thought to assist in assembly of the G-protein beta gamma dimer. Phosphorylation of PhLP at serine residues 18-20 by the casein kinase 2 (CK2) appears to play an essential role in this process. PhLP has also been shown to interact with the chaperonin containing TCP-1 (CCT) atop its apical domain, not entering the substrate folding cavity. However, the physiological role of the PhLP-CCT interaction in G-protein beta gamma dimer formation remains unclear. This study addresses the mechanism of G-protein beta gamma assembly by exploring the specific roles of CCT and CK2 phosphorylation of PhLP in the assembly process. Both overexpressed and endogenous Gbeta were shown to co-immunoprecipitate with CCT to a similar extent as PhLP, indicating that CCT may be involved in the folding of Gbeta. In addition, Ggamma overexpression enhanced the binding of PhLP to CCT, suggesting the formation of a ternary PhLP-Gbeta-CCT complex. In contrast, overexpression of PhLP caused the release of G-beta from CCT. This release was blocked by a PhLP S18-20A variant that lacks the S18-20 CK2 phosphorylation site. PhLP S18-20A has been previously shown to negatively affect the G-protein beta gamma dimer formation, suggesting a correlation between PhLP-mediated release of Gbeta from CCT and G protein beta gamma assembly. Experiments investigating the role of Ggamma in this process show that Ggamma does not interact with CCT nor is it the essential factor in the release of Gbeta from CCT. A new model is therefore proposed for the G-protein beta gamma subunits' assembly involving the formation of a PhLP-Gbeta-CCT ternary complex followed by the release of a phosphorylated PhLP-Gbeta complex from CCT. In the PhLP-Gbeta complex, the Ggamma binding face of Gbeta is exposed, allowing for the formation of the G-protein beta gamma dimer.

PIP3 dynamics observed in membranes are responsible for the protruding edge formation in cancer and amoeboid cells. The mechanisms that maintain those PIP3 domains in three-dimensional space remain elusive, due to limitations in observation and analysis techniques. Recently, a strong relation between the cell geometry, the spatial confinement of the membrane, and the excitable signal transduction system has been revealed by Hörning and Shibata (2019) using a novel 3D spatiotemporal analysis methodology that enables the study of membrane signaling on the entire membrane (Hörning and Shibata, 2019). Here, using 3D spatial fluctuation and phase map analysis on actin polymerization inhibited Dictyostelium cells, we reveal a spatial asymmetry of PIP3 signaling on the membrane that is mediated by the contact perimeter of the plasma membrane—the spatial boundary around the cell-substrate adhered area on the plasma membrane. We show that the contact perimeter guides PIP3 waves and acts as a pinning site of PIP3 phase singularities, that is, the center point of spiral waves. The contact perimeter serves as a diffusion influencing boundary that is regulated by a cell size- and shape-dependent curvature. Our findings suggest an underlying mechanism that explains how local curvature can favor actin polymerization when PIP3 domains get pinned at the curved protrusive membrane edges in amoeboid cells.

The surface gliding motility of Myxococcus xanthus is required for a multicellular developmental process initiated by unfavorable growth conditions. One form of the M. xanthus surface motility, social (S) gliding, is mediated by the extension and retraction of polarly localized type IV pili (Tfp). Besides Tfp, exopolysaccharides (EPS), another cell surface associated component, are also required for M. xanthus S motility. Previous studies demonstrated that the Dif chemotaxis-like signal transduction pathway is central to the regulation of EPS production in M. xanthus. Specifically, difA, difC and difE mutants were found to be defective in EPS production and S motility. DifA, DifC and DifE, homologous to methyl-accepting chemotaxis proteins (MCPs), CheW and CheA, respectively, are therefore positive regulators of EPS. This study, undertaken to better understand the regulation of EPS production, led to a few major findings. First, DifD and DifG, homologous to CheY and CheC, respectively, were found to be negative regulators of EPS production. Both DifD and DifG likely function upstream of the DifE kinase in EPS regulation. DifB, which has no homology to known chemotaxis proteins, was found not to be involved in EPS production. Secondly, this study led to the recognition that Tfp likely function upstream of the Dif pathway in the regulation of EPS production. Extracellular complementation experiments suggest that Tfp may act as sensors instead of signals for the Dif chemotaxis-like pathway. We propose a regulatory feedback loop that couples EPS production with Tfp function through the Dif signaling proteins. Lastly, we sought to identify additional genes involved in EPS production. Our efforts identified a mutation in a separate chemotaxis gene cluster as a suppressor of difA mutations, suggesting potential cross-talks among the multiple chemotaxis-like pathways in M. xanthus. In addition, we identified twenty-five previously uncharacterized genes that are predicted to be involved in M. xanthus EPS production. These genes appear to encode additional EPS regulators and proteins with biosynthetic function. / Ph. D.