No abstract

In recent decades, tremendous progress has been made in understanding serine/threonine protein phosphatase-dependent pathways, which are involved in the regulation of numerous processes, including secretion, cell motility, cell cycle, gene transcription, and cell metabolism (1-7). Serine/threonine phosphorylation, which is regulated by many kinases, can be reversed by a few phosphatases that are targeted to substrates via dozens of regulatory subunits (7,8). Currently, serine/threonine protein phosphatases (PPs) are grouped into two structurally distinct families: the PPP family (PP1, PP2A, and PP2B) and the PPM family (PP2C and pyruvate dehydrogenase phosphatase) (9). The PP2A heterotrimeric protein complex, which consists of a cascade of three subunits, namely, a catalytic subunit (C) and a structural subunit (A) associated with a third, hypothetically competitive and variable regulatory subunit (B), represents a highly conserved eukaryotic signal transduction system that is present in many organisms, from yeasts to humans. The activity of PP2A, along with its subcellular localization, is determined by B-family subunits (10-14). In mammals, PP2A is a major intracellular protein phosphatase that regulates multiple aspects of cell growth and metabolism (15). Therefore, PP2A is one of a few serine/threonine-specific phosphatases in the cell, and its complex structure and regulation system guarantee its various functions. The ability of this widely distributed heterotrimeric enzyme to function on a diverse array of substrates is largely controlled by the nature of its regulatory Bfamily subunits. Thus, multiple isoforms of the B-family regulatory subunit have been isolated from different organisms and grouped into three classes (B, B=, and BЉ) based on their structural similarities (16,17). The structural variations between these families support the hypothesis that the B-family regulatory subunit controls enzyme activity and specificity, such that different activities of PP2A and subcellular localization are determined by Bfamily regulatory subunits. However, one challenge we face is the potential for redundancy in the regulatory subunits' function of assigning PP2A function in mammals (18)(19)(20). Therefore, it is difficult to approach the function of PP2A globally by knocking out one of the regulatory subunits. In contrast, simple eukaryotic organisms, such as Saccharomyces cerevisiae (budding yeast) and Schizosaccharomyces pombe (fission yeast), which contain only a few isoforms of B-family regulatory subunits, are excellent model systems for studying how B-family regulatory subunits function in regulating PP2A activity. In fission yeast, there is only one B subunit of PP2A-Pab1 and two of the B=-encoding genes (par1 and par2) (21-24). Moreover, mutational studies in fission yeast have demonstrated that B regulatory subunits play crucial roles during the processes of cytokinesis, cell morphogenesis, and cell wall synthesis (25,26). Similarly, in budding yeast, studies have shown that the B class has only one ...

Phosphoribosyl pyrophosphate synthetase, which is encoded by the Prs gene, catalyses the reaction of ribose-5-phosphate and adenine ribonucleotide triphosphate (ATP) and has central importance in cellular metabolism. However, knowledge about how Prs family members function and contribute to total 5-phosphoribosyl-α-1-pyrophosphate (PRPP) synthetase activity is limited. In this study, we identified that the filamentous fungus Aspergillus nidulans genome contains three PRPP synthase-homologous genes (AnprsA, AnprsB and AnprsC), among which AnprsB and AnprsC but not AnprsA are auxotrophic genes. Transcriptional expression profiles revealed that the mRNA levels of AnprsA, AnprsB and AnprsC are dynamic during germination, hyphal growth and sporulation and that they all showed abundant expression during the vigorous hyphal growth time point. Inhibiting the expression of AnprsB or AnprsC in conditional strains produced more effects on the total PRPP synthetase activity than did inhibiting AnprsA, thus indicating that different AnPrs proteins are unequal in their contributions to Prs enzyme activity. In addition, the constitutive overexpression of AnprsA or AnprsC could significantly rescue the defective phenotype of the AnprsB-absent strain, suggesting that the function of AnprsB is not a specific consequence of this auxotrophic gene but instead comes from the contribution of Prs proteins to PRPP synthetase activity.