Structural and Functional Analysis of a β2-Adrenergic Receptor Complex with GRK5.

The phosphorylation of agonist-occupied G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) by GPCR kinases (GRKs) functions to turn off G-protein signaling and turn on arrestin-mediated signaling. While a structural understanding of GPCR/G-protein and GPCR/arrestin complexes has emerged in recent years, the molecular architecture of a GPCR/GRK complex remains poorly defined. We used a comprehensive integrated approach of cross-linking, hydrogen-deuterium exchange mass spectrometry (MS), electron microscopy, mutagenesis, molecular dynamics simulations, and computational docking to analyze GRK5 interaction with the β2-adrenergic receptor (β2AR). These studies revealed a dynamic mechanism of complex formation that involves large conformational changes in the GRK5 RH/catalytic domain interface upon receptor binding. These changes facilitate contacts between intracellular loops 2 and 3 and the C terminus of the β2AR with the GRK5 RH bundle subdomain, membrane-binding surface, and kinase catalytic cleft, respectively. These studies significantly contribute to our understanding of the mechanism by which GRKs regulate the function of activated GPCRs. PAPERCLIP

Mass Spectrometric Characterization of Narcolepsy-Associated Pandemic 2009 Influenza Vaccines

The onset of narcolepsy, an irreversible sleep disorder, has been associated with 2009 influenza pandemic (pH1N1) infections in China, and with ASO3-adjuvanted pH1N1 vaccinations using Pandemrix in Europe. Intriguingly, however, the increased incidence was only observed following vaccination with Pandemrix but not Arepanrix in Canada. In this study, the mutational burden of actual vaccine lots of Pandemrix (n = 6) and Arepanrix (n = 5) sourced from Canada, and Northern Europe were characterized by mass spectrometry. The four most abundant influenza proteins across both vaccines were nucleoprotein NP, hemagglutinin HA, matrix protein M1, with the exception that Pandemrix harbored a significantly increased proportion of neuraminidase NA (7.5%) as compared to Arepanrix (2.6%). Most significantly, 17 motifs in HA, NP, and M1 harbored mutations, which significantly differed in Pandemrix versus Arepanrix. Among these, a 6-fold higher deamidation of HA146 (p.Asn146Asp) in Arepanrix was found relative to Pandemrix, while NP257 (p.Thr257Ala) and NP424 (p.Thr424Ile) were increased in Pandemrix. DQ0602 binding and tetramer analysis with mutated epitopes were conducted in Pandemrix-vaccinated cases versus controls but were unremarkable. Pandemrix harbored lower mutational burden than Arepanrix, indicating higher similarity to wild-type 2009 pH1N1, which could explain differences in narcolepsy susceptibility amongst the vaccines

Proteomic analysis of platelet-rich and platelet-poor plasma

Background Autologous blood products, such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP) are commercial products broadly used to accelerate healing of tissues after injuries. However, their content is not standardized and significantly varies in composition, which may lead to differences in clinical efficacy. Also, the underlying molecular mechanisms for therapeutic effects are not well understood. Purpose A proteomic study was performed to compare the composition of low leukocyte PRP, platelet poor plasma (PPP), and blood plasma. Pathway analysis of the proteomic data was performed to evaluate differences between plasma formulations at the molecular level. Low abundance regulatory proteins in plasma were identified and quantified as well as cellular pathways regulated by those proteins. Methods Quantitative proteomic analysis, using multiplexed isotopically labeled tags (TMT labeling) and label-free tandem mass spectrometry, was performed on plasma, low leukocyte PRP, and PPP. Plasma formulations were derived from two blood donors (one donor per experiment). Pathway analysis of the proteomic data identified the major differences between formulations. Results Nearly 600 proteins were detected in three types of blood plasma formulations in two experiments. Identified proteins showed more than 50% overlap between plasma formulations. Detected proteins represented more than 100 canonical pathways, as was identified by pathway analysis. The major pathways and regulatory molecules were linked to inflammation. Conclusion Three types of plasma formulations were compared in two proteomic experiments. The most represented pathways, such as Acute Phase Response, Coagulation, or System of the Complement, had many proteins in common in both experiments. In both experiments plasma sample sets had the same direction of biochemical pathway changes: up- or down-regulation. The most represented biochemical pathways are linked to inflammation

Measurement of the Bottom-Strange Meson Mixing Phase in the Full CDF Data Set

We report a measurement of the bottom-strange meson mixing phase \beta_s using the time evolution of B0_s -> J/\psi (->\mu+\mu-) \phi (-> K+ K-) decays in which the quark-flavor content of the bottom-strange meson is identified at production. This measurement uses the full data set of proton-antiproton collisions at sqrt(s)= 1.96 TeV collected by the Collider Detector experiment at the Fermilab Tevatron, corresponding to 9.6 fb-1 of integrated luminosity. We report confidence regions in the two-dimensional space of \beta_s and the B0_s decay-width difference \Delta\Gamma_s, and measure \beta_s in [-\pi/2, -1.51] U [-0.06, 0.30] U [1.26, \pi/2] at the 68% confidence level, in agreement with the standard model expectation. Assuming the standard model value of \beta_s, we also determine \Delta\Gamma_s = 0.068 +- 0.026 (stat) +- 0.009 (syst) ps-1 and the mean B0_s lifetime, \tau_s = 1.528 +- 0.019 (stat) +- 0.009 (syst) ps, which are consistent and competitive with determinations by other experiments.Comment: 8 pages, 2 figures, Phys. Rev. Lett 109, 171802 (2012

Guidelines for the use and interpretation of assays for monitoring autophagy (3rd edition)

In 2008 we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, research on this topic has continued to accelerate, and many new scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Accordingly, it is important to update these guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Various reviews have described the range of assays that have been used for this purpose. Nevertheless, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to measure autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. For example, a key point that needs to be emphasized is that there is a difference between measurements that monitor the numbers or volume of autophagic elements (e.g., autophagosomes or autolysosomes) at any stage of the autophagic process versus those that measure fl ux through the autophagy pathway (i.e., the complete process including the amount and rate of cargo sequestered and degraded). In particular, a block in macroautophagy that results in autophagosome accumulation must be differentiated from stimuli that increase autophagic activity, defi ned as increased autophagy induction coupled with increased delivery to, and degradation within, lysosomes (inmost higher eukaryotes and some protists such as Dictyostelium ) or the vacuole (in plants and fungi). In other words, it is especially important that investigators new to the fi eld understand that the appearance of more autophagosomes does not necessarily equate with more autophagy. In fact, in many cases, autophagosomes accumulate because of a block in trafficking to lysosomes without a concomitant change in autophagosome biogenesis, whereas an increase in autolysosomes may reflect a reduction in degradative activity. It is worth emphasizing here that lysosomal digestion is a stage of autophagy and evaluating its competence is a crucial part of the evaluation of autophagic flux, or complete autophagy. Here, we present a set of guidelines for the selection and interpretation of methods for use by investigators who aim to examine macroautophagy and related processes, as well as for reviewers who need to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of papers that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a formulaic set of rules, because the appropriate assays depend in part on the question being asked and the system being used. In addition, we emphasize that no individual assay is guaranteed to be the most appropriate one in every situation, and we strongly recommend the use of multiple assays to monitor autophagy. Along these lines, because of the potential for pleiotropic effects due to blocking autophagy through genetic manipulation it is imperative to delete or knock down more than one autophagy-related gene. In addition, some individual Atg proteins, or groups of proteins, are involved in other cellular pathways so not all Atg proteins can be used as a specific marker for an autophagic process. In these guidelines, we consider these various methods of assessing autophagy and what information can, or cannot, be obtained from them. Finally, by discussing the merits and limits of particular autophagy assays, we hope to encourage technical innovation in the field