Ubjected to SUMOylation in COS-7 cells (Fig. 3A). Fragments 509?151 and 729?151 were

Ubjected to SUMOylation in COS-7 cells (Fig. 3A). Fragments 509?151 and 729?151 were Tetracosactide biological activity SUMOylated at apparently a single site (Fig. 3A, FOG-2(509?151), lane 3 and FOG-2(729?151), lane 2). Single point mutations in the 729?151 fragment did not completely abrogate SUMO modification (Fig. 3A, FOG-2(729?1151)KR mutants, lanes 3?). Additional mutations in the fragment containing amino acids 881?092 of FOG-2 identified K955 as a SUMO-acceptor residue, and mutation of this amino acid, in combination with K915, resulted in the complete elimination of SUMOylation of this FOG-2 fragment (Fig. 3A, FOG-2(881?092), lane 4). The validity of this result was then confirmed in the context of the full-length protein. Fig. 3B shows that the quadruple mutant (from now on termed FOG-2-4KR) is not modified by SUMO-1 (Fig. 3B, lane 9, upper panel). Thus K324, K471, K915 and K955 are the only SUMO acceptor sites in mouse FOG-2. The mapping of the FOG-2 SUMOylation sites was confirmed by immunoprecipitation of SUMOylated FOG-2 wt, K324/471/ 915R and 4KR. Fig. 4A shows that at least two SUMOylated bands are pulled down by the anti-GFP antibody when FOG-2 wt is SUMOylated by GFP-SUMO-1 (Fig. 4A, lane 2, upper panel). The anti-GFP antibody also precipitated a single SUMOylated band when the K324/471/915R mutant molecule was used as a substrate (Fig. 4A, lane 3, upper panel). In contrast, no SUMOylated FOG-2 was immunoprecipitated when the K324/ 471/915/955R mutant was co-expressed with GFP-SUMO-1 (Fig. 4A, lane 4, upper panel). Collectively, these experiments show that FOG-2 is targeted for SUMO modification at K324, 471, 915 and 955. The four SUMOylation sites identified in murine FOG-2 show strong conservation across the species examined (Fig. 4B), which would suggest preserved biological functionality.SUMOylation Regulates FOG-2 ActivityFigure 4. Confirmation of FOG-2 SUMOylation sites. (A) COS-7 cells were co-transfected with GFP or GFP-SUMO-1 and either wt FOG-2, FOG-2 Madrasin web triple SUMOylation site mutant (K324/471/915R) or FOG-2 quadruple mutant (K324/471/915/955R). Immuno-precipitation experiments were performed in cell extracts using magnetic beads coated with an anti-GFP antibody. Immuno-precipitated complexes and cell lysates (input) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and blotted with anti-FOG-2, anti-GFP or anti-SUMO-1 antibodies. Immuno-precipitated FOG-2 SUMOylated by GFP-SUMO-1 is observed in lane 2, upper panel. A single SUMOylated band is seen in the triple mutant (lane 3, upper panel), while the FOG-2 K324/471/915/955R mutant is not SUMOylated (lane 4, upper panel). Protein input (5 ) in shown in lanes 5 to 8. Expression of GFP alone (lanes 1 and 5), GFP-SUMO-1 (lanes 2? and 6?) and total SUMOylation are shown in the middle and lower panels. Asterisks indicate non-specific bands detected by the FOG-2 antibody (this non-specific band was enriched by the immuno-precipitation – upper panel, lanes 2 to 4 – indicating that this cross-reacting species is also a SUMOylated protein). (B) The alignment of FOG-2 sequences from human to platypus (Ornithorhynchus anatinus) shows conservation of the four SUMOylation sites. Asterisks indicate non-specific bands detected by the FOG-2 antibody. IB, immunoblot; IP, immuno-precipitation. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0050637.gSUMOylation does not Affect the Cellular Distribution of FOG-For several proteins the connection between SUMO modification and nuclear translocation has already been established (forreview see [31]). We expressed G.Ubjected to SUMOylation in COS-7 cells (Fig. 3A). Fragments 509?151 and 729?151 were SUMOylated at apparently a single site (Fig. 3A, FOG-2(509?151), lane 3 and FOG-2(729?151), lane 2). Single point mutations in the 729?151 fragment did not completely abrogate SUMO modification (Fig. 3A, FOG-2(729?1151)KR mutants, lanes 3?). Additional mutations in the fragment containing amino acids 881?092 of FOG-2 identified K955 as a SUMO-acceptor residue, and mutation of this amino acid, in combination with K915, resulted in the complete elimination of SUMOylation of this FOG-2 fragment (Fig. 3A, FOG-2(881?092), lane 4). The validity of this result was then confirmed in the context of the full-length protein. Fig. 3B shows that the quadruple mutant (from now on termed FOG-2-4KR) is not modified by SUMO-1 (Fig. 3B, lane 9, upper panel). Thus K324, K471, K915 and K955 are the only SUMO acceptor sites in mouse FOG-2. The mapping of the FOG-2 SUMOylation sites was confirmed by immunoprecipitation of SUMOylated FOG-2 wt, K324/471/ 915R and 4KR. Fig. 4A shows that at least two SUMOylated bands are pulled down by the anti-GFP antibody when FOG-2 wt is SUMOylated by GFP-SUMO-1 (Fig. 4A, lane 2, upper panel). The anti-GFP antibody also precipitated a single SUMOylated band when the K324/471/915R mutant molecule was used as a substrate (Fig. 4A, lane 3, upper panel). In contrast, no SUMOylated FOG-2 was immunoprecipitated when the K324/ 471/915/955R mutant was co-expressed with GFP-SUMO-1 (Fig. 4A, lane 4, upper panel). Collectively, these experiments show that FOG-2 is targeted for SUMO modification at K324, 471, 915 and 955. The four SUMOylation sites identified in murine FOG-2 show strong conservation across the species examined (Fig. 4B), which would suggest preserved biological functionality.SUMOylation Regulates FOG-2 ActivityFigure 4. Confirmation of FOG-2 SUMOylation sites. (A) COS-7 cells were co-transfected with GFP or GFP-SUMO-1 and either wt FOG-2, FOG-2 triple SUMOylation site mutant (K324/471/915R) or FOG-2 quadruple mutant (K324/471/915/955R). Immuno-precipitation experiments were performed in cell extracts using magnetic beads coated with an anti-GFP antibody. Immuno-precipitated complexes and cell lysates (input) were resolved by SDS-PAGE and blotted with anti-FOG-2, anti-GFP or anti-SUMO-1 antibodies. Immuno-precipitated FOG-2 SUMOylated by GFP-SUMO-1 is observed in lane 2, upper panel. A single SUMOylated band is seen in the triple mutant (lane 3, upper panel), while the FOG-2 K324/471/915/955R mutant is not SUMOylated (lane 4, upper panel). Protein input (5 ) in shown in lanes 5 to 8. Expression of GFP alone (lanes 1 and 5), GFP-SUMO-1 (lanes 2? and 6?) and total SUMOylation are shown in the middle and lower panels. Asterisks indicate non-specific bands detected by the FOG-2 antibody (this non-specific band was enriched by the immuno-precipitation – upper panel, lanes 2 to 4 – indicating that this cross-reacting species is also a SUMOylated protein). (B) The alignment of FOG-2 sequences from human to platypus (Ornithorhynchus anatinus) shows conservation of the four SUMOylation sites. Asterisks indicate non-specific bands detected by the FOG-2 antibody. IB, immunoblot; IP, immuno-precipitation. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0050637.gSUMOylation does not Affect the Cellular Distribution of FOG-For several proteins the connection between SUMO modification and nuclear translocation has already been established (forreview see [31]). We expressed G.