Roles of “junk phosphorylation” in modulating biomolecular association of phosphorylated proteins?

Protein phosphorylation dynamically regulates cellular activities in response to environmental cues. Sequence conservation analysis of recent proteome-wide phosphorylation data revealed that many previously unidentified phosphorylation sites are not well-conserved leading to the proposal that many are non-functional. However, this is based on the assumption that protein phosphorylation modulates protein function through specific position on protein sequence. Based on emerging understanding on phospho-regulation of cellular activities, we argue, with examples, that non-positionally conserved phosphorylation sites can very well be functional. We previously identified phosphorylation events that need not be conserved at same positions across orthologous proteins but are likely maintained by evolutionary conserved signaling networks through orthologous kinases. We found that proteins with such conserved phosphorylation patterns are statistically over-represented with protein and DNA-binding annotation. Here, we further correlated these proteins with protein-protein interaction data from an independent systematic study and observed they indeed interact frequently with other proteins. Hence, we speculate that non-positionally conserved phosphorylation site could be modulating biomolecular association of phosphorylated proteins possibly through fine-tuning protein’s bulk electrostatic charge and through creating binding sites for phospho-binding interaction domains. We, therefore, advocate the development of complementary evolutionary approaches to interpret physiological important sites.

[1]  Sampsa Hautaniemi,et al.  Effects of HER2 overexpression on cell signaling networks governing proliferation and migration , 2006, Molecular systems biology.

[2]  A. Gingras,et al.  Phosphorylation of eIF4E attenuates its interaction with mRNA 5' cap analogs by electrostatic repulsion: intein-mediated protein ligation strategy to obtain phosphorylated protein. , 2003, RNA.

[3]  Tony Pawson,et al.  Cell-Specific Information Processing in Segregating Populations of Eph Receptor Ephrin–Expressing Cells , 2009, Science.

[4]  James E. Ferrell,et al.  Tuning Bulk Electrostatics to Regulate Protein Function , 2007, Cell.

[5]  P. Bork,et al.  Evolution of Cell Cycle Control: Same Molecular Machines, Different Regulation , 2007, Cell cycle.

[6]  Robert B. Russell,et al.  GlobPlot: exploring protein sequences for globularity and disorder , 2003, Nucleic Acids Res..

[7]  G. Lienhard,et al.  Non-functional phosphorylations? , 2008, Trends in biochemical sciences.

[8]  Toby J Gibson,et al.  Cell regulation: determined to signal discrete cooperation. , 2009, Trends in biochemical sciences.

[9]  W. Lim,et al.  Evolution of Phosphoregulation: Comparison of Phosphorylation Patterns across Yeast Species , 2009, PLoS biology.

[10]  Ben Lehner,et al.  Intrinsic Protein Disorder and Interaction Promiscuity Are Widely Associated with Dosage Sensitivity , 2009, Cell.

[11]  Mike Tyers,et al.  Dynamic equilibrium engagement of a polyvalent ligand with a single-site receptor , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[12]  Richard Durbin,et al.  Clustering of phosphorylation site recognition motifs can be exploited to predict the targets of cyclin-dependent kinase , 2007, Genome Biology.

[13]  H. Chan,et al.  Polyelectrostatic interactions of disordered ligands suggest a physical basis for ultrasensitivity , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[14]  G. Bossi,et al.  Ser58 of mouse p53 is the homologue of human Ser46 and is phosphorylated by HIPK2 in apoptosis , 2006, Cell Death and Differentiation.

[15]  Olivier Poch,et al.  A new protein linear motif benchmark for multiple sequence alignment software , 2008, BMC Bioinformatics.

[16]  Deepak Srinivasan,et al.  Modulation of the p53-MDM2 Interaction by Phosphorylation of Thr18: A Computational Study , 2007, Cell cycle.

[17]  Ruedi Aebersold,et al.  PhosphoPep—a database of protein phosphorylation sites in model organisms , 2008, Nature Biotechnology.

[18]  A. Aderem,et al.  The myristoyl-electrostatic switch: a modulator of reversible protein-membrane interactions. , 1995, Trends in biochemical sciences.

[19]  D. Lauffenburger,et al.  A Systems Model of Signaling Identifies a Molecular Basis Set for Cytokine-Induced Apoptosis , 2005, Science.

[20]  Deepak Srinivasan,et al.  The electrostatic surface of MDM2 modulates the specificity of its interaction with phosphorylated and unphosphorylated p53 peptides , 2008, Cell cycle.

[21]  S. Gygi,et al.  Profiling of UV-induced ATM/ATR signaling pathways , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[22]  Kaoru Irie,et al.  CDK phosphorylation of a novel NLS-NES module distributed between two subunits of the Mcm2-7 complex prevents chromosomal rereplication. , 2005, Molecular biology of the cell.

[23]  B. A. Ballif,et al.  ATM and ATR Substrate Analysis Reveals Extensive Protein Networks Responsive to DNA Damage , 2007, Science.

[24]  Tony Pawson,et al.  Comparative Analysis Reveals Conserved Protein Phosphorylation Networks Implicated in Multiple Diseases , 2009, Science Signaling.

[25]  Wendell A. Lim,et al.  Optimization of specificity in a cellular protein interaction network by negative selection , 2003, Nature.

[26]  S. Gygi,et al.  Global Analysis of Cdk1 Substrate Phosphorylation Sites Provides Insights into Evolution , 2009, Science.

[27]  Kurt Wüthrich,et al.  An EB1-Binding Motif Acts as a Microtubule Tip Localization Signal , 2009, Cell.

[28]  P. Bork,et al.  Co-evolution of transcriptional and post-translational cell-cycle regulation , 2006, Nature.

[29]  R. Russell,et al.  Linear motifs: Evolutionary interaction switches , 2005, FEBS letters.

[30]  S. Swamy,et al.  Neurotransmitters Drive Combinatorial Multistate Postsynaptic Density Networks , 2009, Science Signaling.

[31]  Julian Mintseris,et al.  Phosphoproteome analysis of Drosophila melanogaster embryos. , 2008, Journal of proteome research.

[32]  Mike Tyers,et al.  A Mechanism for Cell-Cycle Regulation of MAP Kinase Signaling in a Yeast Differentiation Pathway , 2007, Cell.

[33]  Jimmy K. Eng,et al.  Quantitative Phosphoproteomic Analysis of T Cell Receptor Signaling Reveals System-Wide Modulation of Protein-Protein Interactions , 2009, Science Signaling.

[34]  Christopher J. Oldfield,et al.  Evolutionary Rate Heterogeneity in Proteins with Long Disordered Regions , 2002, Journal of Molecular Evolution.

[35]  S. L. Wong,et al.  Towards a proteome-scale map of the human protein–protein interaction network , 2005, Nature.

[36]  C. Landry,et al.  Weak functional constraints on phosphoproteomes. , 2009, Trends in genetics : TIG.

[37]  M. Collins Evolving Cell Signals , 2009, Science.

[38]  Terry Gaasterland,et al.  Prediction of Cyclin-Dependent Kinase Phosphorylation Substrates , 2007, PloS one.

[39]  Richard Durbin,et al.  Regulatory evolution in proteins by turnover and lineage-specific changes of cyclin-dependent kinase consensus sites , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[40]  S. Teichmann,et al.  Tight Regulation of Unstructured Proteins: From Transcript Synthesis to Protein Degradation , 2008, Science.

[41]  Tony Pawson,et al.  Positive Selection of Tyrosine Loss in Metazoan Evolution , 2009, Science.

[42]  Tony Pawson,et al.  Multisite phosphorylation of a CDK inhibitor sets a threshold for the onset of DNA replication , 2001, Nature.

[43]  James E. Ferrell,et al.  Substrate Competition as a Source of Ultrasensitivity in the Inactivation of Wee1 , 2007, Cell.