Versions of LYP, as indicated, and stimulated with anti-CD3 AbRegulation of TCR Signaling by LYP/CSK Complexfor 5 min. Erk was immunoprecipitated from lysates of these cells and its phosphorylation was detected by IB. Expression was verified in total lysates (TL) by IB. Phospho-ERK (P-Erk) blot was measured by densitometry and the data were expressed as arbitrary units under the blot.C, As in B, p38 activity was evaluated in Jurkat T cells stimulated with anti-CD3 and anti-CD28 Ab for 30 min by IP of HA-p38 and IB with a specific antibody for dually phosphorylated p38. Phospho-p38 (P-p38) blot was measured by densitometry scanning and the data were expressed as arbitrary units under the blot. D, Activation of a luciferase reporter gene driven by the NF-AT/AP1 site of IL-2 promoter in Jurkat cells co-transfected with LYPR, LYPTW, and CSK-W47A plasmids, as indicated. Expression of LYP and CSK proteins as detected by IB is shown in the insert. E, Activation of a luciferase reporter gene driven by the IL-2 minimal promoter in Jurkat cells transfected with LYPR, LYPW, and CSK-W47A plasmids. The insert shows the IB of LYP and CSK proteins. R, LYPR; W, LYPW. F, Expression of CD25 in Jurkat cells transfected with the plasmids indicated was measured by flow cytometry upon stimulation with anti-CD3 plus anti-CD28 antibodies for 24 hours. Expression of LYP and CSK proteins as detected by IB is shown in the insert. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0054569.gfor T cells (Figure 5B). Co-expression of LCK, Fyn, and CSK lead to LYP Tyr phosphorylation, being the highest phosphorylation produced by LCK. To confirm that LCK was the main kinase involved in LYP phosphorylation, we used Jurkat derived cell lines deficient in LCK, JCam1.6, and in Zap70, P116 (Figure 5C). PV treatment of Jurkat and P116 cells lead to similar levels of LYP Tyr phosphorylation, while in JCam1.6 cells there was a residual phosphorylation that can be explained by the presence of FYN or CSK in these cells. We also detected in vitro LYP phosphorylation by LCK (Figure 5D), further supporting LCK as a key kinase in LYP tyrosine phosphorylation. Our analysis on LYP phosphorylation was followed by the identification of the tyrosines phosphorylated. To this end, we transfected several Tyr to Phe mutants, in a LYPR-DA inactive version, chosen based on the phosphorylation sites predicted by Netphos [25] or Scansite [26], and on the degree of evolutionary conservation. Co-transfection of LCK with the LYP Tyr to Phe mutants showed that the main sites phosphorylated by LCK were Tyr526 and 86168-78-7 biological activity Tyr536 (Figure 5E). We also tested whether there was any difference in the phosphorylation of LYPR and LYPW in Jurkat cells by LCK, which in fact was similar (Figure 5F). Then, we evaluated whether LYP phosphorylation on these residues, Tyr526 and Tyr536, was involved in the regulation of TCR signaling. Expression of LYP Y526F and Y536F mutants showed no effect with respect of LYPR on the activation of the IL-2 promoter in luciferase assays (Figure 5G), in disagreement with data published recently [14]. We also tested whether these mutants affected the interaction of LYP with CSK, but our results showed that they are not involved in this interaction (Figure S4),These results indicate that TCR stimulation leads to Y-phosphorylation of LYP, and that phosphorylation of Tyr526 and Tyr536 does not affect LYP function during TCR signaling.DiscussionThe C1858T polymorphism of LYP plays a Arg8-vasopressin web critical role in the pathogenesis o.Versions of LYP, as indicated, and stimulated with anti-CD3 AbRegulation of TCR Signaling by LYP/CSK Complexfor 5 min. Erk was immunoprecipitated from lysates of these cells and its phosphorylation was detected by IB. Expression was verified in total lysates (TL) by IB. Phospho-ERK (P-Erk) blot was measured by densitometry and the data were expressed as arbitrary units under the blot.C, As in B, p38 activity was evaluated in Jurkat T cells stimulated with anti-CD3 and anti-CD28 Ab for 30 min by IP of HA-p38 and IB with a specific antibody for dually phosphorylated p38. Phospho-p38 (P-p38) blot was measured by densitometry scanning and the data were expressed as arbitrary units under the blot. D, Activation of a luciferase reporter gene driven by the NF-AT/AP1 site of IL-2 promoter in Jurkat cells co-transfected with LYPR, LYPTW, and CSK-W47A plasmids, as indicated. Expression of LYP and CSK proteins as detected by IB is shown in the insert. E, Activation of a luciferase reporter gene driven by the IL-2 minimal promoter in Jurkat cells transfected with LYPR, LYPW, and CSK-W47A plasmids. The insert shows the IB of LYP and CSK proteins. R, LYPR; W, LYPW. F, Expression of CD25 in Jurkat cells transfected with the plasmids indicated was measured by flow cytometry upon stimulation with anti-CD3 plus anti-CD28 antibodies for 24 hours. Expression of LYP and CSK proteins as detected by IB is shown in the insert. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0054569.gfor T cells (Figure 5B). Co-expression of LCK, Fyn, and CSK lead to LYP Tyr phosphorylation, being the highest phosphorylation produced by LCK. To confirm that LCK was the main kinase involved in LYP phosphorylation, we used Jurkat derived cell lines deficient in LCK, JCam1.6, and in Zap70, P116 (Figure 5C). PV treatment of Jurkat and P116 cells lead to similar levels of LYP Tyr phosphorylation, while in JCam1.6 cells there was a residual phosphorylation that can be explained by the presence of FYN or CSK in these cells. We also detected in vitro LYP phosphorylation by LCK (Figure 5D), further supporting LCK as a key kinase in LYP tyrosine phosphorylation. Our analysis on LYP phosphorylation was followed by the identification of the tyrosines phosphorylated. To this end, we transfected several Tyr to Phe mutants, in a LYPR-DA inactive version, chosen based on the phosphorylation sites predicted by Netphos [25] or Scansite [26], and on the degree of evolutionary conservation. Co-transfection of LCK with the LYP Tyr to Phe mutants showed that the main sites phosphorylated by LCK were Tyr526 and Tyr536 (Figure 5E). We also tested whether there was any difference in the phosphorylation of LYPR and LYPW in Jurkat cells by LCK, which in fact was similar (Figure 5F). Then, we evaluated whether LYP phosphorylation on these residues, Tyr526 and Tyr536, was involved in the regulation of TCR signaling. Expression of LYP Y526F and Y536F mutants showed no effect with respect of LYPR on the activation of the IL-2 promoter in luciferase assays (Figure 5G), in disagreement with data published recently [14]. We also tested whether these mutants affected the interaction of LYP with CSK, but our results showed that they are not involved in this interaction (Figure S4),These results indicate that TCR stimulation leads to Y-phosphorylation of LYP, and that phosphorylation of Tyr526 and Tyr536 does not affect LYP function during TCR signaling.DiscussionThe C1858T polymorphism of LYP plays a critical role in the pathogenesis o.
