Specificity of Mouse GM2 Activator Protein and beta -N-Acetylhexosaminidases A and B
SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES WITH THEIR HUMAN COUNTERPARTS IN THE CATABOLISM OF GM2*

Jeffrey A. YuziukDagger , Carmen BertoniDagger §, Tommaso Beccari§, Aldo Orlacchio§, Yan-Yun WuDagger , Su-Chen LiDagger , and Yu-Teh LiDagger

From the Dagger  Department of Biochemistry, Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana 70112 and § Dipartimento di Biologia Cellulare e Molecolare, Universita degli Studi di Perugia, Via del Giochetto, 06126 Perugia, Italy

    ABSTRACT
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Procedures
Results
Discussion
References

Tay-Sachs disease, an inborn lysosomal disease featuring a buildup of GM2 in the brain, is caused by a deficiency of beta -hexosaminidase A (Hex A) or GM2 activator. Of the two human lysosomal Hex isozymes, only Hex A, not Hex B, cleaves GM2 in the presence of GM2 activator. In contrast, mouse Hex B has been reported to be more active than Hex A in cleaving GM2 (Burg, J., Banerjee, A., Conzelmann, E., and Sandhoff, K. (1983) Hoppe Seyler's Z. Physiol. Chem. 364, 821-829). In two independent studies, mice with the targeted disruption of the Hexa gene did not display the severe buildup of brain GM2 or the concomitant abnormal behavioral manifestations seen in human Tay-Sachs patients. The results of these two studies were suggested to be attributed to the reported GM2 degrading activity of mouse Hex B. To clarify the specificity of mouse Hex A and Hex B and to better understand the observed results of the mouse model of Tay-Sachs disease, we have purified mouse liver Hex A and Hex B and also prepared the recombinant mouse GM2 activator. Contrary to the findings of Burg et al., we found that the specificities of mouse Hex A and Hex B toward the catabolism of GM2 were not different from the corresponding human Hex isozymes. Mouse Hex A, but not Hex B, hydrolyzes GM2 in the presence of GM2 activator, whereas GM2 is refractory to mouse Hex B with or without GM2 activator. Importantly, we found that, in contrast to human GM2 activator, mouse GM2 activator could effectively stimulate the hydrolysis of GA2 by mouse Hex A and to a much lesser extent also by Hex B. These results provide clear evidence on the existence of an alternative pathway for GM2 catabolism in mice by converting GM2 to GA2 and subsequently to lactosylceramide. They also provide the explanation for the lack of excessive GM2 accumulation in the Hexa gene-disrupted mice.

    INTRODUCTION
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Procedures
Results
Discussion
References

Human tissues contain two major isoforms of lysosomal beta -hexosaminidase (Hex),1 Hex A, a heterodimeric protein composed of alpha - and beta -subunits, and Hex B, a beta -subunit homodimer (1, 2). These two isoforms have also been reported to exist in other mammals (3). Human Hex A hydrolyzes the GalNAc from GM2 in the presence of a specific protein cofactor, GM2 activator (4-6). Human Hex B, on the other hand, is not able to hydrolyze GM2 with or without GM2 activator (7-10). A deficiency of Hex A or GM2 activator causes Tay-Sachs disease in humans, a lysosomal storage disease characterized by an excessive buildup of GM2 in the central nervous system (11). Burg et al. (3) reported that, in sharp contrast to human Hex isozymes, the partially purified Hex B prepared from several different mammalian tissues were able to degrade GM2 and that rat Hex B degraded GM2 more effectively than the Hex A. They also reported that the mouse activator preparation made from heat-treated mouse kidney extract was only slightly effective in stimulating the hydrolysis of GM2 by mouse Hex A and inhibited mouse Hex B in the same reaction. Recently, in two independent studies, mice with the targeted disruption of the Hexa gene were found to display neither the severe buildup of brain GM2 nor the concomitant abnormal behavioral manifestations seen in human classical Tay-Sachs patients (12, 13). In both studies, the mild manifestations were attributed to the reported GM2 degrading activity of mouse Hex B (3). Based on the fate of the radioactive GM1 fed to embryonic fibroblasts derived from Hexa -/- and Hexb -/- mice, Sango et al. (14) proposed the presence of an alternative pathway in mice where sialidase acts upon GM2 to produce GA2 which can be hydrolyzed subsequently by Hex A or Hex B.

To clarify the role of the mouse Hex A and Hex B in the catabolism of GM2 and also to understand better the observed results of the mouse models of classical Tay-Sachs disease (Type B GM2 gangliosidosis), we have purified mouse liver Hex A and Hex B. We have also prepared the recombinant mouse GM2 activator. Using the recombinant human and mouse GM2 activators, we have studied the requirement of these two protein cofactors in the hydrolysis of GM2 and GA2 by mouse Hex A and Hex B. We have also studied the cross-reactivity of human and mouse GM2 activators by studying the stimulation of mouse Hex A by human GM2 activator and of human Hex A by mouse GM2 activator.

    EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Procedures
Results
Discussion
References

Materials-- GM2 was isolated from the brain of a Tay-Sachs patient (15). GA2 was prepared from GM2 by mild acid hydrolysis (16). II3NeuAcGgOse3 was prepared from GM2 using ceramide glycanase (17). Goat anti-human Hex A was a kind gift of Dr. Richard L. Proia, Section of Biochemical Genetics, Genetics and Biochemistry Branch, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD. The following were purchased from commercial sources: frozen mouse livers (Swiss-Webster strain), Pel-Freez; precoated Silica Gel 60 thin layer chromatography plates, Fractogel EMD DEAE-650(M) and Fractogel SP-650(S), Merck (Darmstadt, Germany); protein standards for molecular weight and pI, FPLC Superose 6 and Mono P columns, Sephacryl S-300-SF, Polybuffer 74, Pharmacia Biotech Inc.; phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, Pierce; peroxidase-conjugated rabbit anti-goat IgG, 4-chloro-1-naphthol, MUG, Coomassie Brilliant Blue R-250, Trizma base, glycine, Sigma; MUGS, Research Development Corp., Toronto, Canada; Centricon-10 (10,000 molecular weight cutoff) micro-concentrators, Amicon.

Expression of Murine GM2 Activator-- A pBluescript vector containing a 1.1-kilobase cDNA encoding the mouse GM2 activator (18) was used as a template to generate by polymerase chain reaction a shortened version of the encoding sequence which was homologous to the mature human GM2 activator (19). The upstream primer was 5'-ATG-ATG-GAT-CCG-GTG-GCT-TCT-CCT-GGG-ATA-3' and the downstream primer was 5'-CAG-GCA-AGC-TTG-CTG-CTG-CCA-GGT-TAT-CTG-3'. This cDNA segment was subcloned into the pT7-7 expression vector at BamHI and HindIII sites, and its sequence was verified to contain the 486-base-pair DNA fragment corresponding to amino acids 32-193 of the mouse GM2 activator (18). The recombinant mouse GM2 activator was expressed and purified according to the procedures described previously for the human GM2 activator (19). The NH2-terminal amino acid sequence of the purified mouse GM2 activator was confirmed by a pulse-liquid protein micro-sequencer equipped with an on-line microbore phenylthiohydantoin-derivative analyzer (Applied BioSystems).

Enzyme Assays-- Enzyme activity was determined by using fluorogenic substrates MUG and MUGS according to Potier et al. (20). The enzyme was incubated with 1.5 mM of substrate in 50 mM sodium citrate buffer, pH 5.0, in a total volume of 50 µl at 37 °C. After a set time, 1.5 ml of 0.2 M sodium borate buffer, pH 9.8, was added to the reaction mixture to stop the reaction. The released MU was determined using a Sequoia-Turner Model 450 fluorometer. One unit of enzyme activity is defined as the amount that liberates 1 µmol of MU/min at 37 °C. For glycolipid substrates GM2 and GA2, the reaction mixture contained 3 nmol of substrate in 40 µl of 10 mM sodium acetate buffer, pH 5.0. The reactions were stopped by adding 40 µl of ethanol, and the mixtures were dried under vacuum, redissolved in 20 µl of chloroform/methanol (2:1, v/v), and applied onto a thin layer chromatography plate. The plates were developed by chloroform/methanol/water (60:35:8, v/v/v), sprayed with diphenylamine reagent (21), and heated at 115 °C for 15 min to visualize glycoconjugates.

Kinetic Analysis-- Initial rate measurements and determination of kinetic parameters for the enzyme-catalyzed hydrolysis of synthetic substrates were conducted similarly to that described previously (22). The reactions were carried out in 20 mM sodium citrate buffer, pH 5.0, using 0-5.0 mM of the substrates MUG and MUGS.

Isoelectric Point Determination-- Purified mouse liver Hex A and Hex B were examined by FPLC chromatofocusing in a pH range of 7.4-3.8 using a Mono P HR 5/20 (0.5 × 20 cm) column. The starting buffer was 25 mM imidazole-HCl, pH 7.4, and the running buffer was Polybuffer 74 adjusted to pH 3.8 using HCl as described in the Pharmacia manual. After applying the sample onto the Mono P column, the column was eluted with the running buffer at 0.5 ml/min and 0.5-ml fractions were collected.

Molecular Mass Determination-- The molecular masses of purified mouse Hex A and Hex B were determined using Superose 6 FPLC gel filtration in 50 mM sodium phosphate buffer, pH 7.0, containing 0.15 M NaCl. The column was first calibrated under the same conditions using ferritin (440,000), catalase (232,000), aldolase (158,000), ovalbumin (49,500), and chymotrypsinogen A (25,000) as molecular weight standards.

Purification of Mouse Liver Hex A and Hex B-- All operations were performed at 0-5 °C except the chromatographies on Con A-Sepharose and SP-Fractogel that were carried out at room temperature. Centrifugation was routinely carried out at 30,000 × g for 50 min using a Sorvall RC5C refrigerated centrifuge. Unless otherwise indicated, ultrafiltration was carried out with an Amicon stirred cell using a PM-10 membrane. Two hundred frozen mouse livers (391 g) were homogenized using a Polytron (Brinkmann) homogenizer with 5 volumes of cold phosphate-buffered saline (10 mM sodium phosphate, 138 mM NaCl, 2.7 mM KCl, pH 7.4) containing 1 mM EDTA and 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride as protease inhibitors, followed by centrifugation. The supernatant was brought to 30% saturation with solid ammonium sulfate. After 2 h, the precipitate was removed by centrifugation, and the supernatant was further brought to 65% saturation with solid ammonium sulfate. After standing overnight, the precipitate was collected by centrifugation and resuspended in 500 ml of 10 mM sodium phosphate buffer, pH 7.0 (buffer A). The suspension was placed into several dialysis bags and dialyzed against 10 liters of buffer A overnight, changing buffer every 4 h (4 changes). This crude enzyme preparation (780 ml) was centrifuged and applied to a DEAE-Fractogel column (5 × 45 cm) equilibrated with buffer A. The column was washed overnight with buffer A at 2 ml/min, and proteins were eluted with a linear gradient of NaCl from 0 to 0.5 M in the same buffer (total volume 4 liters), and 20-ml fractions were collected. Fractions were assayed for both MUG- and MUGS-cleaving activities. Hex B, which cleaves only MUG, was eluted in the nonadsorbed fractions (Fig. 1) and was concentrated by ultrafiltration. As shown in Fig. 1, MUG-cleaving activity eluted with NaCl as a main peak with a leading shoulder. The shoulder contained very low MUGS-cleaving activity, whereas the main peak contained both MUG- and MUGS-cleaving activities. Fractions in the main peak were pooled and concentrated to make a crude mouse Hex A preparation. This preparation was applied to a Sephacryl S-300 column (5 × 90 cm) equilibrated with 50 mM sodium phosphate buffer, pH 7.0, containing 0.15 M NaCl. The column was eluted with the same buffer at 1 ml/min, and 20-ml fractions were collected. MUG- and MUGS-cleaving activities coeluted as a broad peak, and the entire peak was pooled (Fig. 2A) and concentrated to 25 ml by ultrafiltration. The concentrated Hex A was dialyzed thoroughly against buffer A overnight. The crude Hex B preparation (from DEAE-Fractogel column) was dialyzed against buffer A and applied to an SP-Fractogel column (2.5 × 17 cm) equilibrated with buffer A. The column was washed with buffer A at 2 ml/min and eluted with a linear gradient of NaCl from 0 to 0.5 M in buffer A (total volume, 500 ml) and 17-ml fractions were collected. Fractions were assayed for MUG-cleaving activity. No activity was detected in the nonadsorbed fractions. The Hex B activity eluted as a single peak starting at 0.1 M NaCl was pooled and concentrated to make an SP-Fractogel-purified mouse Hex B preparation (elution pattern not shown). This preparation was applied to a Sephacryl S-300 column and eluted under the same conditions as the DEAE-Fractogel purified Hex A (Fig. 2B).


View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1.   DEAE-Fractogel chromatography of mouse liver crude enzyme preparation. Mouse liver crude enzyme preparation obtained after ammonium sulfate precipitation was applied onto a DEAE-Fractogel column (5 × 45 cm). Detailed conditions are described under "Experimental Procedures." Dotted line, absorbance at 280 nm; filled circles, MUG-cleaving activity; empty circles, MUGS-cleaving activity; dashed line, NaCl gradient.


View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 2.   Sephacryl S-300 gel filtration chromatography of mouse Hex A (A) and Hex B (B). Mouse DEAE-Fractogel purified Hex A and SP-Fractogel purified Hex B enzyme preparations were applied onto a Sephacryl S-300 column (5 × 90 cm). Detailed conditions are described under "Experimental Procedures." Dotted line, absorbance at 280 nm; filled circles, MUG-cleaving activity; empty circles, MUGS-cleaving activity.

The dialyzed mouse Hex A after gel filtration was applied to a Con A-Sepharose column (2.5 × 33 cm) equilibrated with buffer A. The column was washed with buffer A at 2 ml/min, followed by buffer A containing 0.5 M NaCl and 17-ml fractions were collected. After the absorbance at 280 nm fell to a stable base line, the column was eluted with buffer A containing 0.5 M NaCl and 0.75 M methyl-alpha -mannoside. No MUG-cleaving activity was detected in the nonadsorbed or 0.5 M NaCl eluted fractions. The fractions eluted by methyl-alpha -mannoside contained MUG-cleaving activity (elution pattern not shown) and were pooled and concentrated to 7 ml and dialyzed against buffer A. The mouse Hex B preparation after Sephacryl S-300 gel filtration was also applied to a Con A-Sepharose column and processed in the same manner as the Hex A. Hex B also adsorbed to the column and was specifically eluted using buffer A containing 0.5 M NaCl and 0.75 M methyl-alpha -mannoside. Hex B after the Con A-Sepharose step was purified about 1000-fold and was used for subsequent experiments.

The dialyzed mouse Hex A preparation obtained after the Con A-Sepharose step was centrifuged and applied to an SP-Fractogel column (0.5 × 2 cm) equilibrated with buffer A (Fig. 3). The column was washed with buffer A at 0.5 ml/min and eluted with a linear NaCl gradient from 0 to 0.5 M in buffer A (total volume 40 ml) and 0.5-ml fractions were collected. Fractions were assayed for both MUG- and MUGS-cleaving activities. As shown in Fig. 3, the nonadsorbed fractions contained the majority of the protein with about one-third of the enzyme activity. The MUG- and MUGS-cleaving activities coeluted as a complex peak beginning at about 0.15 M NaCl and was partially resolved from the main UV-absorbing material. When Hex A-containing fractions were analyzed by SDS-PAGE under nonreducing conditions, fractions 116-132 (Fig. 3) were found to contain only one major protein band and were pooled and concentrated. By the above procedure, Hex A was purified about 1500-fold from the crude enzyme preparation and was used for subsequent studies. Table I summarizes the recovery of Hex A and Hex B from 200 mouse livers according to this purification scheme.


View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 3.   SP-Fractogel chromatography of mouse liver Hex A. Con A-Sepharose purified mouse Hex A was applied onto a SP-Fractogel column (0.5 × 2 cm). Detailed conditions are described under "Experimental Procedures." Dotted line, absorbance at 280 nm; filled circles, MUG-cleaving activity; empty circles, MUGS-cleaving activity; dashed line, NaCl gradient.

                              
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table I
Purification of Hex A and Hex B from mouse liver
The enzymatic assays and purification were carried out as described under "Experimental Procedures." Steps 1-5 show the preparation of Hex A and steps 1 and 6-9 describe the preparation of Hex B, starting from 200 frozen mouse livers.

Western Blotting-- The purified mouse liver Hex A after SP-Fractogel chromatography was analyzed by 15% SDS-PAGE (23). The gel was electrophoretically transferred onto a nitrocellulose membrane in 20 mM Tris/150 mM glycine buffer, pH 8.0, containing 20% methanol at 18 V for 4 h using a Bio-Rad transfer apparatus. Membranes were overlaid with goat anti-human Hex A (24, 25) as the primary antibody followed by horseradish peroxidase-conjugated rabbit anti-goat IgG as the secondary antibody. For visualization, the membrane was incubated with 8 mmol of 4-chloro-1-naphthol with 0.01% hydrogen peroxide to produce a purple color. The reaction was stopped by washing the membrane with water.

    RESULTS
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Procedures
Results
Discussion
References

Purification and Characterization of Mouse Liver Hex A and Hex B-- The two major Hex isozymes were resolved from the crude mouse liver extract by DEAE-Fractogel chromatography at pH 7.0 (Fig. 1). The acidic mouse Hex A was purified to near homogeneity using the scheme described under "Experimental Procedures" as summarized in Table I. The Hex A after SP-Fractogel chromatography was used for the subsequent studies. By SDS-PAGE under nonreducing conditions, the purified Hex A showed one broad protein band when stained by Coomassie Brilliant Blue (Fig. 4A, lane 3). Immunostaining with anti-human Hex A revealed two overlapping bands of equal intensity corresponding to molecular sizes of approximately 57 and 59 kDa (Fig. 4B, lane 3). This is in agreement with the postulated makeup of mouse Hex A, which is a heterodimer consisting of an alpha -subunit and a beta -subunit, with molecular sizes before posttranslational processing of 60 and 61 kDa, respectively, as deduced from their cDNA sequences (26-28). In humans, the beta -subunit is posttranslationally processed to form two smaller polypeptides, beta 1 and beta 2, which are joined by disulfide bonds (29). Fig. 4A, lane 2, shows that similar processing occurs in mouse Hex A, with the appearance under reducing conditions of two overlapping bands of about 27 and 24 kDa, and the concomitant disappearance of the 59-kDa band. Western blot analysis was used to confirm that the protein band visualized by Coomassie Brilliant Blue staining was indeed Hex A. Goat anti-human Hex A recognized both the nonreduced mouse Hex alpha - and beta -subunits and the lower molecular size polypeptide chains after reduction (Fig. 4B). The native molecular sizes of the mouse Hex A and Hex B were determined to be 110 and 120 kDa, respectively, as estimated using Superose 6 FPLC gel filtration. These values suggest that the native structures of mouse Hex A and Hex B consist of dimers as is the case for human enzymes. The isoelectric points of the two isoforms were estimated using Mono P FPLC chromatofocusing to be 5.4-3.8 for the purified mouse Hex A and 6.3-5.8 for the mouse Hex B. When crude mouse liver extract was chromatofocused under the same conditions, MUGS-cleaving activity was detected throughout a broader pH range extending from pH 6.5 to 3.8. 


View larger version (72K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 4.   Analysis of mouse liver Hex A by SDS-PAGE (A) and Western blotting (B). A, purified mouse liver Hex A was analyzed by 15% SDS-PAGE according to the conditions described under "Experimental Procedures." Protein bands were visualized by Coomassie Brilliant Blue staining: molecular weight standards (lane 1); purified mouse liver Hex A reduced with 2-mercaptoethanol (lane 2); purified mouse liver Hex A, not reduced (lane 3). B, Western blot analysis of purified mouse liver Hex A after 15% SDS-PAGE: purified mouse liver Hex A, reduced with 2-mercaptoethanol (lane 2); and purified mouse liver Hex A, not reduced (lane 3). Detailed conditions are described under "Experimental Procedures."

Using MUG or MUGS in 50 mM sodium citrate buffer, both mouse Hex A and Hex B exhibited maximal activity at pH 5.0. This value is slightly higher than the reported human value of 4.4 (8). The Km value of Hex A toward MUG and MUGS were 0.98 mM and 0.72 mM, respectively. For Hex B, the Km value toward MUG was 0.90 mM and toward MUGS was 7.8 mM. Similar values were found for the human isozymes (8, 30, 31).

Expression and Characterization of Mouse GM2 Activator-- The molecular mass of the recombinant mouse GM2 activator determined by SDS-PAGE was 18.5 kDa, which is as expected from the cDNA sequence and is identical to that of the human GM2 activator. By Western blot analysis, mouse GM2 activator was recognized by the polyclonal antibodies against human GM2 activator, indicating similarities in protein structure, although with a weaker interaction than that for the human GM2 activator.

Hydrolysis of GM2 by Mouse Hex A and Hex B-- The purified mouse Hex A and Hex B were examined for their ability to hydrolyze GM2. As shown in Fig. 5A, the specificities of the mouse Hex A and Hex B toward GM2 are the same as their human counterparts. Under the same conditions, mouse Hex A effectively hydrolyzes GM2 but only in the presence of the mouse GM2 activator (Fig. 5A, lane 4, 88% hydrolysis). Similar to human Hex B, but in contrast to the previous report (3), mouse Hex B is not able to cleave GM2 in the absence of GM2 activator (Fig. 5A, lane 5) even after extended incubation (Fig. 5A, lane 7). While in the presence of GM2 activator, only a very trace of GM3 production by mouse Hex B is detected after 30 min of incubation (Fig. 5A, lane 6) or 6 h of incubation (Fig. 5A, lane 8). These results clearly indicate that mouse Hex B is similar to human Hex B with regard to the specificity for GM2 hydrolysis.


View larger version (83K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 5.   Thin layer chromatography showing the hydrolysis of GM2 (A) and GA2 (B) by mouse Hex A and Hex B. The glycolipids (3 nmol) were incubated with 20 milliunits of Hex at 37 °C for 30 min or 6 h for the extended incubation. The detailed assay conditions are described under "Experimental Procedures." The plates were developed with chloroform/methanol/water, 60:35:8 (v/v/v), and stained with diphenylamine reagent. A: 1, GM3 standard; 2, GM2 + mouse GM2 activator; 3, GM2 + mouse Hex A; 4, GM2 + mouse Hex A + mouse GM2 activator; 5, GM2 + mouse Hex B; 6, GM2 + mouse Hex B + mouse GM2 activator; 7, GM2 + mouse Hex B, 6 h of incubation; 8, GM2 + mouse Hex B + mouse GM2 activator, 6 h of incubation. B: 1, LacCer; 2, GA2 + mouse GM2 activator; 3, GA2 + mouse Hex A; 4, GA2 + mouse Hex A + mouse GM2 activator; 5, GA2 + mouse Hex B; 6, GA2 + mouse Hex B + mouse GM2 activator; 7, GA2 + mouse Hex B, 6 h of incubation; 8, GA2 + mouse Hex B + mouse GM2 activator, 6 h of incubation.

Hydrolysis of GA2 by Mouse Hex A and Hex B-- To understand the reported observations on the studies of mouse Hex alpha -chain disruption (12, 13), we also examined the ability of two mouse Hex isozymes to hydrolyze the GalNAc from GA2 (Fig. 5B). Under our assay conditions (30 min of incubation), mouse Hex A was found to slowly hydrolyze GA2 in the absence of mouse GM2 activator (Fig. 5B, lane 3). We found that even though GA2 is refractory to human Hex A in the presence of human GM2 activator (19), mouse Hex A was able to effectively hydrolyze GA2 in the presence of mouse GM2 activator (Fig. 5B, lane 4, 45% hydrolysis). Under the same conditions, mouse Hex B was not able to hydrolyze GA2 in the absence of mouse GM2 activator (Fig. 5B, lane 5), and no detectable hydrolysis was observed in the presence of mouse GM2 activator (Fig. 5B, lane 6) after 30 min of incubation. However, after extended incubation (6 h of incubation), mouse Hex B was found to be able to slowly hydrolyze GA2 in the presence of mouse GM2 activator (Fig. 5B, lane 8).

It has been shown previously that the ceramide portion of the GM2 molecule is essential for hydrolysis by human Hex A (10, 19). As is the case for the human enzyme, neither mouse Hex isozyme was able to hydrolyze II3NeuAcGgOse3, the oligosaccharide derived from GM2, even in the presence of GM2 activator (data not shown).

The mouse Hex A and Hex B are highly homologous to their human counterparts, with the alpha - and beta -chains sharing 85 and 74% identity, respectively, at the amino acid level (26-28). The mouse GM2 activator is also quite similar to the human protein, sharing 75% identity (18). Therefore, we studied the ability of human and mouse activators to cross-stimulate GM2 and GA2 hydrolysis by human and mouse Hex A. Using the same units (20 milliunits) of human and mouse Hex A and the same amount (1 µg) of human and mouse GM2 activator, we found that the mouse activator effectively stimulated the hydrolysis of GM2 by both human Hex A (Fig. 6A, lane 4, 83% hydrolysis) and mouse Hex A (Fig. 6A, lane 7, 72% hydrolysis). It appears that the mouse GM2 activator is more effective in stimulating the hydrolysis of GM2 by human Hex A. Under the same conditions, the human GM2 activator stimulated only 57% hydrolysis of GM2 by human Hex A (Fig. 6A, lane 3). The human GM2 activator was also much less effective in stimulating the hydrolysis of GM2 by mouse Hex A (Fig. 6A, lane 8), which could be seen after extended incubation or in the presence of additional activator protein (data not shown). Of great interest was the observation that the mouse GM2 activator also stimulated the hydrolysis of GA2 by human Hex A (Fig. 6B, lane 4). In contrast, the human activator was not able to promote the hydrolysis of GA2 by human Hex A (Fig. 6B, lane 3) or mouse Hex A (Fig. 6B, lane 8). Extended incubation of the mouse activator with human Hex B resulted in the slow hydrolysis of GA2 (data not shown) as seen for mouse activator with mouse Hex B (Fig. 5B, lane 8).


View larger version (89K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 6.   Species specificity of human and mouse GM2 activators toward the hydrolysis of GM2 (A) and GA2 (B) by human and mouse Hex A. Each glycolipid substrate (3 nmol) was incubated with 20 milliunits of Hex at 37 °C for 30 min. The plates were developed with chloroform/methanol/water, 60:35:8 (v/v/v), and stained with diphenylamine reagent. The detailed assay conditions are described under "Experimental Procedures." A: 1, GM2 + human GM2 activator; 2, GM2 + human Hex A; 3, GM2 + human Hex A + human GM2 activator; 4, GM2 + human Hex A + mouse GM2 activator; 5, GM2 + mouse GM2 activator; 6, GM2 + mouse Hex A; 7, GM2 + mouse Hex A + mouse GM2 activator; 8, GM2 + mouse Hex A + human GM2 activator; 9, GM3. B: 1, GA2 + human GM2 activator; 2, GA2 + human Hex A; 3, GA2 + human Hex A + human GM2 activator; 4, GA2 + human Hex A + mouse GM2 activator; 5, GA2 + mouse GM2 activator; 6, GA2 + mouse Hex A; 7, GA2 + mouse Hex A + mouse GM2 activator; 8, GA2 + mouse Hex A + human GM2 activator; 9, LacCer.

    DISCUSSION
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Procedures
Results
Discussion
References

To understand the catabolism of GM2 in mouse, we have purified and characterized mouse liver Hex A and Hex B and compared their properties with human Hex A and Hex B. As seen with the recombinantly expressed alpha - and beta -chains (25), the purified mouse liver Hex A was recognized by goat anti-human Hex A. Purified mouse Hex A was determined to be composed of 57- and 59-kDa subunits by SDS-PAGE under nonreducing conditions, and smaller polypeptides were observed in the presence of 2-mercaptoethanol or dithiothreitol (Fig. 4A, lane 2). Therefore, mouse Hex A has a similar subunit composition to human Hex A, with noncovalently linked alpha - and beta -subunits (2). This is also the first direct evidence that one of the subunits is composed of nonidentical cystine-linked polypeptide chains, which, by comparison with the human enzyme, is probably the beta -subunit (29).

While the isoelectric points of purified mouse Hex A and Hex B are similar to the isoelectric points of their human counterparts, the presence of mouse Hex A distributed in a wide range of isoelectric points has important consequences for purification. In the past, the separation of the mouse Hex A and Hex B isozymes has been routinely accomplished by passing a preparation over an anion exchange column equilibrated with 10 mM sodium phosphate buffer, pH 6.0-6.5. Hex B is collected in the pass-through fractions, while the retained Hex A is eluted by an NaCl gradient (3, 32). However, these reports followed the method that was originally optimized for the human Hex isozymes (1). We found that in following the previously reported methods (3), the mouse Hex B preparation that was not adsorbed to the DEAE column at pH 6.0-6.5 still contained a small amount of MUGS-cleaving activity. MUGS-cleaving activity has been correlated with the ability to hydrolyze GM2 (33). As reported by Burg et al. (3), we also found that mouse Hex B prepared by this method did contain some GM2-cleaving activity. To ascertain whether this GM2-cleaving activity was inherent in the mouse Hex B or due to contamination by Hex A, we increased the pH of the buffer solution to 7.0 for the separation of the two isozymes by anion exchange chromatography. Interestingly, the amount of MUGS-cleaving activity, as compared with the MUG-cleaving activity, decreased significantly and the resulting Hex B preparation became extremely weak in hydrolyzing GM2 (Fig. 5A), as was observed with human Hex B (11).

From the binding behavior of mouse Hex A to DEAE-Fractogel and also because of its acidic pI, the retention of the enzyme by the SP-Fractogel column at pH 7.0 (Fig. 3) was totally unexpected. This suggests that interactions other than ionic may be involved. This chromatography step was very effective for removing contaminating proteins. Because the Hex B preparation contained other proteins not adsorbed to DEAE-Fractogel at pH 7.0, it is not surprising that the SP-Fractogel chromatography was not as effective for purifying Hex B as for Hex A. Based on the DEAE-Fractogel chromatography, we estimated that approximately 90% of the total MUG-cleaving activity present in the crude mouse liver extract was Hex A and 7% was Hex B. This is in agreement with previous reports of the level of the two isozymes in mouse liver tissues (32). Because the amount of Hex B in mouse liver is very low compared with Hex A it was not practical to purify Hex B to homogeneity as done for Hex A. However, the final Hex B preparation is free from contaminating glycosidases and proved to be suitable for the studies presented.

The recombinant human and mouse GM2 activators were expressed using the shortened version of cDNAs which encode only the mature activator proteins. The cDNA for human GM2 activator encodes for a protein of 193 amino acids that consists of a signal peptide (23 amino acids), a propeptide (8 amino acids), and a mature protein (162 amino acids). The signal and the propeptides are excised proteolytically to form the mature GM2 activator protein (5). In the full-length cDNA encoding for the mouse GM2 activator, the predicted cleavage site is between positions 19 and 20 of the deduced amino acid sequence (34). This site is very close to the cleavage site (positions 23 and 24) of the human sequence (5). Although there is no direct evidence that the first 31 amino acids in the mouse sequence contains a signal peptide and a propeptide, the mouse sequence shows a hydropathy profile similar to that of the human sequence (18). In addition, the recombinant mouse GM2 activator and the native human protein were found to have the same specific activity toward the hydrolysis of GM2, indicating that the mature form of mouse GM2 activator is very likely to start from amino acid 32 as in the case of humans.

As seen with the human Hex isozymes, mouse Hex A hydrolyzes GM2, with the requirement of the GM2 activator, whereas mouse Hex B has only a trace of activity to cleave GM2 with or without GM2 activator. To our surprise, in contrast to human Hex isozymes, mouse Hex A was also able to effectively hydrolyze GA2 in the presence of mouse GM2 activator (Fig. 5B, lane 4). We were not able to detect the hydrolysis of GA2 by Hex B without GM2 activator, but when the activator is present, some hydrolysis of GA2 could be seen after extended incubation (Fig. 5B, lane 6). These results provide the explanation for the observations made in mice with disrupted alpha -subunit gene. Mice defective in Hex A but not Hex B, because of the disrupted alpha -subunit were found to show relatively little buildup of GM2 or GA2 with no behavioral abnormalities, as compared with humans with defective alpha -subunits. (12, 13). The fact that mouse Hex B cannot hydrolyze GM2 but can act on GA2 suggests that in mice GM2 can be converted to GA2 that serves as a substrate for mouse Hex B. We have shown previously that clostridial sialidase can effectively convert GM2 to GA2 in the presence of human GM2 activator (35). Our results complement the recent pathobiological findings of the three mouse models of human Tay-Sachs disease, types B, O, and AB of GM2 gangliosidosis. The mouse models of type B (Hexa-/-) and O (Hexb-/-) were generated by targeted disruption of Hex A (alpha -subunit) (12, 13) or Hex B (subunit) (36) genes encoding Hex A (alpha beta ) and Hex B (beta beta ). The model of type AB GM2 gangliosidosis (Gm2a -/-) (GM2 activator deficiency) was produced by targeted disruption of Gm2a gene (37). Unlike human type B GM2 gangliosidosis, the Hexa -/- mice were asymptomatic (12, 13), while Hexb -/- mice (36) were severely affected as in the case of human type O GM2 gangliosidosis. The Hexb -/- mice accumulated more GM2 and GA2 in the brain than the Hexa -/- mice. The Gm2a -/- mice (37) showed a phenotype which is intermediate to those of Hexa -/- (12, 13) and Hexb -/- (36) with storage of an excess amount of GM2 and a low amount of GA2. From these three murine models of Tay-Sachs disease, it has been proposed that Hexa -/- mice escape the disease through partial catabolism of GM2 via GA2 by the combined action of sialidase and Hex B (14). The pathogenesis of Gm2a -/- mice also suggested a role for the GM2 activator in GA2 degradation in mice (37).

Our results provide the explanation for the results generated by the above three mouse models. We have demonstrated the ability of mouse Hex A to participate in the catabolism of GA2 and a very weak activity of Hex B toward the degradation of GM2. We have also shown the ability of mouse GM2 activator to stimulate the hydrolysis of GA2 by mouse Hex A and to a lesser extent by mouse Hex B. We have also examined the species specificity of the interactions between the mouse and human Hex isozymes and the activators. Previously, crude activator preparations from other mammalian species (3) and purified mullet roe GM2 activator (38) were found to activate the hydrolysis of GM2 by human Hex A. We have shown here that purified recombinant mouse GM2 activator can effectively stimulate the hydrolysis of GM2 and GA2 by human Hex A. In reverse, human GM2 activator was not effective in stimulating the hydrolysis of GM2 or GA2 by mouse Hex A.

Although the mouse GM2 activator is 73.5% identical to the human protein, it also appears that the mouse activator does not share the specificity to the characteristic branched trisaccharide epitope of GM2 (19) but assists Hex A to hydrolyze GA2 as well. The observation that mouse GM2 activator can stimulate the hydrolysis of GM2 by both human and mouse Hex A, while human GM2 activator can only stimulate the hydrolysis of GM2 by human Hex A but not mouse Hex A, provides strong evidence that the GM2 activator proteins must somehow interact with Hex A. Similarly, the observation that the mouse GM2 activator can stimulate the hydrolysis of both GM2 and GA2 by human Hex A, but the human GM2 activator can only stimulate the hydrolysis of GM2 by human Hex A, shows that the GM2 activators of these two species may have different specificities for the two glycolipids.

Biochemical analysis of enzyme systems is an important complement to molecular and genetic studies in the effort to fully understand the roles of Hex isozymes in mouse. Despite the biochemical similarities between human and mouse Hex isozymes and GM2 activator proteins, the catabolic pathways for GM2 in mouse and human are clearly not identical. Therefore, the murine model for Type B Tay-Sachs disease does not truly reflect its counterpart in man.

    FOOTNOTES

* This work was supported by National Institutes of Health Grant NS 09626.The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

To whom correspondence should be addressed: Department of Biochemistry SL 43, Tulane University School of Medicine, 1430 Tulane Avenue, New Orleans, LA 70112. Tel.: 504-584-2459; Fax: 504-584-2739; E-mail: yli{at}tmcpop.tmc.tulane.edu.

1 The abbreviations used are: Hex, beta -N-acetylhexosaminidase; MU, 4-methylumbelliferyl; MUG, 4-methylumbelliferyl-beta -GlcNAc; MUGS, 4-methylumbelliferyl-beta -GlcNAc-6-S04; GM1, Galbeta 1right-arrow3GalNAcbeta 1right-arrow4(NeuAcalpha 2right-arrow3)Galbeta 1right-arrow4Glcbeta 1-1'Cer; GM2, GalNAcbeta 1right-arrow4(NeuAcalpha 2right-arrow3)Galbeta 1right-arrow4Glcbeta 1-1'Cer; GA2, GalNAcbeta 1right-arrow4Galbeta 1right-arrow4Glcbeta 1-1'Cer; GM3, NeuAcalpha 2right-arrow3Galbeta 1right-arrow4Glcbeta 1-1'Cer; II3NeuAcGgOse3, the oligosaccharide derived from GM2; FPLC, fast protein liquid chromatography; SP, sulfopropyl; PAGE, polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis.

    REFERENCES
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Procedures
Results
Discussion
References

  1. Robinson, D., and Stirling, J. L. (1968) Biochem. J. 107, 321-327[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  2. Geiger, B., and Arnon, R. (1976) Biochemistry 15, 3484-3493[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  3. Burg, J., Banerjee, A., Conzelmann, E., and Sandhoff, K. (1983) Hoppe-Seyler's Z. Physiol. Chem. 364, 821-829[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  4. Li, Y.-T., and Li, S.-C. (1984) in Lysosomes in Biology and Pathology (Dingle, J. T., Dean, R. T., and Sly, W.., eds), pp. 99-117, Elsevier Science Publishers B. V., Amsterdam
  5. Fürst, W., and Sandhoff, K. (1992) Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1126, 1-16[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  6. Kishimoto, Y., Hiraiwa, M., and O'Brien, J. S. (1992) J. Lipid Res. 33, 1255-1267[Abstract]
  7. Sandhoff, K., and Wassle, W. (1971) Z. Physiol. Chem. 352, 1119-1133
  8. Wenger, D. A., Okada, S., and O'Brien, J. S. (1972) Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 153, 116-129[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  9. Li, Y.-T., Mazzotta, M. Y., Wan, C.-C., Orth, R., and Li, S.-C. (1973) J. Biol. Chem. 248, 7512-7515[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Li, S.-C., Hirabayashi, Y., and Li, Y.-T. (1981) J. Biol. Chem. 256, 6234-6240[Free Full Text]
  11. Gravel, R. A., Clarke, J. T. R., Kaback, M. M., Mahuran, D., Sandhoff, K., Suzuki, K. (1995) in The Metabolic and Molecular Basis of Inherited Disease (Scriver, C. V., Beaudet, A. L., Sly, W. S., and Valle, D., eds), pp. 2839-2879, McGraw-Hill, New York
  12. Yamanaka, S., Johnson, M. D., Grinberg, A., Westphal, H., Crawley, J. N., Taniike, M., Suzuki, K., Proia, R. L. (1994) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 91, 9975-9979[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Cohen-Tannoudji, M., Marchand, P., Akli, S., Sheardown, S. A., Puech, J.-P., Kress, C., Gressens, P., Nassogne, M.-C., Beccari, T., Muggleton-Harris, A. L., Evrard, P., Stirling, J. L., Poenaru, L., Babinet, C. (1995) Mamm. Genome 6, 844-849[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  14. Sango, K., Yamanaka, S., Hoffmann, A., Okuda, Y., Grinberg, A., Westphal, H., McDonald, M. P., Crawley, J. N., Sandhoff, K., Suzuki, K., Proia, R. L. (1995) Nat. Genet. 11, 170-176[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  15. Svennerholm, L. (1972) Methods Carbohydr. Chem. 6, 464-474
  16. Svennerholm, L., Månsson, J.-E., and Li, Y.-T. (1973) J. Biol. Chem. 248, 740-742[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Zhou, B., Li, S.-C., Laine, R. A., Huang, R. T. C., Li, Y.-T. (1989) J. Biol. Chem. 264, 12272-12277[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Bellachioma, G., Stirling, J. L., Orlacchio, A., and Beccari, T. (1993) Biochem. J. 294, 227-230[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  19. Wu, Y. Y., Lockyer, J. M., Sugiyama, E., Pavlova, N. V., Li, Y.-T., Li, S.-C. (1994) J. Biol. Chem. 269, 16276-16283[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Potier, M., Mameli, L., Bélisle, M., Dallaire, L., and Melançon, S. B. (1979) Anal. Biochem. 94, 287-296[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  21. Harris, G., and MacWilliams, I. C. (1954) Chem. Ind. (London), 249
  22. Yuziuk, J. A., Nakagawa, H., Hasegawa, A., Kiso, M., Li, S.-C., and Li, Y.-T. (1996) Biochem. J. 315, 1041-1048[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  23. Laemmli, U. K. (1970) Nature 227, 680-685[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  24. Hasilik, A., and Neufeld, E. F. (1980) J. Biol. Chem. 255, 4937-4945[Free Full Text]
  25. Pennybacker, M., Liessem, B., Moczall, H., Tifft, C. J., Sandhoff, K., Proia, R. L. (1996) J. Biol. Chem. 271, 17377-17382[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Beccari, T., Hoade, J., Orlacchio, A., and Stirling, J. L. (1992) Biochem. J. 285, 593-596[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  27. Yamanaka, S., Johnson, O. N., Norflus, F., Boles, D. J., Proia, R. L. (1994) Genomics 21, 588-596[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  28. Bapat, B., Ethier, M., Neote, K., Mahuran, D., and Gravel, R. A. (1988) FEBS Lett. 237, 191-195[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  29. O'Dowd, B. F., Cumming, D. A., Gravel, R. A., Mahuran, D. (1988) Biochemistry 27, 5216-5226[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  30. Inui, K., and Wenger, D. A. (1984) Clin. Genet. 26, 318-321[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  31. Bayleran, J., Hechtman, P., Kolodny, E., and Kaback, M. (1987) Am. J. Hum. Genet. 41, 532-548[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  32. Beccari, T., Orlacchio, A., and Stirling, J. L. (1988) Biochem. J. 252, 617-620[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  33. Fuchs, W., Navon, R., Kaback, M., and Kresse, H. (1983) Clin. Chim. Acta 133, 253-261[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  34. Nielsen, H., Engelbrecht, J., Brunak, S., and Von Heijne, G. (1997) Protein Eng. 10, 1-6[Abstract]
  35. Li, S.-C., Wu, Y.-Y., Sugiyama, E., Taki, T., Kasama, T., Casellato, R., Sonnino, S., and Li, Y.-T. (1995) J. Biol. Chem. 270, 24246-24251[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  36. Paneuf, F., Wakamatsu, N., Huang, A., Peterson, A. C., Fortunato, S. R., Ritter, G., Igdoura, S. A., Morales, C. R., Benoit, G., Akerman, B. R., Leclerc, D., Hanai, N., Marth, J. D., Trasler, J. M., Gravel, R. A. (1996) Hum. Mol. Genet. 5, 1-14[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  37. Liu, Y., Hoffmann, A., Grinberg, A., Westphal, H., McDonald, M. P., Miller, K. M., Crawley, J. N., Sandhoff, K., Suzuki, K., Proia, R. (1997) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 94, 8138-8143[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  38. DeGasperi, R., Li, Y.-T., and Li, S.-C. (1989) Biochem. J. 260, 777-783[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]


Copyright © 1998 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.