Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About IAI
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Infection and Immunity
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About IAI
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Cellular Microbiology: Pathogen-Host Cell Molecular Interactions

EspH Suppresses Erk by Spatial Segregation from CD81 Tetraspanin Microdomains

Rachana Pattani Ramachandran, Felipe Vences-Catalán, Dan Wiseman, Efrat Zlotkin-Rivkin, Eyal Shteyer, Naomi Melamed-Book, Ilan Rosenshine, Shoshana Levy, Benjamin Aroeti
Vincent B. Young, Editor
Rachana Pattani Ramachandran
aDepartment of Cell and Developmental Biology, Institute of Life Sciences, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Felipe Vences-Catalán
bDivision of Oncology, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Dan Wiseman
aDepartment of Cell and Developmental Biology, Institute of Life Sciences, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Efrat Zlotkin-Rivkin
aDepartment of Cell and Developmental Biology, Institute of Life Sciences, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Eyal Shteyer
cDepartment of Pediatric Gastroenterology and Nutrition, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, Israel
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Naomi Melamed-Book
dBioimaging Unit, Institute of Life Sciences, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Ilan Rosenshine
eDepartment of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, IMRIC, Hadassah-Hebrew University Medical School, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Shoshana Levy
bDivision of Oncology, Department of Medicine, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Benjamin Aroeti
aDepartment of Cell and Developmental Biology, Institute of Life Sciences, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem, Israel
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Vincent B. Young
University of Michigan—Ann Arbor
Roles: Editor
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/IAI.00303-18
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Additional Files
  • FIG 1
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG 1

    CD81 clusters at EPEC infection sites. (A and B) CD81 clustering in HeLa and Caco-2 cells. Cells were infected with the EPEC wt or EPEC escV for 30 (HeLa cells) or 45 min (Caco-2 cells) at 37°C, fixed, and stained with anti-CD81 (5A6) antibodies, TR-phalloidin (F-actin), and DAPI (nuclei and bacteria). Cells were then visualized by confocal microscopy. (Left) Representative x-y confocal images. Arrows point to cell-associated EPEC microcolonies. Bar = 5 μm. (Right) Quantitative evaluation of CD81 and F-actin clustering at infection sites was performed as described in Materials and Methods. Results are the mean ± SE for at least 30 infection sites imaged in 3 independent experiments. P values refer to the comparison with EPEC escV-infected cells. ***, P < 0.0005. (C) Apical-basal distribution of CD81 in polarized Caco-2 cell monolayers. (Left) Representative x-z images. (Right) Mean fluorescence levels of CD81 and F-actin along the x-z axis of the monolayer (see Materials and Methods). Results are the mean ± SE for values obtained from 5 different images.

  • FIG 2
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG 2

    CD81 is not required for F-actin recruitment at infection sites. CRISPR-control (Control) and CRISPR CD81KO (CD81KO) HeLa cells were infected with the EPEC wt for the indicated times. The cells were then fixed, and the level of clustering of F-actin at infection sites was determined as indicated in Materials and Methods and in the legend to Fig. 1A. Representative images (left) and the results of quantitative analysis of protein clustering at infection sites (right) are presented. P values refer to the comparison with infected CRISPR control cells. ns, nonsignificant statistical difference (P > 0.05). DIC, differential interference contrast. Bars = 10 μm.

  • FIG 3
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG 3

    Screening for bacterial effectors that mediate CD81 clustering at infection sites. (A) Screening for LEE and non-LEE effectors involved in CD81 clustering. HeLa cells were infected with the indicated EPEC strains (see Table S1 in the supplemental material), and the levels of CD81 and F-actin clustering at infection sites were determined as described in the legend to Fig. 1A. (B) EspH is involved in CD81 clustering. HeLa or Caco-2 cells were infected with EPEC ΔespH or EPEC ΔespH+EspH strain (Table S1), and EspH expression was induced using IPTG. Cells were processed for confocal imaging as described in the legend to Fig. 1A. Representative images (left) and the results of clustering analysis of CD81 and F-actin (right) are presented. Results are the mean ± SE from 3 experiments. P values refer to the comparison with EPEC wt-infected cells. ***, P < 0.0005; **, P < 0.005; *, P < 0.05; ns, nonsignificant statistical difference (P > 0.05). Bars = 15 μm.

  • FIG 4
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG 4

    EspH reduces pErk levels, and CD81 counteracts this effect. (A) pErk levels are suppressed in EPEC wt-infected but not EPEC escV-infected HeLa and Caco-2 cells. Cells were infected with EPEC for 90 min at 37°C or left untreated. Cells were lysed and processed for pErk and tErk detection by Western blotting, as described in Materials and Methods. Representative Western blots are shown. (B) EspH mediates pErk suppression. HeLa cells were infected with the indicated EPEC strains for 90 min at 37°C or left uninfected. The cells were then lysed and processed for quantitative Western blotting of pErk levels, as described in the legend to panel A and Materials and Methods. Results are the mean ± SE from 3 experiments. P values refer to the comparison with uninfected cells. (C) CD81 counteracts EspH-mediated pErk suppression. CD81KO or CD81KO–mEmerald-CD81 HeLa cells were infected with the indicated EPEC strains and subjected to quantitative Western blotting of pErk levels, as described in Materials and Methods. Results are the mean ± SE from 3 experiments. P values refer to the comparison with infected CRISPR control cells. ***, P < 0.0005; **, P < 0.005; *, P < 0.05.

  • FIG 5
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG 5

    The C-terminal 38-amino-acid segment of EspH is important for pErk increase. (A) Secondary structure prediction of EspH. Prediction of the secondary structure of EspH in EPEC (GenBank accession number SLM08785), EHEC (GenBank accession number ACG59626), and Citrobacter rodentium (GenBank accession number CBG89721) was performed using the JPred4 protein secondary structure prediction server (68). The results were viewed using the Jalview (version 2.10.3b1) program (69). The C-terminal segment (amino acids 114 to 168) is shown. jnetpred predicts secondary structures in EspH. Red tubes and green arrows represent helices and sheets, respectively; JnetCONF shows the confidence of prediction (from 0 to 9; a higher value means a higher-confidence prediction); JnetPSSM refers to Jnet PSIBLAST pssm-based profile prediction; red tubes and green arrows indicate helices and sheets, respectively. The C-terminal part of EspH containing the C-terminal 38-amino-acid segment and a highly conserved predicted α-helix, which was deleted to generate the EspHΔ130–168 mutant, is indicated with a green box. (B) pErk levels are significantly decreased in host cells infected with EPEC ΔespH+EspH compared to cells infected with EPEC ΔespH or EPEC EspHΔ130–168. HeLa cells were infected with the indicated EPEC strain, and pErk levels were determined as described in the legend to Fig. 4. Results are the mean ± SE from 3 independent experiments. P values refer to the comparison with EPEC ΔespH-infected cells. (C) pErk levels are decreased in EspH-eGFP-expressing cells compared to eGFP- or EspH EspHΔ130–168-eGFP-expressing cells. HeLa cells were transfected with plasmids expressing the indicated eGFP. Cells were lysed and analyzed for pErk levels by Western blotting as described in the legend to Fig. 4. eGFP expression levels in the lysates were detected using anti-eGFP antibodies. The results are the mean ± SE from 3 experiments. P values refer to the comparison with eGFP-transfected cells. (D) Phospho-p38 levels were not significantly altered in cells infected with EPEC ΔespH, EPEC ΔespH+EspH, or EPEC EspHΔ130–168. HeLa cells were infected with the indicated EPEC strains, and phospho-p38 levels normalized to total p38 levels were determined by Western blotting. Results are the mean ± SE from 3 independent experiments. P values refer to the comparison with EPEC ΔespH-infected cells. (E) Analysis of Rho GTPase activity. HeLa cells were transfected with plasmids expressing eGFP, EspH-eGFP, or EspHΔ130–168-eGFP. The cells were then analyzed for Rho activity by the luciferase-based assay, as described in Materials and Methods. Data were normalized to those for eGFP-expressing cells. P values refer to the comparison with eGFP-transfected cells. In control experiments, Rho GTPases were inhibited by the Rho inhibitor I, and the results were compared to those for dimethyl sulfoxide-treated cells (inset). The results are the mean ± SE for 12 measurements. ***, P < 0.0005; **, P < 0.005; ns, nonsignificant statistical difference (P > 0.05).

  • FIG 6
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG 6

    EspH moves out of the CD81 microdomain. (A and B) Localization of translocated EspH with respect to mEmerald-CD81. mEmerald-CD81-expressing cells were infected for 30 (A) or 90 (B) min at 37°C. Cells were then fixed and stained with anti-SBP antibodies to label EspH. Cells were imaged by confocal microscopy, and an intensity profile was created along a drawn line over CD81-EspH clusters, as exemplified in the boxed areas. The plot represents the average of intensity profile values measured for ∼20 different such clusters. a.u., arbitrary units. Bars = 15 μm. (C) Distribution of ectopically expressed eGFP tagged EspH with respect to immunostained CD81. HeLa cells expressing EspH-eGFP or EspHΔ130–168-eGFP were immunostained with the anti-CD81 5A6 antibody and imaged by confocal microscopy. The representative confocal image shows EspH and CD81 located at the plasma membrane (arrows) or at a central aggregate (arrowheads). The fluorescence level of eGFP and immunostained CD81 positioned in the central CD81 aggregate of EspH-eGFP- and EspHΔ130–168-eGFP-expressing cells was quantified by a method similar to the quantification method applied for estimating the clustering of CD81 and F-actin at infection sites (Fig. 1). The results are the mean ± SE for 25 measurements. P values refer to the comparison with EspH-eGFP transfected cells. ***, P < 0.0005; ns, nonsignificant statistical difference (P > 0.05). Bar = 10 μm.

  • FIG 7
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG 7

    EspH suppresses TNF-α-induced pErk levels, and CD81 counteracts this effect. (A) Ectopic expression of EspH-eGFP specifically suppresses the TNF-α-induced pErk. HeLa cells were either transfected with the indicated eGFP-encoding constructs or remained untransfected. Cells were then exposed (+) or not exposed (No Ligand) to EGF, TNF-α, or IL-1β ligands, as described in Materials and Methods. Cells were lysed, and pErk levels were detected by quantitative Western blotting, as described in the legend to Fig. 4 and Materials and Methods. The expressed eGFPs were detected using anti-GFP antibodies. The results are the mean ± SE from three experiments. P values refer to the comparison with untransfected cells. (B) Ectopically expressed mutant EspH with a 38-amino-acid C-terminal truncation fails to suppress the TNF-α-evoked pErk. HeLa cells were transfected with plasmids expressing eGFP, EspH-eGFP, or EspH-eGFPΔ130–168. The cells were then challenged with TNF-α, lysed, and subjected to determination of changes in pErk levels by quantitative Western blotting. The results are the mean ± SE from three experiments. P values refer to the comparison with eGFP-transfected cells. (C) Translocated EspH with a 38-amino-acid C-terminal truncation fails to suppress TNF-α-evoked pErk in infected cells. HeLa cells were infected with EPEC ΔespH, EPEC ΔespH+EspH, or EPEC ΔespH+EspHΔ130–168, which were not preactivated, for 3 h at 37°C. Thereafter, bacterium-containing medium was replaced with fresh TNF-α (25 ng/ml)-containing DMEM (+TNF-α) for one set of cells, while for other cells, the bacterium-containing medium was replaced with just plain DMEM (−TNF-α). The cells were then incubated for a further 30 min at 37°C and processed for Western blotting analyses. The results are the mean ± SE from 3 experiments. P values refer to the comparison with untreated (−TNF-α) EPEC-ΔespH-infected cells. (D) CD81 counteracts the ability of EspH to suppress TNF-α-stimulated pErk. CRISPR control, CD81KO, and CD81KO–mEmerald-CD81 cells were transfected with the indicated eGFP-encoding constructs, and the relative changes in pErk levels were determined as described in the legend to panel B. The results are the mean ± SE from 3 experiments. P values refer to the comparison with eGFP-transfected cells. ***, P < 0.0005; **, P < 0.005; *, P < 0.05; ns, nonsignificant statistical difference (P > 0.05).

  • FIG 8
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    FIG 8

    Schematic of the working model for EspH-mediated modulation of pErk controlled by its spatial distribution with respect to CD81 microdomains. At an early infection phase, EspH facilitates CD81 clustering at the plasma membrane infection site. At this stage, CD81 may act as a positive Erk regulator which antagonizes the ability of translocated EspH to diminish pErk and, thereby, the MAPK-Erk signaling pathway. As Erk signaling has been implicated to regulate innate immunity and host cell survival, the inability of EspH to inhibit Erk may allow innate immunity and host survival processes aimed at exterminating the infecting pathogen. At a later stage, EspH is segregated to the edges and external regions of these CD81 clusters, where it prompts pErk inhibition. Suppression of this signaling pathway could be important for inhibiting innate immunity and other functions attributed to EspH, such as the induction of cell toxicity and death, to allow pathogen colonization and survival in its host.

Additional Files

  • Figures
  • Supplemental material

    • Supplemental file 1 -

      Fig. S1. Knockout of CD81 by CRISPR-Cas9. Fig. S2. EspH translocation. Fig. S3. Screening for EPEC genes altering pErk levels. Fig. S4. Expression and distribution of CD81 in CRISPR control, CD81KO, and CD81KO cells expressing mEmerald-CD81. Fig. S5. EspH suppresses pMEK and pc-Raf. Fig. S6. CD81 is expressed in the human gut. Table S1. Bacterial strains (all mutant strains are derivatives of E2348/69). Table S2. Primary and secondary antibodies. Table S3. Plasmids. Table S4. List of primers used in this study and their usage.

      PDF, 1.8M

PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
EspH Suppresses Erk by Spatial Segregation from CD81 Tetraspanin Microdomains
Rachana Pattani Ramachandran, Felipe Vences-Catalán, Dan Wiseman, Efrat Zlotkin-Rivkin, Eyal Shteyer, Naomi Melamed-Book, Ilan Rosenshine, Shoshana Levy, Benjamin Aroeti
Infection and Immunity Sep 2018, 86 (10) e00303-18; DOI: 10.1128/IAI.00303-18

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Infection and Immunity article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
EspH Suppresses Erk by Spatial Segregation from CD81 Tetraspanin Microdomains
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Infection and Immunity
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Infection and Immunity.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
EspH Suppresses Erk by Spatial Segregation from CD81 Tetraspanin Microdomains
Rachana Pattani Ramachandran, Felipe Vences-Catalán, Dan Wiseman, Efrat Zlotkin-Rivkin, Eyal Shteyer, Naomi Melamed-Book, Ilan Rosenshine, Shoshana Levy, Benjamin Aroeti
Infection and Immunity Sep 2018, 86 (10) e00303-18; DOI: 10.1128/IAI.00303-18
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • INTRODUCTION
    • RESULTS
    • DISCUSSION
    • MATERIALS AND METHODS
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

Escherichia coli
EspH
MAP kinases
cell membranes
cell polarity
host-pathogen interactions
type III secretion system

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About IAI
  • Editor in Chief
  • Editorial Board
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #IAIjournal

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 0019-9567; Online ISSN: 1098-5522