Open Access

Widespread presence of "bacterial-like" PPP phosphatases in eukaryotes

Contributed equally
BMC Evolutionary Biology20044:47

DOI: 10.1186/1471-2148-4-47

Received: 25 August 2004

Accepted: 19 November 2004

Published: 19 November 2004

Abstract

Background

In eukaryotes, PPP (p rotein p hosphatase P) family is one of the two known protein phosphatase families specific for Ser and Thr. The role of PPP phosphatases in multiple signaling pathways in eukaryotic cell has been extensively studied. Unlike eukaryotic PPP phosphatases, bacterial members of the family have broad substrate specificity or may even be Tyr-specific. Moreover, one group of bacterial PPPs are diadenosine tetraphosphatases, indicating that bacterial PPP phosphatases may not necessarily function as protein phosphatases.

Results

We describe the presence in eukaryotes of three groups of expressed genes encoding "non-conventional" phosphatases of the PPP family. These enzymes are more closely related to bacterial PPP phosphatases than to the known eukaryotic members of the family. One group, found exclusively in land plants, is most closely related to PPP phosphatases from some α-Proteobacteria, including Rhizobiales, Rhodobacterales and Rhodospirillaceae. This group is therefore termed Rhi zobiales / Rh odobacterales / Rh odospirillaceae-l ike ph osphatases, or Rhilphs. Phosphatases of the other group are found in Viridiplantae, Rhodophyta, Trypanosomatidae, Plasmodium and some fungi. They are structurally related to phosphatases from psychrophilic bacteria Shewanella and Colwellia, and are termed She wanella-l ike ph osphatases, or Shelphs. Phosphatases of the third group are distantly related to ApaH, bacterial diadenosine tetraphosphatases, and are termed A paH-l ike ph osphatases, or Alphs. Patchy distribution of Alphs in animals, plants, fungi, diatoms and kinetoplasts suggests that these phosphatases were present in the common ancestor of eukaryotes but were independently lost in many lineages. Rhilphs, Shelphs and Alphs form PPP clades, as divergent from "conventional" eukaryotic PPP phosphatases as they are from each other and from major bacterial clades. In addition, comparison of primary structures revealed a previously unrecognised (I/L/V)D(S/T)G motif, conserved in all bacterial and "bacterial-like" eukaryotic PPPs, but not in "conventional" eukaryotic and archaeal PPPs.

Conclusions

Our findings demonstrate that many eukaryotes possess diverse "bacterial-like" PPP phosphatases, the enzymatic characteristics, physiological roles and precise evolutionary history of which have yet to be determined.

Background

Reversible phosphorylation of proteins is a ubiquitous mechanism, indispensable for regulation of virtually any cellular function. Therefore, protein kinases and phosphatases are of paramount importance for normal functioning of all metabolic and signalling pathways. In eukaryotes, PPP family is one of the two known protein phosphatase families specific for Ser and Thr [14]. Unlike eukaryotic (and archaeal [5]) PPP phosphatases, bacterial members of the family have broad substrate specificity [6] or may even be Tyr-specific [79]. Moreover, one group of bacterial PPPs are diadenosine tetraphosphatases [10, 11]. Unlike eukaryotes, in prokaryotes PPP phosphatases appear to be facultative, since entirely sequenced genomes of some bacteria and archaea do not encode them [5, 12]. Nevertheless, when present, they appear to play essential roles [1315].

Three motifs (GDXHG, GDXXDRG and GNH(E/D)), highly conserved in the N-terminal subdomains of the catalytic domains of all PPP phosphatases [10, 11], contain most residues which coordinate metal ions in the active centre [16] and are considered as the signature of the PPP family.

In a previous work [17] we identified an unusual cDNA fragment from a moss Physcomitrella patens, showing no similarities to the known PPP phosphatases beyond the presence of the GDXHG and GDXXDRG motifs. Detection of homologous cDNA sequences from Arabidopsis and rice suggested the presence of an unknown PPP group in plants, distinct from "conventional" eukaryotic PPP phosphatases [17].

We have now taken advantage of a much greater representation (as compared to 1999) of sequence databases for various species to further explore this initial observation. We present the evidence for the existence in eukaryotes of three "non-conventional" branches of the PPP family. We also identify a previously unrecognised conserved motif in the PPP catalytic domain, which can be used as a signature of "bacterial"-type PPP phosphatases.

Results

"Rh izobiales / Rh odobacterales / Rh odospirillaceae – like" PPP phosphatases in plants

Two Arabidopsis sequences, At3g09960 and At3g09970, were retrieved using the P. patens fragment [17] as a query in TBlastN searches. They share 85% identity with each other at the protein level (see Figure 1). Both genes are transcribed, since full-length cDNAs have been detected in a large-scale transcription study [18]. They are arranged on chromosome 3 in tandem, suggesting their origin by a recent duplication. A number of ESTs from other plant species (but none from non-plant eukaryotes) were also detected by TBlastN searches, which in most cases provide no evidence for the existence of more than one isoform.
https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1471-2148-4-47/MediaObjects/12862_2004_Article_107_Fig1_HTML.jpg
Figure 1

Comparison of the primary structures of plant Rhilphs, related α-proteobacterial phosphatases and human PP1α as a prototype of "conventional" eukaryotic PPP phosphatases. Amino acid residues conserved in at least all but one Rhilphs and α-proteobacterial phosphatases are shown in white and shaded in black. Residues conserved in at least two thirds of the sequences are shown in white and shaded in dark grey. Residues conserved in at least half of the sequences are shown in black and shaded in light grey. Following substitutions were considered as conserved residues: Ile/Leu, Phe/Tyr, Asp/Glu, Asn/Gln, Arg/Lys and Ser/Thr. Catalytic site residues that interact with metal ions are indicated by asterisks according to [20]. SAPNY motif in PP1, conserved in most eukaryotic PPP phosphatases, is double underlined. Solanum tuberosum sequence is translation of the EST entries BQ516856, BQ516857 and BI435517. Physcomitrella patens sequence is translation of the EST entry BQ039171. Other accession numbers are indicated in Table 1.

Among prokaryotes, related sequences were detected in some α-Proteobacteria, the closest matches being with Rhizobiales, Rhodobacterales and Rhodospirillaceae. Therefore, we designate this group as Rhi zobiales / Rh odobacterales / Rh odospirillaceae-like phosphatases, or Rhilphs (Figure 1; see also Table 1 and Figure 4), and the two Arabidopsis genes products At3g09960 and At3g09970 as "R hizobiales-l ike" p hosphatases 1 (RLP1) and 2 (RLP2), respectively.
Table 1

Species, accession numbers (UniProt, EMBL, NCBI or TIGR Gene Index) and common names (where available) of PPP phosphatase sequences shown in Figure 4. For A. thaliana sequences, gene numbers are also indicated. Sequence No. 67 is available from Chlamydomonas reinhardtii draft genome [65].

No.

Accession

Species name

Rhilphs

1

Q9SR61; At3g09960

Arabidopsis thaliana

2

Q9SR62; At3g09970

Arabidopsis thaliana

3

BE034080

Mesembryanthemum crystallinum

4

BQ995369

Lactuca sativa

5

AW034786

Lycopersicon esculentum

6

BU875146

Populus balsamifera

7

BG457803

Medicago truncatula

8

AV425727

Lotus japonicus

9

BM731295

Glycine max

10

BF261816

Hordeum vulgare

11

BQ788728

Triticum aestivum

12

AL731641

Oryza sativa

13

CF670562

Pinus taeda

14

BQ039171

Physcomitrella patens

Group I (α-Proteobacteria)

15

Q987U4

Mesorhizobium loti

16

Q8UA33

Agrobacterium tumefaciens

17

ZP_00054691

Magnetospirillum magnetotacticum

18

ZP_00015226

Rhodospirillum rubrum

19

ZP_00014771

Rhodospirillum rubrum

20

CAE28794

Rhodopseudomonas palustris

21

Q9ABQ8

Caulobacter crescentus

22

ZP_00051041

Magnetospirillum magnetotacticum

23

ZP_00093979

Novosphingobium aromaticivorans

24

Q92V37

Sinorhizobium meliloti

Group VII (heterogeneous)

25

Q8YZT4

Anabaena sp.

26

Q9WZK1

Thermotoga maritima

27

O34205

Fervidobacterium islandicum

28

NZ_AABE01000101

Cytophaga hutchinsonii

Group III (γ-Proteobacteria and bacteriophage λ)

29

P03772

Bacteriophage λ

30

P55798

E. coli PrpA

31

Q8VPE2

Salmonella typhimurium PrpA

32

Q8Z487

Salmonella enterica

33

P55799

E. coli PrpB

Group IV (Firmicutes)

34

Q81YR3

Bacillus anthracis

35

Q9FB69

Lactococcus lactis

36

Q97FF3

Clostridium acetobutylicum

Alphs

37

BM291808

Amblyomma variegatum

38

TC9835

Ciona intestinalis

39

BU652795

Chlamydomonas reinhardtii

40

AC091781

Trypanosoma brucei

41

AC084046

Trypanosoma brucei

42

AL499620

Leishmania major

43

BQ143558

Metarhizium anisopliae

44

AC127427

Magnaporthe grisea

45

AA966318

Aspergillus nidulans

46

P40152

Saccharomyces cerevisiae

ApaH

47

Q8Y1K9

Ralstonia solanacearum ApaH

48

Q9JVF4

Neisseria meningitidis ApaH

49

P05637

Escherichia coli ApaH

Group VI (heterogeneous)

50

O31614

Bacillus subtilis

51

O69213

Anabaena sp. PrpA

52

Q93JF4

Streptomyces coelicolor

53

Q9RS78

Deinococcus radiodurans

Group II (Cyanobacteria)

54

O54390

Microcystis aeruginosa PP1-Cyano 1

55

P74150

Synechocystis sp.

56

Q8YP31

Anabaena sp.

57

ZP_00072257

Trichodesmium erythraeum

58

Q8DGA2

Thermosynechococcus elongatus

Shelphs

59

AC119500*

Leishmania major

60

Q8EBN0

Shewanella oneidensis

61

Q9S427

Shewanella sp.

62

TIGR_167879 Contig1731

Colwellia psychrerythraea

63

CF394707

Pinus taeda

64

TC31593

Solanum tuberosum

65

Q944L7; At1g18480

Arabidopsis thaliana

66

BF645180

Medicago truncatula

67

Scaffold_45

Chlamydomonas reinhardtii

68

Q9LMJ5; At1g07010

Arabidopsis thaliana

69

AW266595

Mesembryanthemum crystallinum

70

BG644111

Lycopersicon esculentum

71

BG450922

Medicago truncatula

72

BI787505

Glycine max

73

Q8L676

Oryza sativa

74

TC21958

Hordeum vulgare

75

AC007863

Trypanosoma brucei

76

AL499621

Leishmania major

77

TIGR_246197 Contig433

Myxococcus xanthus

78

EAK84303

Ustilago maydis

79

O74480

Schizosaccharomyces pombe

80

EAK87480

Cryptosporidium parvum

81

Q7RIH8

Plasmodium yoelii

82

Q8IKE5

Plasmodium falciparum

83

Q8I5Y5

Plasmodium falciparum

84

Q7RR22

Plasmodium yoelii

Group V (heterogeneous)

85

O87639

Streptomyces coelicolor

86

Q9RVT7

Deinococcus radiodurans

Archaea

87

O28453

Archaeoglobus fulgidus PPA

88

Q8ZW26

Pyrobaculum aerophilum

89

O34200

Methanosarcina thermophila PP1-arch2

90

Y12396

Pyrodictium abyssi

"Conventional" eukaryotic PPP

91

Q9U493

Plasmodium falciparum PPJ

92

Q8I728

Trypanosoma cruzi PPEF

93

BH900132

Ostreococcus tauri

94

O14829

Homo sapiens PPEF1 (PP7)

95

Q8IDE7

Plasmodium falciparum PP5

96

P53041

Homo sapiens PP5

97

P53043

Saccharomyces cerevisiae PPT

98

P32838

Saccharomyces cerevisiae PPG

99

P05323

Homo sapiens PP2A

100

O00743

Homo sapiens PP6

101

Q08209

Homo sapiens Calcineurin (PP2B)

102

P08129

Homo sapiens PP1

103

P32945

Saccharomyces cerevisiae PPQ

104

O49346

Arabidopsis thaliana PP7

* This phosphatase is unlikely to be catalytically active due to replacements of essential residues in the active centre.

https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1471-2148-4-47/MediaObjects/12862_2004_Article_107_Fig2_HTML.jpg
Figure 2

Comparison of the primary structures of " Shewanella -like" phosphatases (Shelphs) and human PP1α as a prototype of eukaryotic PPP phosphatases. Designations for conserved amino acid residues are as in Figure 1. For Oryza sativa, dashed underlined C-terminal sequence has been corrected by comparison with ESTs. Accession numbers: Plasmodium falciparum 1, Q8I5Y5; 2, Q8IKE5; Trypanosoma brucei 1, AC007863; 2, AC084046.12. Chlamydomonas reinhardtii sequence is translation of the EST entries BG855683 and BI995255. Other accession numbers are indicated in Table 1.

https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1471-2148-4-47/MediaObjects/12862_2004_Article_107_Fig3_HTML.jpg
Figure 3

Characteristic modifications (shaded in black) in the conserved PPP signature motif GDXXDRG in bacterial diadenosine tetraphosphatases and eukaryotic Alphs. Eukaryotic species are shown in bold. Plus signs indicate that gene expression is confirmed by the presence of ESTs.

https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1471-2148-4-47/MediaObjects/12862_2004_Article_107_Fig4_HTML.jpg
Figure 4

Neighbor-Net analysis of the conserved N-terminal subdomains (starting 5 amino acid residues before conserved GDXHG and ending 25 residues after GNH(E/D) of 104 bacterial, archaeal and eukaryotic PPP phosphatases. Bootstrap values exceeding 50% (out of 1000 resamplings) were obtained in a separate neihbour-joining analysis and are shown in brackets. Species and accession numbers are listed in Table 1. Note that groups designated as I, IV and VII did not receive significant bootstrap support; corresponding sequences are grouped together for convenience of their representation in Table 1. This image (and bootstrap values for the alternative splits) can be viewed at a higher resolution as the Additional File 1.

https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1471-2148-4-47/MediaObjects/12862_2004_Article_107_Fig5_HTML.jpg
Figure 5

Distinct conserved motifs in the C-termini of bacterial and "bacterial-like" PPP phosphatases from eukaryotes as opposed to archaeal and eukaryotic PPP phosphatases. A His residue directly binding a metal ion in the catalytic centre (marked with asterisk), and the elements of secondary structure are shown for bacteriophage λ phosphatase and for human PP1 according to ref. [20] and [19], respectively. The (I/L/V)D(S/T)G motif, highly conserved in bacterial and "bacterial-like" phosphatases, is highlighted. An expanded version of this alignment can be viewed as the Additional File 2.

Structural features of Rhilphs

All residues that are expected to bind metal ions in the catalytic centre are conserved in Rhilphs (Figure 1). Rhilphs do not have N- or C-terminal extensions beyond their catalytic domains, which in many PPP phosphatases have regulatory function and / or interact with regulatory proteins / subunits. Instead, they have characteristic inserts between the conserved motifs GNH(E/D) and HAG (corresponding to HGG in "conventional" eukaryotic PPPs, see Figure 1). Notably, much shorter inserts are found at a similar position in α-proteobacterial phosphatases (group I in Figure 1). Inserts in both plant Rhilphs and α-proteobacterial phosphatases contain a conserved motif LXXAXPXXH (Figure 1). Similarly to bacteriophage λphosphatase (λPP [19]), Rhilphs lack a region corresponding to β8, β9 and α9 of eukaryotic PPPs [2022]. Like bacterial PPP phosphatases, Rhilphs do not have a SAPNY motif, conserved in the β12-β13 loop of eukaryotic PPPs. Analysis of Rhilph sequences did not reveal targeting or signal peptides.

While this work was in progress, a phosphatase encoded by an Arabidopsis gene At1g07010 was reported in an independent study [4].

"Shewanella-like" PPP phosphatases in plants, red algae, fungi and unicellular parasites

We undertook further TBlastN searches using full-length Arabidopsis RLP2 as a query to see whether Arabidopsis genome encodes additional "bacterial-like" PPPs. These searches identified two more genes for putative PPP phosphatases, only distantly related to Rhilphs and to any other members of the family (Figure 2).

One of these genes is At1g070101. At least three different predicted products of this gene could be found in protein databases. On the basis of comparison with EST sequences, we consider as the correct structure that of Q8RY10 with Asp and Gly at positions 109 and 208, respectively (see Figure 2). The other detected gene, At1g18480, is also represented in the databases by three distinct deduced proteins. Comparison with A. thaliana ESTs confirms Q944L7 as the correct structure.

Genomic and EST database searches provided ample evidence for the presence of related phosphatases in a number of green plants, including multiple angiosperm species, pine and a unicellular green alga Chlamydomonas reinhardtii (Figure 2; see also Table 1 and Figure 4). Related sequences were also identified in some fungi (several basidiomycetes and an ascomycete Schizosaccharomyces pombe, but not other ascomycetes), in Apicomplexa, Trypanosomatidae, and in a red alga Porphyra yezoensis (for available sequence from the latter species, see Figure 5).

The most closely related prokaryotic phosphatases were detected in Myxococcus xanthus (δ-Proteobacteria) and psychrophilic bacteria Alteromonadales (γ-Proteobacteria): uncharacterised phosphatases from Shewanella oneidensis and Colwellia psychrerythraea and a Tyr-specific phosphatase PPI from Shewanella sp. [8]. Therefore, we designate this phosphatase group as "She wanella-l ike" ph osphatases, or Shelphs, and the products of the two prototype Arabidopsis genes At1g07010 and At1g18480 as "S hewanella-l ike" p hosphatases 1 (SLP1) and 2 (SLP2), respectively.

Structural features of Shelphs

Like in Rhilphs, all residues that are expected to bind metal ions in the catalytic centre are conserved in Shelphs (see Figure 1). Another feature common with Rhilphs is the presence of inserts (as compared to "conventional" eukaryotic PPPs) between the GNHE and H(A/G)G motifs (Figure 1), which are especially long in plant Shelphs. However, these inserts share no sequence similarity between Rhilphs and Shelphs and probably appeared in the two phosphatase groups independently. Like in Rhilphs, a region corresponding to β8, β9 and α9 of eukaryotic PPPs is absent in Shelphs, and the primary structure of the region corresponding to the β12-β13 loop is similar to that of typical bacterial PPPs. A.thaliana SLP1 and corresponding Shelph isoform from rice have chloroplast targeting sequence, which could not be detected in A.thaliana SLP2 and corresponding isoform from Medicago truncatula.

Eukaryotic PPPs distantly related to bacterial diadenosine tetraphosphatases

Identification of Rhilphs and Shelphs prompted us to perform extensive searches of eukaryotic sequence databases. These searches revealed the existence of other "bacterial-like" PPP phosphatases throughout eukaryotes. Sequences only distantly related to Rhilphs, Shelphs or any other PPP phosphatases were detected in several fungi (including a putative S. cerevisiae phosphatase reported previously [23]), in Trypanosomatidae, a tick Amblyomma, an ascidian Ciona, Chlamydomonas, pine and diatoms Fragilariopsis cylindrus and Phaeodactylum tricornutum. Blast searches using these sequences revealed that all of them share higher similarity to bacterial diadenosine tetraphosphatases (ApaH) than to other PPP groups. Therefore, we tentatively designate them as A paH-l ike p hosphatases, or Alphs (Figures 3 and 4; Table 1; partial sequences available for pine and diatoms are shown in Figure 5).

Alphs share a distinctive common structural feature. In the GDXXDRG motif, absolutely conserved in other PPPs, the second Asp (which stabilises the protonation of a His that directly participates in catalysis [20]) is replaced by a neutral amino acid, and the Arg residue (which coordinates phosphate [24]) is replaced, with one exception, by Lys (Figure 3). The former of these replacements is also found in ApaH, while the latter is unique to Alphs. While higher overall sequence similarity and a common alteration in the GDXXDRG motif are compatible with closer relatedness of Alphs to bacterial diadenosine tetraphosphatases, phylogenetic analysis using full length sequences failed to produce a robust tree due to high sequence diversity (not shown).

Relationship of novel eukaryotic PPP groups to known PPP phosphatases

In order to better understand the relationship of "bacterial-like" PPP phosphatases in eukaryotes to each other and to bacterial PPPs, we attempted to extend our previous phylogenetic analysis of eukaryotic PPP phosphatases [25] by including PPP sequences from a number of bacteria and archaea. Primary structures of bacterial PPP phosphatases are extremely diverse and, outside the relatively conserved N-terminal subdomain of about 100 amino acids containing the GDXHG, GDXXDRG and GNH(E/D) motifs, they share only a few conserved residues. Moreover, many of the sequences have long insertions at different positions. This leads to the failure to produce informative alignments of full-length catalytic domains. Therefore, we aligned more conserved N-terminal subdomains only, an approach applied previously by Kennelly [6] to a much smaller set of PPP sequences available at that time. Phylogenetic reconstruction was attempted with either neighbor-joining (as implemented in PHYLIP [26] or SplitsTree [27]) or maximum likelihood analysis using quartet puzzling (TreePuzzle [28]); in the latter case a smaller dataset consisting of with consisting of 32 representative sequences was analyzed due to the inability of the algorithm to handle large datasets. Due to the relatively short length of the sequences and their high diversity, some of the major clades did not receive significant bootstrap support and were different depending on the method used, although most major clades, including Rhilphs and Shelphs, were recovered by both methods. Alphs tended to be grouped together by neighbor-joining but were split into smaller clades when maximum likelihood analysis was used. However, we still tentatively consider Alphs as a single group due to the characteristic replacements in their catalytic centre.

To circumvent the ambiguity of the results, we used Neighbor-Net [29], a neighbor-joining based method that constructs phylogenetic networks rather than trees and thus represents conflicting signals and visualises feasible trees in a single plot (Figure 4; for a high-resolution image, see Additional file 1). The Neighbor-Net analysis accurately identified the major clades such as eukaryotic and archaeal phosphatases, as well as their closer relationship to each other than to bacterial PPPs [6]. Separation of "conventional" eukaryotic PPPs into two branches, suggested previously from the analysis of the full-length catalytic domains [25], was also recovered. As it was suggested by initial sequence similarity searches, Rhilphs, Shelphs and Alphs represent distinct major clades of the PPP family, as divergent from "conventional" eukaryotic and archaeal PPP phosphatases as they are from major bacterial clades (Figure 4; Additional file 1).

Common structural elements in all "bacterial-like" PPP phosphatases from eukaryotes and bacterial phosphatases

C-terminal regions of the catalytic domain of all "conventional" eukaryotic PPP phosphatases share a highly conserved (with minor variations) SAPNY motif, located in the β12-β13 loop. This loop and the Tyr residue of the SAPNY motif in particular are implicated in interaction with regulators and inhibitors [21, 3032]. β strands (β9 and β10) corresponding to β12 and β13 are conserved in λPP [19]. However, the sequence on the C-terminal side of β9 is dissimilar to SAPNY in λPP and in bacterial PPPs. A conservative replacement of the first Ser of SAPNY by Thr is found in many bacterial sequences (this Thr is however only moderately conserved and is replaced by Glu or Gln in all Rhilphs and by Val or Phe in most Shelphs). The two adjacent positions are occupied by highly conserved Asp and Gly residues, respectively, thus defining a previously unrecognised motif (I/L/V)D(S/T)G. This motif is present in all examined bacterial PPPs, as well as in all "bacterial-like" phosphatases from eukaryotes described above (Figure 5; see also Additional file 2 for a more complete alignment).

In addition, we note the presence of another characteristic feature of bacterial and "bacterial-like" PPPs: the His residue (H248 in PP1; H186 in λPP) coordinating one of the metal ions in the catalytic centre is preceded by an absolutely conserved Gly; this residue is conserved in some archaeal but not in "conventional" eukaryotic PPPs (Figure 5; Additional file 2).

Discussion

In this report, we have documented the presence in different eukaryotic lineages of the genes that encode PPP phosphatases resembling those of bacterial origin, rather than "conventional" eukaryotic members of the family. Catalytic domains of these "bacterial-like" phosphatases are characterised by relatively conserved structure of the N-terminal subdomains, but very diverse organisation of the C-terminal subdomains, where conserved motifs and residues forming the active centre are separated by sequences of various length that share little or no similarity between different clades (Figure 6). In most cases, corresponding EST sequences could be detected, which confirms that these genes are expressed.
https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1471-2148-4-47/MediaObjects/12862_2004_Article_107_Fig6_HTML.jpg
Figure 6

Schematic diagram depicting organisation of the catalytic domains of the phosphatase groups discussed in this study. N-terminal subdomains (used in the alignment for the Neighbor-Net analysis, Figure 4) and C-terminal subdomains are shown in red and yellow, respectively. Positions of the conserved motifs in PPλ and the residues forming the active centre (underlined; shown according to ref. [19]) are shown. Positions of the LXXAXPXXH motif in plant Rhilphs and related phosphatases from Rhizobiales are indicated (green boxes). For more detailed information on the position of inserts in Rhilphs and Shelphs relative to the elements of the secondary structure, see Figures 1 and 2, respectively.

The most conspicuous presence of "bacterial-like" PPPs has been detected in plants. Plants possess phosphatases from all three novel groups described in this work. Rhilphs are most closely related to PPP phosphatases from a number of α-proteobacteria, including purple photosynthetic bacteria and Rhizobiales. The absence of related sequences in eukaryotes other than land plants suggests that Rhilphs may have been acquired after plants started colonising land. Although bacterial lineage that could be the source for plant Rhilphs could not be unambiguously identified by phylogenetic reconstruction, Rhizobiales (or purple photosynthetic bacteria from which Rhizobiales are thought to have originated [33, 34]) appear to be likely candidates. Indeed, Rhizobiales have transmissible chromosomal elements and some, like Agrobacterium, are able to integrate their plasmid genes into plant genome [35] or even transform animal cells [36], a situation that would be ideally suited for a horizontal gene transfer to occur. Interestingly, the presence of genes of rhizobial origin has been detected in plant parasitic nematodes [37]. Possible origin of plant Rhilphs from α-proteobacterial phosphatases is also supported by the presence in the enzymes of both groups of characteristic inserts in similar positions, which share some sequence similarity (see Results).

Phosphatases of another group, designated as Shelphs, are found in green plants, in a red alga, in Apicomplexa, Trypanosomatidae, as well as in some fungi. The similarity between proteins from Apicomplexa and Trypanosomatidae and those from plants is well documented. Trypanosomatidae are related to photosynthetic euglenoids and are thought to have lost plastids secondarily [38]. Apicomplexan parasites have a relict plastid, originated from the engulfment of a red alga [39]. Thus, the presence of phosphatases shared by plants, red algae, Apicomplexa and Trypanosomatidae is not surprising and probably reflects the presence of Shelphs in a common ancestor of photosynthetic eukaryotes. The presence of chloroplast targeting sequence in SLP1 suggests a possible origin of Shelphs from a bacterial precursor of the chloroplast (however it should be noted that Shelphs are absent from cyanobacteria); alternatively, this sequence may have appeared secondarily. Protein Ser/Thr phosphorylation / dephosphorylation is essential for regulation of photosynthesis, and unidentified okadaic acid-insensitive protein phosphatases in chloroplasts have been reported [40, 41]. SLP1 appears to be a good candidate for such a phosphatase.

The origin of fungal Shelphs is unclear. Curiously, they are found in basidiomycetes and in an ascomycete S. pombe, but not in a number of other ascomycetes, whose genomes have been completed. Current data do not permit to discriminate between (i) the presence of Shelphs in a common ancestor of eukaryotes and their loss in such lineages as animals and many fungi, and (ii) independent acquisition of Shelphs from bacteria by an ancestor of photosynthetic eukaryotes and by fungi. Further sequencing of eukaryotic genomes may shed light on the evolutionary history of this PPP group.

The third group of "bacterial-like" phosphatases detected in eukaryotes, designated here as Alphs, appears to be distantly related to bacterial diadenosine tetraphosphatases ApaH. Patchy distribution in several eukaryotic kingdoms suggests that Alphs were probably present in the common ancestor of eukaryotes, but were independently lost in many lineages, including insects, vertebrates and flowering plants. A characteristic modification of the conserved GDXXDRG motif shared only with ApaH further supports a suggestion that Alphs may represent a divergent branch of diadenosine tetraphosphatases, rather than protein phosphatases. However, relatedness of eukaryotic Alphs to bacterial diadenosine tetraphosphatases remains hypothetical, since Alph sequences are too divergent from ApaH, as well as from each other, to permit a reliable phylogenetic reconstruction.

Diadenosine oligophosphates are considered as emerging signalling molecules in both intra- and intercellular signalling in eukaryotes [42, 43]. In particular, human diadenosine oligophosphate hydrolase FHIT has been identified as a tumor suppressor [44]. It seems plausible that appearance of eukaryotic diadenosine oligophosphate hydrolases (structurally unrelated to the PPP phosphatases) may have made bacterial-type diadenosine tetraphosphatases redundant, leading to their loss in many eukaryotic lineages. It would be interesting to test experimentally whether Alphs are indeed diadenosine oligophosphatases.

More generally, an important implication of our findings is that many eukaryotes possess PPP phosphatases with yet undetermined substrate specificity. Eukaryotic PPP phosphatases are generally considered as Ser/Thr specific in vivo, although they may be able to dephosphorylate phosphoTyr-containing substrates in vitro (e.g. [45, 46]). This is probably true for archaeal PPPs as well [5]. However, Ser/Thr specificity is not a feature of bacterial PPP phosphatases [79, 13, 4749]. Thus, it would not be possible to predict substrate specificity of uncharacterised "bacterial-like" PPP phosphatases without experimental evidence. In particular, since Shewanella PPI is Tyr-specific [8], it would be interesting to determine substrate specificity of eukaryotic Shelphs. It is also worth noting that interest in tyrosine phosphorylation in plants has recently been stimulated by identification of plant Tyr phosphatase genes and by the finding that Tyr phosphorylation is involved in the regulation of stomatal movement (reviewed by Luan [50]).

Three motifs, GDXHG, GDXXDRG and GNH(E/D) form the diagnostic signature of all PPP phosphatases [10, 11]. We detected a (I/L/V)D(S/T)G motif, which appears to be a characteristic signature of "bacterial"-type PPPs. The existence of such a motif is striking per se, taking into account extreme structural diversity of bacterial PPP phosphatases. It indicates that (I/L/V)D(S/T)G was probably present as the fourth "universal" signature motif in the common ancestor of PPP phosphatases, and was lost in the common lineage of archaeal and "conventional" eukaryotic PPPs. An alternative possibility could be that the (I/L/V)D(S/T)G motif was acquired by a bacterium and propagated by lateral gene transfer, replacing the ancestral SAPNY-related motif. However this scenario seems less likely, since the (I/L/V)D(S/T)G motif is present, with minor variations, in virtually all bacterial phosphatases, despite their great diversity, and is replaced by SAPNY-related sequences only in archaeal and "conventional" eukaryotic PPPs.

The Asp residue in the 2nd position of (I/L/V)D(S/T)G is highly conserved and can only be replaced by Glu, indicating that the negative charge is essential. The presence of a highly conserved Gly in the 4th position indicates that flexibility of the polypeptide chain is likely to be important. The crystal structure of bacteriophage λ phosphatase (PPλ; [19]) shows that the Asp residue of (I/L/V)D(S/T)G (Asp202) is just downstream of the β9 strand, which corresponds to the β12 strand in mammalian PP1. In PPλ, Asp202 is hydrogen bonded to a water molecule coordinated to one of the metal ions in the catalytic centre, which probably accounts for its conservation. In eukaryotic or archaeal PPPs, corresponding position is occupied by neutral residues (see Figure 5).

It would be tempting to speculate that this difference in the region just downstream of the β9 (β12) may be responsible for a feature that is common to all "bacterial"-type but not to eukaryotic / archaeal PPPs. One such feature is the Ser/Thr specificity of the latter group. The Tyr residue of the SAPNY motif has been suggested to provide a bulky phenol ring in the β12-β13 loop, sufficient to sterically block access of phosphoTyr-containing substrates to the active site [32]. However this is unlikely to be the sole determinant of Ser/Thr specificity, since residues containing bulky aromatic rings (Tyr, Phe or Trp) are found in the same or adjacent positions in many bacterial phosphatases (Figure 5). Since the (I/L/V)D(S/T)G motif, absent in eukaryotic and archaeal PPPs, is involved in organisation of the catalytic centre [19], it is possible that this difference in the catalytic centre organisation may be one of the determinants of broad substrate specificity vs. Ser/Thr specificity.

Conclusions

So far, eukaryotic PPP phosphatases were considered as a well-defined monophyletic group of enzymes, specifically dephosphorylating phosphoSer and phosphoThr, while a much more structurally and enzymatically diverse PPP phosphatases were known to be present in prokaryotes. Our findings demonstrate that, in addition to "conventional" eukaryotic PPP Ser/Thr-specific protein phosphatases, many eukaryotes possess very diverse "bacterial-like" PPP phosphatases. Enzymatic characteristics, physiological roles and evolutionary history of these phosphatases have yet to be revealed.

Methods

Detection of PPP phosphatase-coding sequences

Sequence similarity searches were conducted using BlastP or TBlastN [51] at NCBI [52] in the following databases: "non-redundant" (NR), "expressed sequence tags" (EST), "genomic sequence survey" (GSS) and "high-throughput genomic sequences" (HTGS). Additional Blast searches of the following databases were performed: finished and unfinished genomes of eukaryotes at the NCBI [53]; fungal genomes at the Broad Institute [54]; plant genomes at The Arabidopsis Information Resource (TAIR) [55]; Gene Index databases of tentative consensus sequences (EST assemblies) at The Institute for Genomic Research (TIGR) [56]; Chlamydomonas reinhardtii draft genome [57]. In all cases, reciprocal searches were used, i.e. hits retrieved by Blast searches were in their turn used as queries in the following Blast searches. Accuracy of gene prediction was examined by comparison of the retrieved sequences with translations of corresponding EST entries. In the absence of available ESTs, closely related sequences from other species were used. Taxonomy of the species from which the phosphatase sequences is given according to the NCBI taxonomy web site [58].

Phylogenetic analysis

Multiple alignments were generated using CLUSTAL W [59] at Kyoto University Bioinformatics Centre [60] and edited manually. During manual editing, particular attention was paid to correct alignment of the PPP family signature motifs and other conserved residues known to constitute the catalytic site of PPP phosphatases. Phylogenetic tree construction by the neighbor-joining method [61] and bootstrap analysis were performed using the PHYLIP package, version 3.573 [26]. Maximum likelihood analysis was performed using TreePuzzle [28]. Possible alternative neighbor-joining based phylogenies were visualised using Neighbor-Net [29] as implemented in SplitsTree, version 4.β10 [62]

Analysis of the primary structure

The presence of signal peptides and targeting sequences was analyzed using TargetP [63] at the the Centre for Biological Sequence Analysis, Technical University of Denmark [64].

Notes

Abbreviations

EST: 

expressed sequence tag, Alph, ApaH – like phosphatase

PPP: 

protein phosphatases of the P family

Rhilph (RLP): 

Rhizobiales / Rhodobacterales / Rhodospirillaceae – like phosphatase

Shelph (SLP): 

Shewanella – like phosphatase.

Declarations

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Research School of Biological and Molecular Sciences, Oxford Brookes University
(2)
Present address: University of Illinois, College of Medicine, Department of Pharmacology

References

  1. Cohen PTW: Novel protein serine/threonine phosphatases: Variety is the spice of life. Trends Biochem Sci. 1997, 22: 245-251. 10.1016/S0968-0004(97)01060-8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Andreeva AV, Kutuzov MA: RdgC/PP5-related phosphatases: novel components in signal transduction. Cell Signal. 1999, 11: 555-562. 10.1016/S0898-6568(99)00032-7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Ariño J: Novel protein phosphatases in yeast. Eur J Biochem. 2002, 269: 1072-1077. 10.1046/j.0014-2956.2002.02753.x.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Kerk D, Bulgrien J, Smith DW, Barsam B, Veretnik S, Gribskov M: The complement of protein phosphatase catalytic subunits encoded in the genome of Arabidopsis. Plant Physiol. 2002, 129: 908-925. 10.1104/pp.004002.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Kennelly PJ: Archaeal protein kinases and protein phosphatases: insights from genomics and biochemistry. Biochem J. 2003, 370: 373-389. 10.1042/BJ20021547.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Kennelly PJ: Protein phosphatases – a phylogenetic perspective. Chem Rev. 2001, 101: 2291-2312. 10.1021/cr0002543.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Tsuruta H, Aizono Y: Enzymatical properties of psychrophilic phosphatase I. J Biochem. 1999, 125: 690-695.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Tsuruta H, Aizono Y: Cloning of phosphatase I gene from a psychrophile, Shewanella sp, and some properties of the recombinant enzyme. J Biochem. 2000, 127: 143-149.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Iwanicki A, Herman-Antosiewicz A, Pierechod M, Seror SJ, Obuchowski M: PrpE, a PPP protein phosphatase from Bacillus subtilis with unusual substrate specificity. Biochem J. 2002, 366: 929-936.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Koonin EV: Bacterial and bacteriophage protein phosphatases. Mol Microbiol. 1993, 8: 785-786.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Barton GJ, Cohen PTW, Barford D: Conservation analysis and structure prediction of the protein serine/threonine phosphatases. Sequence similarity with diadenosine tetraphosphatase from Escherichia coli suggests homology to the protein phosphatases. Eur J Biochem. 1994, 220: 225-237.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Kennelly PJ: Protein kinases and protein phosphatases in prokaryotes: a genomic perspective. FEMS Microbiol Lett. 2002, 206: 1-8. 10.1016/S0378-1097(01)00479-7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Missiakas D, Raina S: Signal transduction pathways in response to protein misfolding in the extracytoplasmic compartments of E.coli : role of two new phosphoprotein phosphatases PrpA and PrpB. EMBO J. 1997, 16: 1670-1685. 10.1093/emboj/16.7.1670.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Umeyama T, Naruoka A, Horinouchi S: Genetic and biochemical characterization of a protein phosphatase with dual substrate specificity in Streptomyces coelicolor A3(2). Gene. 2000, 258: 55-62. 10.1016/S0378-1119(00)00450-9.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Shi L: Manganese-dependent protein O-phosphatases in prokaryotes and their biological functions. Front Biosci. 2004, 9: 1382-1397.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Barford D: Molecular mechanisms of the protein serine/threonine phosphatases. Trends Biochem Sci. 1996, 21: 407-412. 10.1016/S0968-0004(96)10060-8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Andreeva AV, Kutuzov MA: Physcomitrella patens gene/cDNA fragments related to genes encoding protein Ser/Thr phosphatases. J Plant Physiol. 1999, 155: 153-158.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Haas BJ, Volfovsky N, Town CD, Troukhan M, Alexandrov N, Feldmann KA, Flavell RB, White O, Salzberg SL: Full-length messenger RNA sequences greatly improve genome annotation. Genome Biol. 2002, 3: research0029.-10.1186/gb-2002-3-6-research0029.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Voegtli WC, White DJ, Reiter NJ, Rusnak F, Rosenzweig AC: Structure of the bacteriophage λ Ser/Thr protein phosphatase with sulfate ion bound in two coordination modes. Biochemistry. 2000, 39: 15365-15374. 10.1021/bi0021030.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Egloff MP, Cohen PTW, Reinemer P, Barford D: Crystal structure of the catalytic subunit of human protein phosphatase 1 and its complex with tungstate. J Mol Biol. 1995, 254: 942-959. 10.1006/jmbi.1995.0667.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Goldberg J, Huang HB, Kwon YG, Greengard P, Nairn AC, Kuriyan J: Three-dimensional structure of the catalytic subunit of protein serine/threonine phosphatase-1. Nature. 1995, 376: 745-753. 10.1038/376745a0.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Kissinger CR, Parge HE, Knighton DR, Lewis CT, Pelletier LA, Tempczyk A, Kalish VJ, Tucker KD, Showalter RE, Moomaw EW, Gastinel LN, Habuka N, Chen X, Maldonado F, Barker JE, Bacquet R, Villafranca JE: Crystal structures of human calcineurin and the human FKBP12-FK506-calcineurin complex. Nature. 1995, 378: 641-644. 10.1038/378641a0.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Coster F, van Dyck L, Jonniaux J-L, Purnelle B, Goffeau A: The sequence of a 13.5 kb DNA segment from the left arm of yeast chromosome XIV reveals MER1; RAP1; a new putative member of the DNA replication complex and a new putative serine/threonine phosphatase gene. Yeast. 1995, 11: 85-91.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Zhang J, Zhang Z, Brew K, Lee EYC: Mutational analysis of the catalytic subunit of muscle protein phosphatase-1. Biochemistry. 1996, 35: 6276-6282. 10.1021/bi952954l.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Andreeva AV, Kutuzov MA: PPP family of protein Ser/Thr phosphatases: Two distinct branches?. Mol Biol Evol. 2001, 18: 448-452.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Felsenstein J: PHYLIP (phylogeny inference package). Version 3.5731999 Distributed by the author, Department of Genetics, University of Washington, Seattle.
  27. Huson DH, Bryant D: Estimating phylogenetic trees and networks using SplitsTree4, in preparation.
  28. Schmidt HA, Strimmer K, Vingron M, von Haeseler A: TREE-PUZZLE: maximum likelihood phylogenetic analysis using quartets and parallel computing. Bioinformatics. 2002, 18: 502-504. 10.1093/bioinformatics/18.3.502.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Bryant D, Moulton V: Neighbor-Net: An agglomerative method for the construction of phylogenetic networks. Mol Biol Evol. 2004, 21: 255-65. 10.1093/molbev/msh018.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Connor JH, Kleeman T, Barik S, Honkanen RE, Shenolikar S: Importance of the β12-β13 loop in protein phosphatase-1 catalytic subunit for inhibition by toxins and mammalian protein inhibitors. J Biol Chem. 1999, 274: 22366-22372. 10.1074/jbc.274.32.22366.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Lee EY, Zhang L, Zhao S, Wei Q, Zhang J, Qi ZQ, Belmonte ER: Phosphorylase phosphatase: new horizons for an old enzyme. Front Biosci. 1999, 4: D270-D285.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Watanabe T, Huang HB, Horiuchi A, da Cruze Silva EF, Hsieh-Wilson L, Allen PB, Shenolikar S, Greengard P, Nairn AC: Protein phosphatase 1 regulation by inhibitors and targeting subunits. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001, 98: 3080-3085. 10.1073/pnas.051003898.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Sprent JI: Evolution and diversity in the legume-rhizobium symbiosis: Chaos theory?. In Symbiotic Nitrogen Fixation. Edited by: Graham PH, Sadowsky MJ, Vance CP. 1994, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1-10.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  34. Fleischman D, Kramer D: Photosynthetic rhizobia. Biochim Biophys Acta . 1998, 1364: 17-36. 10.1016/S0005-2728(98)00011-5.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Escobar MA, Dandekar AM: Agrobacterium tumefaciens as an agent of disease. Trends Plant Sci. 2003, 8: 380-386. 10.1016/S1360-1385(03)00162-6.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Kunik T, Tzfira T, Kapulnik Y, Gafni Y, Dingwall C, Citovsky V: Genetic transformation of HeLa cells by Agrobacterium. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001, 98: 1871-1876. 10.1073/pnas.041327598.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Scholl EH, Thorne JL, McCarter JP, Bird DM: Horizontally transferred genes in plant-parasitic nematodes: a high-throughput genomic approach. Genome Biol. 2003, 4: R39-10.1186/gb-2003-4-6-r39.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Hannaert V, Saavedra E, Duffieux F, Szikora JP, Rigden DJ, Michels PA, Opperdoes FR: Plant-like traits associated with metabolism of Trypanosoma parasites. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003, 100: 1067-1071. 10.1073/pnas.0335769100.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Foth BJ, McFadden GI: The apicoplast: a plastid in Plasmodium falciparum and other Apicomplexan parasites. Int Rev Cytol. 2003, 224: 57-110.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Hast T, Follmann H: Identification of two thylakoid-associated phosphatases with protein phosphatase activity in chloroplasts of the soybean (Glycine max). J Photochem Photobiol B -Biology. 1996, 36: 313-319. 10.1016/S1011-1344(96)07383-6.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  41. Hammer MF, Markwell J, Sarath G: Purification of a protein phosphatase from chloroplast stroma capable of dephosphorylating the light-harvesting complex-II. Plant Physiol. 1997, 113: 227-233. 10.1104/pp.113.1.227.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Kisselev LL, Justesen J, Wolfson AD, Frolova LY: Diadenosine oligophosphates (Ap(n)A), a novel class of signalling molecules?. FEBS Lett. 1998, 427: 157-163. 10.1016/S0014-5793(98)00420-7.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Vartanian AA, Suzuki H, Poletaev AI: The involvement of diadenosine 5 ',5 "'-P-1,P-4-tetraphosphate in cell cycle arrest and regulation of apoptosis. Biochem Pharmacol. 2003, 65: 227-235. 10.1016/S0006-2952(02)01481-8.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Pekarsky Y, Zanesi N, Palamarchuk A, Huebner K, Croce CM: FHIT: from gene discovery to cancer treatment and prevention. Lancet Oncology. 2002, 3: 748-754. 10.1016/S1470-2045(02)00931-2.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Chan CP, Gallis B, Blumenthal DK, Pallen CJ, Wang JH, Krebs EG: Characterization of the phosphotyrosyl protein phosphatase activity of calmodulin-dependent protein phosphatase. J Biol Chem. 1986, 261: 9890-9895.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. MacKintosh C, Garton AJ, McDonnell A, Barford D, Cohen PTW, Tonks NK, Cohen P: Further evidence that inhibitor-2 acts like a chaperone to fold PP1 into its native conformation. FEBS Lett. 1996, 397: 235-238. 10.1016/S0014-5793(96)01175-1.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. Zhuo S, Clemens JC, Hakes DJ, Barford D, Dixon JE: Expression, purification, crystallization, and biochemical characterization of a recombinant protein phosphatase. J Biol Chem. 1993, 268: 17754-17761.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. Shi L, Carmichael WW, Kennelly PJ: Cyanobacterial PPP family protein phosphatases possess multifunctional capabilities and are resistant to microcystin-LR. J Biol Chem. 1999, 274: 10039-10046. 10.1074/jbc.274.15.10039.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. Shi L, Kehres DG, Maguire ME: The PPP-family protein phosphatases PrpA and PrpB of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhimurium possess distinct biochemical properties. J Bacteriol. 2001, 183: 7053-7057. 10.1128/JB.183.24.7053-7057.2001.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. Luan S: Protein phosphatases in plants. Annu Rev Plant Biol. 2003, 54: 63-92. 10.1146/annurev.arplant.54.031902.134743.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Altschul SF, Madden TL, Schaffer AA, Zhang J, Zhang Z, Miller W, Lipman DJ: Gapped BLAST and PSI-BLAST: a new generation of protein database search programs. Nucleic Acids Res. 1997, 25: 3389-3402. 10.1093/nar/25.17.3389.PubMed CentralView ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. NCBI Blast search. [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/blast]
  53. NCBI BLAST with eukaryotic genomes. [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sutils/genom_tree.cgi?organism=euk]
  54. Fungal Genomes Blast search at the Broad Institute. [http://www.broad.mit.edu/cgi-bin/annotation/fgi/blast_page.cgi]
  55. The Arabidopsis Information Resource (TAIR) Blast search. [http://www.arabidopsis.org/Blast]
  56. Gene Index databases of tentative consensus sequences at the Institute for Genomic Research (TIGR). [http://www.tigr.org/tdb]
  57. Chlamydomonas reinhardtii draft genome BLAST search. [http://aluminum.jgi-psf.org/prod/bin/runBlast.pl?db=chlre1]
  58. NCBI Taxonomy Homepage. [http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Taxonomy/taxonomyhome.html]
  59. Higgins DG, Thompson JD, Gibson TJ: Using CLUSTAL for multiple sequence alignments. Methods Enzymol. 1996, 266: 383-402.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. CLUSTAL W: Multiple Sequence Alignment at Kyoto University Bioinformatics Centre. [http://clustalw.genome.ad.jp]
  61. Saitou N, Nei M: The neighbor-joining method: a new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees. Mol Biol Evol. 1987, 4: 406-425.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. SplitsTree: Analyzing and Visualizing Evolutionary Data. [http://www-ab.informatik.uni-tuebingen.de/software/splits/welcome_en.html]
  63. Emanuelsson O, Nielsen H, Brunak S, von Heijne G: Predicting subcellular localization of proteins based on their N-terminal amino acid sequence. J Mol Biol. 2000, 300: 1005-1016. 10.1006/jmbi.2000.3903.View ArticlePubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. TargetP Server at the Centre for Biological Sequence Analysis, Technical University of Denmark. [http://www.cbs.dtu.dk/services/TargetP]
  65. Chlamydomonas reinhardtii draft genome, scaffold 45. [http://genome.jgi-psf.org/cgi-bin/getScaffold?db=chlre1&scaffold=scaffold_45]

Copyright

© Andreeva and Kutuzov; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2004

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Advertisement