The role of profilin in actin polymerization and nucleotide exchange.

Properties of human profilin I mutated in the major actin-binding site were studied and compared with wild-type profilin using beta/gamma-actin as interaction partner. The mutants ranged in affinity, from those that only weakly affected polymerization of actin to one that bound actin more strongly than wild-type profilin. With profilins, whose sequestering activity was low, the concentration of free actin monomers observed at steady-state of polymerization [Afree], was close to that seen with actin alone ([Acc], critical concentration of polymerization). Profilin mutants binding actin with an intermediate affinity like wild-type profilin caused a lowering of [Afree] as compared to [Acc], indicating that actin monomers and profilin:actin complexes participate in polymer formation. With a mutant profilin, which bound actin more strongly than the wild-type protein, an efficient sequestration of actin was observed, and in this case, the [Afree] at steady state was again close to [Acc], suggesting that the mutant profilin:actin had a greatly lowered ability to incorporate actin subunits at the (+)-end. The results from the kinetic and steady-state experiments presented are consonant with the idea that profilin:actin complexes are directly incorporated at the (+)-end of actively polymerizing actin filaments, while they do not support the view that profilin facilitates polymer formation.

Characterization of a mutant profilin with reduced actin-binding capacity: effects in vitro and in vivo.

We are investigating structure-function relationships in profilin and actin by site-specific mutagenesis using a yeast, Saccharomyces cerevisiae, expression system to produce wild-type and mutant proteins. This paper shows that deleting proline 96 and threonine 97, which are located close to the major actin binding site on profilin, did not significantly alter the interaction between profilin and phosphatidylinositol 4,5-bisphosphate, nor did it affect the profilin:poly(L-proline) interaction. The mutant protein, however, had a lower capacity to bind to actin in vitro than wild-type profilin, though it showed a slightly increased profilin-enhanced nucleotide exchange on the actin. When microinjected into Swiss 3T3 mouse fibroblasts or porcine aortic endothelial cells, the mutant profilin did not change the organization of the microfilament system like the wild-type profilin did. This provides further evidence that profilin controls microfilament organization in the cell by interacting directly with actin.

Isolation and characterization of two mutants of human profilin I that do not bind poly(L-proline).

A simple procedure for the isolation of profilin mutants having a reduced capacity to bind poly(L-proline) is used to isolate two mutants of human profilin I, W3N and H133S. Binding of the mutants to poly(L-proline), actin, and phosphatidylinositol (4,5)-bisphosphate (PIP2) was studied. Both mutations abolished the poly(L-proline)-binding activity of profilin. This suggests that the arrangement of the N- and C-terminal helices forming the poly(L-proline)-binding site depends on the stabilizing interaction between W3 and W31 in the underlying beta-strand, and that the H133S mutation in the C-terminal helix also must have distorted the arrangement of the terminal helices. Both mutations caused a reduced affinity for actin, with the W3N replacement having the most pronounced effect. This shows that structural changes in the poly(L-proline)-binding region of profilin can affect the distantly located actin-binding site. Thus, ligands influencing the structure of the poly(L-proline)-binding site may regulate actin polymerization through profilin. This is consonant with the finding that PIP2, which changes the tryptophan fluorescence in wild-type profilin and dissociates the profilin:actin complex in vitro, binds more strongly to the W3N mutant profilin. Thus, the poly(L-proline)-binding surface represents a crucial regulatory site of profilin function.