Comprehensive Physiology Wiley Online Library
For Librarians For Authors Editors About

Dual Specificity Phosphatase 5‐Substrate Interaction: A Mechanistic Perspective

Raman G. Kutty, Marat R. Talipov, Robert D. Bongard, Rachel A. Jones Lipinski, Noreena L. Sweeney, Daniel S. Sem, Rajendra Rathore, Ramani Ramchandran

10.1002/cphy.c170007

Source: Volume 7, Issue 4, October 2017

Published online: September 2017

Full Article on Wiley Online Library



ABSTRACT

The mammalian genome contains approximately 200 phosphatases that are responsible for catalytically removing phosphate groups from proteins. In this review, we discuss dual specificity phosphatase 5 (DUSP5). DUSP5 belongs to the dual specificity phosphatase (DUSP) family, so named after the family members’ abilities to remove phosphate groups from serine/threonine and tyrosine residues. We provide a comparison of DUSP5’s structure to other DUSPs and, using molecular modeling studies, provide an explanation for DUSP5’s mechanistic interaction and specificity toward phospho‐extracellular regulated kinase, its only known substrate. We also discuss new insights from molecular modeling studies that will influence our current thinking of mitogen‐activated protein kinase signaling. Finally, we discuss the lessons learned from identifying small molecules that target DUSP5, which might benefit targeting efforts for other phosphatases. © 2017 American Physiological Society. Compr Physiol 7:1449‐1461, 2017.

Comprehensive Physiology offers downloadable PowerPoint presentations of figures for non-profit, educational use, provided the content is not modified and full credit is given to the author and publication.

Download a PowerPoint presentation of all images


Figure 1. Figure 1. Depiction of the active site of DUSP5 PD (A) as well as its juxtaposition with the X‐ray crystallography/NMR structures of DUSPs 3‐5, 8, 10, 13b, 14, 15, 18, 19, 22, and 27 (14,16,33,34,35,36,41,50,51,66,70,73,77,79,80,82) (B) showing their remarkable similarity in positioning of the catalytically relevant residues forming the active site (indicated by ellipses) as well as a histidine outside the reaction pocket (top right ellipse).
Figure 2. Figure 2. Chemical steps involved in dephosphorylation of the phosphorylated tyrosine of pY‐ERK2 by DUSP5.
Figure 3. Figure 3. Comparison of the X‐ray/NMR structures of DUSPs that are active toward ppERK1/2. Red ellipses show position of catalytic aspartic acid, blue ellipses highlight the conformational differences in the active site, and green‐, yellow‐, and pink‐filled ellipses show unique features associated only with DUSP5, i.e. glutamic acid E264, secondary binding site, and presence of a disulfide bridge, respectively (1,15,33,35,70).
Figure 4. Figure 4. (A) Structure of the DUSP5/ppERK2 complex obtained by the computational modeling and molecular dynamics simulations. (B) Tertiary structure of EBD and ppERK2, where residues were colored according to their conservation score, that is, ranged from the cyan color corresponding to most variable residues to violet color corresponding to the most conserved ones (4a,4b). Structures in the bottom of panel B show the frontal view of the interfacial regions of EBD and pERK2.
Figure 5. Figure 5. (A) The proposed sequence of binding events leading to formation of the DUSP5/ppERK2 complex. (B) Schematic representation of the binding of pERK and PD of DUSP5 leading to the prereactive near attack conformation. Yellow and black circles on the left show the position of active and secondary binding sites, respectively. Parts of panel B especially the schematic representation of the mechanism is modified from our previous publication (72).


Figure 1. Depiction of the active site of DUSP5 PD (A) as well as its juxtaposition with the X‐ray crystallography/NMR structures of DUSPs 3‐5, 8, 10, 13b, 14, 15, 18, 19, 22, and 27 (14,16,33,34,35,36,41,50,51,66,70,73,77,79,80,82) (B) showing their remarkable similarity in positioning of the catalytically relevant residues forming the active site (indicated by ellipses) as well as a histidine outside the reaction pocket (top right ellipse).


Figure 2. Chemical steps involved in dephosphorylation of the phosphorylated tyrosine of pY‐ERK2 by DUSP5.


Figure 3. Comparison of the X‐ray/NMR structures of DUSPs that are active toward ppERK1/2. Red ellipses show position of catalytic aspartic acid, blue ellipses highlight the conformational differences in the active site, and green‐, yellow‐, and pink‐filled ellipses show unique features associated only with DUSP5, i.e. glutamic acid E264, secondary binding site, and presence of a disulfide bridge, respectively (1,15,33,35,70).


Figure 4. (A) Structure of the DUSP5/ppERK2 complex obtained by the computational modeling and molecular dynamics simulations. (B) Tertiary structure of EBD and ppERK2, where residues were colored according to their conservation score, that is, ranged from the cyan color corresponding to most variable residues to violet color corresponding to the most conserved ones (4a,4b). Structures in the bottom of panel B show the frontal view of the interfacial regions of EBD and pERK2.


Figure 5. (A) The proposed sequence of binding events leading to formation of the DUSP5/ppERK2 complex. (B) Schematic representation of the binding of pERK and PD of DUSP5 leading to the prereactive near attack conformation. Yellow and black circles on the left show the position of active and secondary binding sites, respectively. Parts of panel B especially the schematic representation of the mechanism is modified from our previous publication (72).
References
 1.Almo SC, Bonanno JB, Sauder JM, Emtage S, Dilorenzo TP, Malashkevich V, Wasserman SR, Swaminathan S, Eswaramoorthy S, Agarwal R, Kumaran D, Madegowda M, Ragumani S, Patskovsky Y, Alvarado J, Ramagopal UA, Faber‐Barata J, Chance MR, Sali A, Fiser A, Zhang Z‐y, Lawrence DS, Burley SK. Structural genomics of protein phosphatases. J Struct Funct Genomics 8: 121‐140, 2007.
 2.Aoki K, Takahashi K, Kaizu K, Matsuda M. A quantitative model of ERK MAP kinase phosphorylation in crowded media. Sci Rep 3: 1541, 2013.
 3.Aoki K, Yamada M, Kunida K, Yasuda S, Matsuda M. Processive phosphorylation of ERK MAP kinase in mammalian cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A108: 12675‐12680, 2011.
 4.Aronov AM, Baker C, Bemis GW, Cao J, Chen G, Ford PJ, Germann UA, Green J, Hale MR, Jacobs M, Janetka JW, Maltais F, Martinez‐Botella G, Namchuk MN, Straub J, Tang Q, Xie X. Flipped out: Structure‐guided design of selective pyrazolylpyrrole ERK inhibitors. J Med Chem 50: 1280‐1287, 2007.
 5.Ashkenazy H, Abadi S, Martz E, Chay O, Mayrose I, Pupko T, Ben‐Tal N. ConSurf 2016: an improved methodology to estimate and visualize evolutionary conservation in macromolecules. Nucleic Acids Res 44: W344‐W350, 2016.
 6.Ashkenazy H, Erez E, Martz E, Pupko T, Ben‐Tal N. ConSurf 2010: calculating evolutionary conservation in sequence and structure of proteins and nucleic acids. Nucleic Acids Res 38: W529‐W533, 2010.
 7.Bellou S, Hink MA, Bagli E, Panopoulou E, Bastiaens PI, Murphy C, Fotsis T. VEGF autoregulates its proliferative and migratory ERK1/2 and p38 cascades by enhancing the expression of DUSP1 and DUSP5 phosphatases in endothelial cells. Am J Physiol Cell Physiol 297: C1477‐C1489, 2009.
 8.Bongard RD, Lepley M, Thakur K, Talipov MR, Nayak J, Sweeney N, Ramchandran R, Rathore R, Sem DS. Serendipitous discovery of Light‐Induced (In situ) Formation of an Azo‐Bridged Dimeric Sulfonated Naphthol as potent PTP1B inhibitor. BMC Biochemistry 18(1): 10, 2017. doi: 10.1186/s12858‐017‐0083‐3.
 9.Boutros T, Chevet E, Metrakos P. Mitogen‐activated protein (MAP) kinase/MAP kinase phosphatase regulation: Roles in cell growth, death, and cancer. Pharmacol Rev 60: 261‐310, 2008.
 10.Cai C, Chen JY, Han ZD, He HC, Chen JH, Chen YR, Yang SB, Wu YD, Zeng YR, Zou J, Liang YX, Dai QS, Jiang FN, Zhong WD. Down‐regulation of dual‐specificity phosphatase 5 predicts poor prognosis of patients with prostate cancer. Int J Clin Exp Med 8: 4186‐4194, 2015.
 11.Camps M, Nichols A, Gillieron C, Antonsson B, Muda M, Chabert C, Boschert U, Arkinstall S. Catalytic activation of the phosphatase MKP‐3 by ERK2 mitogen‐activated protein kinase. Science 280: 1262‐1265, 1998.
 12.Canagarajah BJ, Khokhlatchev A, Cobb MH, Goldsmith EJ. Activation mechanism of the MAP kinase ERK2 by dual phosphorylation. Cell 90: 859‐869, 1997.
 13.Caunt CJ, Armstrong SP, Rivers CA, Norman MR, McArdle CA. Spatiotemporal regulation of ERK2 by dual specificity phosphatases. J Biol Chem 283: 26612‐26623, 2008.
 14.Caunt CJ, Keyse SM. Dual‐specificity MAP kinase phosphatases (MKPs): shaping the outcome of MAP kinase signalling. FEBS J 280: 489‐504, 2013.
 15.Echavarria R, Hussain SNA. Regulation of angiopoietin‐1/Tie‐2 receptor signaling in endothelial cells by dual‐specificity phosphatases 1, 4, and 5. J Am Heart Assoc 2: e000571‐e000571, 2013.
 16.Fan F, Geurts AM, Pabbidi MR, Smith SV, Harder DR, Jacob H, Roman RJ. Zinc‐finger nuclease knockout of dual‐specificity protein phosphatase‐5 enhances the myogenic response and autoregulation of cerebral blood flow in FHH.1BN rats. PloS One 9(11): e112878, 2014. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0112878.
 17.Farooq A, Chaturvedi G, Mujtaba S, Plotnikova O, Zeng L, Dhalluin C, Ashton R, Zhou MM. Solution structure of ERK2 binding domain of MAPK phosphatase MKP‐3: structural insights into MKP‐3 activation by ERK2. Mol Cell 7: 387‐399, 2001.
 18.Farooq A, Plotnikova O, Chaturvedi G, Yan S, Zeng L, Zhang Q, Zhou M‐M. Solution structure of the MAPK phosphatase PAC‐1 catalytic domain. Insights into substrate‐induced enzymatic activation of MKP. Structure 11: 155‐164, 2003.
 19.Farooq A, Zhou M‐M. Structure and regulation of MAPK phosphatases. Cell Signal 16: 769‐779, 2004.
 20.Ferrell JE, Jr., Bhatt RR. Mechanistic studies of the dual phosphorylation of mitogen‐activated protein kinase. J Biol Chem 272: 19008‐19016, 1997.
 21.Ferrell JE, Jr., Machleder EM. The biochemical basis of an all‐or‐none cell fate switch in Xenopus oocytes. Science 280: 895‐898, 1998.
 22.Frey PA, Hegeman AD. Enzymatic Reaction Mechanisms. New York, USA: Oxford University Press, 2007.
 23.Gille H, Kortenjann M, Thomae O, Moomaw C, Slaughter C, Cobb MH, Shaw PE. ERK phosphorylation potentiates Elk‐1‐mediated ternary complex formation and transactivation. EMBO J 14: 951‐962, 1995.
 24.Gille H, Strahl T, Shaw PE. Activation of ternary complex factor Elk‐1 by stress‐activated protein kinases. Curr Biol 5: 1191‐1200, 1995.
 25.Goldsmith EJ, Min X, He H, Zhou T. Structural studies of MAP Kinase cascade components. Methods Mol Biol 661: 223‐237, 2010.
 26.Haagenson KK, Wu GS. Mitogen activated protein kinase phosphatases and cancer. Cancer Biol Ther 9: 337‐340, 2010.
 27.Harris TK, Turner GJ. Structural basis of perturbed pKa values of catalytic groups in enzyme active sites. IUBMB Life 53: 85‐98, 2002.
 28.Hatano N, Mori Y, Oh‐hora M, Kosugi A, Fujikawa T, Nakai N, Niwa H, Miyazaki J, Hamaoka T, Ogata M. Essential role for ERK2 mitogen‐activated protein kinase in placental development. Genes Cells 8: 847‐856, 2003.
 29.Holmes DA, Yeh JH, Yan D, Xu M, Chan AC. Dusp5 negatively regulates IL‐33‐mediated eosinophil survival and function. EMBO J 34: 218‐235, 2015.
 30.Hornbeck PV, Kornhauser JM, Tkachev S, Zhang B, Skrzypek E, Murray B, Latham V, Sullivan M. PhosphoSitePlus: A comprehensive resource for investigating the structure and function of experimentally determined post‐translational modifications in man and mouse. Nucleic Acids Res 40: D261‐D270, 2012.
 31.Hornbeck PV, Zhang B, Murray B, Kornhauser JM, Latham V, Skrzypek E. PhosphoSitePlus, 2014: Mutations, PTMs and recalibrations. Nucleic Acids Res 43: D512‐D520, 2015.
 32.Huang C‐Y, Tan T‐H. DUSPs, to MAP kinases and beyond. Cell Biosci 2: 24, 2012.
 33.Iwamoto N, D'Alessandro LA, Depner S, Hahn B, Kramer BA, Lucarelli P, Vlasov A, Stepath M, Bohm ME, Deharde D, Damm G, Seehofer D, Lehmann WD, Klingmuller U, Schilling M. Context‐specific flow through the MEK/ERK module produces cell‐ and ligand‐specific patterns of ERK single and double phosphorylation. Sci Signal 9: ra13, 2016.
 34.Jeffrey KL, Camps M, Rommel C, Mackay CR. Targeting dual‐specificity phosphatases: Manipulating MAP kinase signalling and immune responses. Nat Rev Drug Discov 6: 391‐403, 2007.
 35.Jeong DG, Cho YH, Yoon T‐S, Kim JH, Ryu SE, Kim SJ. Crystal structure of the catalytic domain of human DUSP5, a dual specificity MAP kinase protein phosphatase. Proteins 66: 253‐258, 2007.
 36.Jeong DG, Cho YH, Yoon T‐S, Kim JH, Son JH, Ryu SE, Kim SJ. Structure of human DSP18, a member of the dual‐specificity protein tyrosine phosphatase family. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr 62: 582‐588, 2006.
 37.Jeong DG, Jung S‐K, Yoon T‐S, Woo E‐J, Kim JH, Park BC, Ryu SE, Kim SJ. Crystal structure of the catalytic domain of human MKP‐2 reveals a 24‐mer assembly. Proteins 76: 763‐767, 2009.
 38.Jeong DG, Wei CH, Ku B, Jeon TJ, Chien PN, Kim JK, Park SY, Hwang HS, Ryu SY, Park H, Kim D‐S, Kim SJ, Ryu SE. The family‐wide structure and function of human dual‐specificity protein phosphatases. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr 70: 421‐435, 2014.
 39.Kesarwani M, Kincaid Z, Gomaa A, Huber E, Rohrabaugh S, Siddiqui Z, Bouso MF, Latif T, Xu M, Komurov K, Mulloy JC, Cancelas JA, Grimes HL, Azam M. Targeting c‐FOS and DUSP1 abrogates intrinsic resistance to tyrosine‐kinase inhibitor therapy in BCR‐ABL‐induced leukemia. Nat Med 23: 472‐482, 2017.
 40.Kidger AM, Keyse SM. The regulation of oncogenic Ras/ERK signalling by dual‐specificity mitogen activated protein kinase phosphatases (MKPs). Semin Cell Dev Biol 50: 125‐132, 2016.
 41.Kidger AM, Rushworth LK, Stellzig J, Davidson J, Bryant CJ, Bayley C, Caddye E, Rogers T, Keyse SM, Caunt CJ. Dual‐specificity phosphatase 5 controls the localized inhibition, propagation, and transforming potential of ERK signaling. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 114: E317‐E326, 2017.
 42.Kim HS, Fernandes G, Lee CW. Protein phosphatases involved in regulating mitosis: Facts and hypotheses. Mol Cells 39: 654‐662, 2016.
 43.Kim SJ, Jeong D‐G, Yoon T‐S, Son J‐H, Cho SK, Ryu SE, Kim J‐H. Crystal structure of human TMDP, a testis‐specific dual specificity protein phosphatase: Implications for substrate specificity. Proteins 66: 239‐245, 2007.
 44.Korotchenko VN, Saydmohammed M, Vollmer LL, Bakan A, Sheetz K, Debiec KT, Greene KA, Agliori CS, Bahar I, Day BW, Vogt A, Tsang M. In vivo structure‐activity relationship studies support allosteric targeting of a dual specificity phosphatase. Chembiochem 15: 1436‐1445, 2014.
 45.Krieger E, Darden T, Nabuurs SB, Finkelstein A, Vriend G. Making optimal use of empirical energy functions: Force‐field parameterization in crystal space. Proteins 57: 678‐683, 2004.
 46.Krieger E, Joo K, Lee J, Lee J, Raman S, Thompson J, Tyka M, Baker D, Karplus K. Improving physical realism, stereochemistry, and side‐chain accuracy in homology modeling: Four approaches that performed well in CASP8. Proteins 77: 114‐122, 2009.
 47.Krieger E, Koraimann G, Vriend G. Increasing the precision of comparative models with YASARA NOVA‐a self‐parameterizing force field. Proteins 47: 393‐402, 2002.
 48.Kucharska A, Rushworth LK, Staples C, Morrice NA, Keyse SM. Regulation of the inducible nuclear dual‐specificity phosphatase DUSP5 by ERK MAPK. Cell Signal 21: 1794‐1805, 2009.
 49.Kutty RG, Xin G, Schauder DM, Cossette SM, Bordas M, Cui W, Ramchandran R. Dual specificity phosphatase 5 is essential for T cell survival. PloS One 11: e0167246, 2016.
 50.Lee J, Hun Yun J, Lee J, Choi C, Hoon Kim J. Blockade of dual‐specificity phosphatase 28 decreases chemo‐resistance and migration in human pancreatic cancer cells. Sci Rep 5: 12296, 2015.
 51.Li B, Cociorva OM, Nomanbhoy T, Weissig H, Li Q, Nakamura K, Liyanage M, Zhang MC, Shih AY, Aban A, Hu Y, Cajica J, Pham L, Kozarich JW, Shreder KR. Hit‐to‐lead optimization and kinase selectivity of imidazo[1,2‐a]quinoxalin‐4‐amine derived JNK1 inhibitors. Bioorg Med Chem Lett 23: 5217‐5222, 2013.
 52.Lountos GT, Tropea JE, Cherry S, Waugh DS. Overproduction, purification and structure determination of human dual‐specificity phosphatase 14. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr 65: 1013‐1020, 2009.
 53.Lountos GT, Tropea JE, Waugh DS. Structure of human dual‐specificity phosphatase 27 at 2.38 Å resolution. Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr 67: 471‐479, 2011.
 54.Mandl M, Slack DN, Keyse SM. Specific inactivation and nuclear anchoring of extracellular signal‐regulated kinase 2 by the inducible dual‐specificity protein phosphatase DUSP5. Mol Cell Biol 25: 1830‐1845, 2005.
 55.Marchi M, D'Antoni A, Formentini I, Parra R, Brambilla R, Ratto GM, Costa M. The N‐terminal domain of ERK1 accounts for the functional differences with ERK2. PloS One 3: e3873, 2008.
 56.Mazzucchelli C, Vantaggiato C, Ciamei A, Fasano S, Pakhotin P, Krezel W, Welzl H, Wolfer DP, Pages G, Valverde O, Marowsky A, Porrazzo A, Orban PC, Maldonado R, Ehrengruber MU, Cestari V, Lipp HP, Chapman PF, Pouyssegur J, Brambilla R. Knockout of ERK1 MAP kinase enhances synaptic plasticity in the striatum and facilitates striatal‐mediated learning and memory. Neuron 34: 807‐820, 2002.
 57.Molina G, Vogt A, Bakan A, Dai W, de Oliveira PQ, Znosko W, Smithgall TE, Bahar I, Lazo JS, Day BW, Tsang M. Zebrafish chemical screening reveals an inhibitor of Dusp6 that expands cardiac cell lineages. Nat Chem Biol 5: 680‐687, 2009.
 58.Montero‐Conde C, Ruiz‐Llorente S, Dominguez JM, Knauf JA, Viale A, Sherman EJ, Ryder M, Ghossein RA, Rosen N, Fagin JA. Relief of feedback inhibition of HER3 transcription by RAF and MEK inhibitors attenuates their antitumor effects in BRAF‐mutant thyroid carcinomas. Cancer Discov 3: 520‐533, 2013.
 59.Moon S‐J, Lim M‐A, Park J‐S, Byun J‐K, Kim S‐M, Park M‐K, Kim E‐K, Moon Y‐M, Min J‐K, Ahn S‐M, Park S‐H, Cho M‐L. Dual‐specificity phosphatase 5 attenuates autoimmune arthritis in mice via reciprocal regulation of the Th17/Treg cell balance and inhibition of osteoclastogenesis. Arthritis Rheum 66: 3083‐3095, 2014.
 60.Nayak J, Gastonguay AJ, Talipov MR, Vakeel P, Span EA, Kalous KS, Kutty RG, Jensen DR, Pokkuluri PR, Sem DS, Rathore R, Ramchandran R. Protein expression, characterization and activity comparisons of wild type and mutant DUSP5 proteins. BMC Biochem 15: 27, 2014.
 61.Neumann TS, Span EA, Kalous KS, Bongard R, Gastonguay A, Lepley MA, Kutty RG, Nayak J, Bohl C, Lange RG, Sarker MI, Talipov MR, Rathore R, Ramchandran R, Sem DS. Identification of inhibitors that target dual‐specificity phosphatase 5 provide new insights into the binding requirements for the two phosphate pockets. BMC Biochem 16: 19, 2015.
 62.Pages G, Guerin S, Grall D, Bonino F, Smith A, Anjuere F, Auberger P, Pouyssegur J. Defective thymocyte maturation in p44 MAP kinase (Erk 1) knockout mice. Science 286: 1374‐1377, 1999.
 63.Patterson KI, Brummer T, O'Brien PM, Daly RJ. Dual‐specificity phosphatases: Critical regulators with diverse cellular targets. Biochem J 418: 475‐489, 2009.
 64.Patwardhan P, Miller WT. Processive phosphorylation: Mechanism and biological importance. Cell Signal 19: 2218‐2226, 2007.
 65.Pramanik K, Chun CZ, Garnaas MK, Samant GV, Li K, Horswill MA, North PE, Ramchandran R. Dusp‐5 and Snrk‐1 coordinately function during vascular development and disease. Blood 113: 1184‐1191, 2009.
 66.Pratilas CA, Taylor BS, Ye Q, Viale A, Sander C, Solit DB, Rosen N. (V600E)BRAF is associated with disabled feedback inhibition of RAF‐MEK signaling and elevated transcriptional output of the pathway. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 106: 4519‐4524, 2009.
 67.Raman M, Chen W, Cobb MH. Differential regulation and properties of MAPKs. Oncogene 26: 3100‐3112, 2007.
 68.Roskoski R. ERK1/2 MAP kinases: Structure, function, and regulation. Pharmacol Res 66: 105‐143, 2012.
 69.Rushworth LK, Kidger AM, Delavaine L, Stewart G, van Schelven S, Davidson J, Bryant CJ, Caddye E, East P, Caunt CJ, Keyse SM. Dual‐specificity phosphatase 5 regulates nuclear ERK activity and suppresses skin cancer by inhibiting mutant Harvey‐Ras (HRasQ61L)‐driven SerpinB2 expression. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 111: 18267‐18272, 2014.
 70.Saba‐El‐Leil MK, Vella FD, Vernay B, Voisin L, Chen L, Labrecque N, Ang SL, Meloche S. An essential function of the mitogen‐activated protein kinase Erk2 in mouse trophoblast development. EMBO Rep 4: 964‐968, 2003.
 71.Selcher JC, Nekrasova T, Paylor R, Landreth GE, Sweatt JD. Mice lacking the ERK1 isoform of MAP kinase are unimpaired in emotional learning. Learn Mem 8: 11‐19, 2001.
 72.Stewart AE, Dowd S, Keyse SM, McDonald NQ. Crystal structure of the MAPK phosphatase Pyst1 catalytic domain and implications for regulated activation. Nat Struct Biol 6: 174‐181, 1999.
 73.Sumanas S, Jorniak T, Lin S. Identification of novel vascular endothelial‐specific genes by the microarray analysis of the zebrafish cloche mutants. Blood 106: 534‐541, 2005.
 74.Talipov MR, Nayak J, Lepley M, Bongard RD, Sem DS, Ramchandran R, Rathore R. Critical role of the secondary binding pocket in modulating the enzymatic activity of DUSP5 toward phosphorylated ERKs. Biochemistry 55: 6187‐6195, 2016.
 75.Tao X, Tong L. Crystal structure of the MAP kinase binding domain and the catalytic domain of human MKP5. Protein Sci 16: 880‐886, 2007.
 76.Ubersax JA, Ferrell JE, Jr. Mechanisms of specificity in protein phosphorylation. Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol 8: 530‐541, 2007.
 77.Ueda K, Arakawa H, Nakamura Y. Dual‐specificity phosphatase 5 (DUSP5) as a direct transcriptional target of tumor suppressor p53. Oncogene 22: 5586‐5591, 2003.
 78.Wang Z, Canagarajah BJ, Boehm JC, Kassisà S, Cobb MH, Young PR, Abdel‐Meguid S, Adams JL, Goldsmith EJ. Structural basis of inhibitor selectivity in MAP kinases. Structure 6: 1117‐1128, 1998.
 79.Wei CH, Ryu SY, Jeon YH, Yoon MY, Jeong DG, Kim SJ, Ryu SE. Crystal structure of a novel mitogen‐activated protein kinase phosphatase, SKRP1. Proteins 79: 3242‐3246, 2011.
 80.Widmann C, Gibson S, Jarpe MB, Johnson GL. Mitogen‐activated protein kinase: Conservation of a three‐kinase module from yeast to human. Physiol Rev 79: 143‐180, 1999.
 81.Yokota T, Nara Y, Kashima A, Matsubara K, Misawa S, Kato R, Sugio S. Crystal structure of human dual specificity phosphatase, JNK stimulatory phosphatase‐1, at 1.5 A resolution. Proteins 66: 272‐278, 2007.
 82.Yoon T‐S, Jeong DG, Kim JH, Cho YH, Son JH, Lee JW, Ryu SE, Kim SJ. Crystal structure of the catalytic domain of human VHY, a dual‐specificity protein phosphatase. Proteins 61: 694‐697, 2005.
 83.Yun J, Rago C, Cheong I, Pagliarini R, Angenendt P, Rajagopalan H, Schmidt K, Willson JK, Markowitz S, Zhou S, Diaz LA, Jr., Velculescu VE, Lengauer C, Kinzler KW, Vogelstein B, Papadopoulos N. Glucose deprivation contributes to the development of KRAS pathway mutations in tumor cells. Science 325: 1555‐1559, 2009.
 84.Yuvaniyama J, Denu JM, Dixon JE, Saper MA. Crystal structure of the dual specificity protein phosphatase VHR. Science 272: 1328‐1331, 1996.

Teaching Material

R. G. Kutty, M. R. Talipov, R. D. Bongard, R. A. J. Lipinski, N. L. Sweeney, D. S. Sem, R. Rathore, R. Ramchandran. Dual Specificity Phosphatase 5-Substrate Interaction: A Mechanistic Perspective. Compr Physiol 7: 2017, 1449-1461. doi:10.1002/cphy.c170007

Didactic Synopsis

  1. Understanding the structural features in proteins is key to identifying strategies for pursuing them as drug targets. Dual specific phosphatase 5 (DUSP5) contains two binding pockets, both of which are responsible for interaction with phosphate residues in its substrate ERK. Entry of the threonine phosphate residue in ERK into the secondary pocket (secondary site) facilitates accessibility for the tyrosine phosphate residue in ERK to the primary pocket (active site) of DUSP5. This is dubbed the “lock-and-key,” mechanism with the “key” being entry of threonine phosphate residue into secondary pocket, which then “unlocks” the active site for the tyrosine phosphate binding.
  2. Phosphatases as drug targets are not developed to the same extent as their counterpart kinases. The structural similarities between all members of the DUSP family underscore this point. DUSP5 compared to other DUSPs shares unique structural features that help explain its specificity to substrate ERK. The unique mechanism described in teaching point 1 allows for specific targeting of the DUSP5:ERK interface.
  3. Numerous skillsets and tools are necessary for successful drug discovery projects. This includes skillsets from various scientific disciplines, including biochemistry, organic chemistry, and target biology. Tools include molecular dynamics simulation, molecular docking, enzymology, and organic synthesis. Complementary expertise across disciplines with expertise in specific tools is often necessary to solve complex problems in drug discovery.

Didactic Legends

The figures—in a freely downloadable PowerPoint format—can be found on the Images tab along with the formal legends published in the article. The following legends to the same figures are written to be useful for teaching.

Figure 1. Teaching points: The catalytic site is very highly conserved between DUSPs, both inside and outside of the binding pocket. This high degree of homology underscores the importance of the active site and suggests a common mechanism for dephosphorylation between DUSPs.

Figure 2. Teaching points: The aspartic acid residue (Asp232) of DUSP5 serves as both acid and base in the dephosphorylation of ERK by DUSP5. First, it serves as general acid and provides a proton to the leaving tyrosine/threonine. Second, it acts as a general base in the addition of the hydroxyl group from water to the phosphorylated cysteine.

Figure 3. Teaching points: DUSPs show very highly conserved sequence homology. However, this sequence homology does not always lend itself to similarity in tertiary structure. Specifically, the location of the critical aspartic acid residue discussed in Figure 2 is not spatially conserved. This residue may be near or far from the pocket, depending on the DUSP species in question. Additionally, there are several key unique features of DUSP5—presence of a disulfide bridge (pink ellipse), a secondary binding site (yellow ellipse), and a glutamic acid residue (green ellipse).

Figure 4. Teaching points: Full-length DUSP5 has not been crystalized and therefore, no full X-ray crystallographic structure is available. However, based on the high sequence homology between DUSP5 and other DUSPs it is possible to render a very close approximation of the structure of DUSP5. High confidence in these models is enforced through conservation comparisons (B). In this model, the most conserved residues of the ERK Binding Domain (EBD) should be on the face closest to the ERK molecule itself, which is the case. These models demonstrate the ability to infer structures of unsolved proteins through homology and molecular simulations with a high degree of confidence.

Figure 5. Teaching points: The mechanism of precatalysis arrangement of the DUSP5:ERK2 protein complex is a concerted, multistep process. A shows the domain version of the DUSP5 and ERK2 proteins while B shows the catalysis reaction in detail as it relates to active and secondary sites of phosphatase domain (PD) of DUSP5 with TEY motif of ERK2 protein. The steps in the reaction for panel A are: (1) The EBD interacts with the C-terminus of ERK, aligning the N-terminus of the DUSP5 linker (orange wavy line) to a groove in ERK (yellow region). (2) This alignment forces a zipper-like arrangement of the linker into the ERK groove. (3) The pT and pY residues (black dots on red interface) are brought into the proximity of the phosphatase domain. (4) The close proximity of the EBD and PD domain of DUSP5 enveloped around ppERK2 is shown. The steps in the reaction for panel B are: (1) The active site (yellow circle) and the secondary site (black circle) in the phosphatase domain of DUSP5 are depicted in the ribbon structure format, and are also shown in a simplified cartoon format. (2) The pT residue of ERK2 enters the secondary pocket first, interrupting the salt bridge (red vertical rectangles) formed between R269 and E264. (3) The pY residue of ERK2 is then able to enter the active site, forming the prereactive complex.


Related Articles:

Protein Kinases and Phosphatases in Cellular Signaling
Membrane Structure/Proteins
Membrane Proteins Structure and Dynamics by Nuclear Magnetic Resonance

Contact Editor

Submit a note to the editor about this article by filling in the form below.

* Required Field

Article Title: Dual Specificity Phosphatase 5‐Substrate Interaction: A Mechanistic Perspective
 

How to Cite

Raman G. Kutty, Marat R. Talipov, Robert D. Bongard, Rachel A. Jones Lipinski, Noreena L. Sweeney, Daniel S. Sem, Rajendra Rathore, Ramani Ramchandran. Dual Specificity Phosphatase 5‐Substrate Interaction: A Mechanistic Perspective. Compr Physiol 2017, 7: 1449-1461. doi: 10.1002/cphy.c170007