Published: Vol 6, Iss 20, Oct 20, 2016 DOI: 10.21769/BioProtoc.1968 Views: 9971
Reviewed by: HongLok LungHsin-Yi ChangAnonymous reviewer(s)
Protocol Collections
Comprehensive collections of detailed, peer-reviewed protocols focusing on specific topics
Related protocols
Use of Open Surface Plasmon Resonance (OpenSPR) to Characterize the Binding Affinity of Protein–Protein Interactions
Cassie Shu Zhu [...] Haichao Wang
Sep 5, 2023 1521 Views
Determination of Dissociation Constants for the Interaction of Myosin-5a with its Cargo Protein Using Microscale Thermophoresis (MST)
Rui Zhou [...] Xiang-Dong Li
Feb 5, 2025 615 Views
Cell-Sonar, an Easy and Low-cost Method to Track a Target Protein by Expression Changes of Specific Protein Markers
Sabrina Brockmöller [...] Simone Rothmiller
Feb 5, 2025 615 Views
Abstract
The migration of membrane receptors upon exposure to different stimulants/inhibitors is of great importance. Among others, the internalization of membrane receptors affects their accessibility to ligands and cell responsiveness to environmental cues. Experimentally, receptor internalization can be used as a measure of their activation. In our studies, we employed this approach to explore cross-talk between a seven transmembrane domain receptor for neuropeptide Y (NPY), Y5R, and a tyrosine kinase receptor for brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), TrkB. To this end, we measured the internalization of Y5R upon stimulation with the TrkB ligand, BDNF. Upon treatment with BDNF, the cells were exposed to a membrane impermeable, biotinylation reagent that selectively labels surface proteins. Subsequently, the biotinylated membrane proteins were affinity-purified on columns with avidin resins and analyzed by Western blot. Differences in the fraction of receptors present on the cell surface of control and ligand-treated cells served as a measure of their internalization and response to particular stimuli.
Keywords: Membrane receptorsBackground
Cell membrane receptor internalization in response to external stimuli can be measured using two major strategies – microscopic and biochemical. The most common approach is the use of microscopy – either in real-time or on fixed cells. In the first approach, the cells expressing receptors labelled with fluorescent tags (e.g., fused to the fluorescent proteins) are examined in live cells by time-lapse confocal microscopy. Alternatively, cells expressing fluorescently labeled receptors can be exposed to the desired stimuli and then fixed at a pre-defined time. Subsequently, sub-cellular localization of these receptors (i.e., membrane vs. intracellular fraction) is examined by fluorescence microscopy and compared with the untreated control. The advantage of time-lapse microscopy is the ability to examine the same cells at different time points and directly assess changes in the receptor distribution upon stimulation (Czarnecka et al., 2015). However, since this assessment has to be performed under high magnification, the number of cells that can be analyzed is limited and the response is not always uniform among the cells. On the other hand, fixing the cells upon stimulation allows for examining a larger cell population and for analysis of the native, not-labeled receptors, if combined with fluorescently labeled ligands or immunocytochemistry (Bohme et al., 2008; Fabry et al., 2000). However, in this case, the analysis of the receptor sub-cellular localization is usually qualitative and the time of exposure may not be optimal, as the changes are not examined in real time.
The biochemical approach takes advantage of cell-impermeable biotinylation reagents that selectively cross-link extracellular domains of cell surface receptors. The biotin-labeled cell membrane proteins are then affinity-purified and the receptor of interest can be selectively detected by Western blot (Czarnecka et al., 2015). This approach allows for quantitative analysis of the cells as a whole population and does not require fusion with a fluorescent protein that may potentially change the behavior of the tested receptors. However, as with microscopic analysis of fixed cells upon treatment, the time of exposure to the ligand remains to be determined. Therefore, in our study, we combined time-lapse confocal microscopy, which allowed us to perform the initial assessment of the internalization rate and determine the time of ligand exposure allowing for detecting maximal changes in receptor sub-cellular localization, and the subsequent selective isolation of cell surface receptors at this time point to achieve quantitative results and confirm microscopic observations (Czarnecka et al., 2015). This strategy was successful in demonstrating neuropeptide Y (NPY) Y5R receptor internalization upon stimulation with non-cognate ligand, brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), and therefore proving the interactions between NPY and BDNF systems.
Materials and Reagents
Equipment
Procedure
Data analysis
In the procedure of cell surface protein extraction, cells are exposed to a membrane impermeable, biotinylation reagent. Subsequently, cells are lysed, and the crosslinked membrane proteins are affinity-purified on columns with avidin resins. Kit functionality was validated by the manufacturer, based on the lack of representative intracellular proteins (Heat shock protein 90, Hsp90; calnexin) in the eluates analyzed by Western blot. Our experiments confirmed this observation. While extracellular membrane proteins, such as Y5R, were readily detectable in both lysate and eluate fractions, the eluates were markedly depleted in intracellular proteins, such as cytoplasmic p42/44 mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) and a mitochondrial marker, apoptosis-inducing factor (AIF) (Figure 2). Of note, based on our protocol, the eluates are 5 fold concentrated by volume, as compared to the lysates.
Figure 2. Cell surface protein preparation is depleted in intracellular proteins. A cell membrane protein, Y5 receptor (Y5R), is readily detectable in the original lysates and eluates containing cell surface proteins, while the latter fraction is depleted in cytoplasmic p42/44 mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) and mitochondrial apoptosis-inducing factor (AIF). The proteins loaded on the gel correspond to 0.04 and 0.2 of the original lysate volume for the lysate and eluate fraction, respectively, indicating that the eluate fraction is 5 times concentrated.
We used the above procedure to provide evidence for cross-talk between NPY receptor Y5R and BDNF receptor, TrkB. To this end, SHSY5Y neuroblastoma cells stably transfected with TrkB receptor were treated with NPY or BDNF for 8 min (Czarnecka et al., 2015; Ho et al., 2002). The time of stimulation and ligand concentrations were selected based on previous time-lapse microscopy experiments (Czarnecka et al., 2015). Upon ligand treatment, the surface proteins were labelled, immunoprecipitated and analyzed by Western blot for Y5R. As shown in Figure 3, NPY stimulation resulted in a modest decrease in the surface fraction of Y5R, while BDNF treatment triggered more profound Y5R internalization. These data were in agreement with the results of parallel experiment in which receptor internalization was monitored by time-lapse microscopy (Czarnecka et al., 2015).
Figure 3. Representative results of the surface protein immunoprecipitation experiment. A. Y5 receptor (Y5R) cell membrane expression in SY5Y/TrkB transfectants. Under control conditions Y5R was present on the cell membrane and the addition of NPY, as well as BDNF decreased the cell membrane pool of Y5R. B. The total Y5R levels do not differ in cell lysates, confirming equal protein input.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by National Institutes of Health (NIH) grants: 1RO1CA123211, 1R03CA178809, R01CA197964 and 1R21CA198698 to JK. The protocol adapted from Czarnecka et al. (2015).
References
Article Information
Copyright
© 2016 The Authors; exclusive licensee Bio-protocol LLC.
How to cite
Czarnecka, M. and Kitlinska, J. (2016). Cell Surface Protein Detection to Assess Receptor Internalization. Bio-protocol 6(20): e1968. DOI: 10.21769/BioProtoc.1968.
Category
Cancer Biology > General technique > Biochemical assays
Biochemistry > Protein > Interaction
Do you have any questions about this protocol?
Post your question to gather feedback from the community. We will also invite the authors of this article to respond.
Tips for asking effective questions
+ Description
Write a detailed description. Include all information that will help others answer your question including experimental processes, conditions, and relevant images.
Share
Bluesky
X
Copy link