text:
About EC
Nucleus-Specific Importin Alpha Proteins and Nucleoporins Regulate Protein Import and Nuclear Division in the Binucleate Tetrahymena thermophila
Colin D. Malone, Katarzyna A. Falkowska, Alanna Y. Li, Sarah E. Galanti, Reshi C. Kanuru, Elizabeth G. LaMont, Kate C. Mazzarella, Alan J. Micev, Morwan M. Osman, Nicholas K. Piotrowski, Jason W. Suszko, Adam C. Timm, Ming-Ming Xu, Lucy Liu, Douglas L. Chalker
Colin D. Malone
Biology Department, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri 63130
Katarzyna A. Falkowska
Alanna Y. Li
Sarah E. Galanti
Reshi C. Kanuru
Elizabeth G. LaMont
Kate C. Mazzarella
Alan J. Micev
Morwan M. Osman
Nicholas K. Piotrowski
Jason W. Suszko
Adam C. Timm
Ming-Ming Xu
Douglas L. Chalker
For correspondence: dchalker@biology2.wustl.edu
DOI: 10.1128/EC.00193-08
The ciliate Tetrahymena thermophila, having both germ line micronuclei and somatic macronuclei, must possess a specialized nucleocytoplasmic transport system to import proteins into the correct nucleus. To understand how Tetrahymena can target proteins to distinct nuclei, we first characterized FG repeat-containing nucleoporins and found that micro- and macronuclei utilize unique subsets of these proteins. This finding implicates these proteins in the differential permeability of the two nuclei and implies that nuclear pores with discrete specificities are assembled within a single cell. To identify the import machineries that interact with these different pores, we characterized the large families of karyopherin homologs encoded within the genome. Localization studies of 13 putative importin (imp) α- and 11 imp β-like proteins revealed that imp α-like proteins are nucleus specific—nine localized to the germ line micronucleus—but that most imp β-like proteins localized to both types of nuclei. These data suggest that micronucleus-specific proteins are transported by specific imp α adapters. The different imp α proteins exhibit substantial sequence divergence and do not appear to be simply redundant in function. Disruption of the IMA10 gene encoding an imp α-like protein that accumulates in dividing micronuclei results in nuclear division defects and lethality. Thus, nucleus-specific protein import and nuclear function in Tetrahymena are regulated by diverse, specialized karyopherins.
The regulated transport of macromolecules into and out of the nucleus controls many cellular processes. The import of proteins containing nuclear localization signals (NLSs) is facilitated by karyopherin proteins, also known as importins. Karyopherins shuttle their NLS-containing cargo through nuclear pore complexes (NPCs), protein channels that permeate the nuclear membrane. Two classes of karyopherins, imp α and β proteins, collaborate to orchestrate specific nucleocytoplasmic trafficking (reviewed in reference 13). To transport proteins containing a classical NLS (cNLS), imp α binds to the cargo's cNLS and associates with imp β in a ternary complex that docks at an NPC (reviewed in reference 23). The karyopherin-cargo complex is directed through the NPC, primarily through interactions of imp β with NPC proteins (6, 7, 26). Nuclear proteins may, alternatively, contain nonclassical NLSs that mediate direct association with imp β proteins without the imp α adapter.
Eukaryotic cells typically encode multiple karyopherins. In yeast and humans, which contain at least 14 and 20 karyopherins, respectively, most are members of the imp β family. Yeast encodes just one imp α, whereas humans possess three distinct classes (reviewed in reference 23). The imp α proteins have a characteristic structure consisting of an amino (N)-terminal imp β-binding (IBB) domain of ∼100 amino acids (aa) that is followed by 8 to 10 alpha-helical armadillo (ARM) repeats that span most of the remainder of the protein. The ARM repeats are responsible for recognition of the cNLS of cargo (11, 12, 30). The IBB and ARM domains interact to regulate imp α-directed import (30).
Imp β proteins also have a highly repetitive structure. After a short, conserved N-terminal domain, most of the coding sequence consists of up to 20 tandem repeats of the HEAT motif (3). The HEAT and ARM repeats of imp β and α are structurally related motifs (4, 37). HEAT repeats mediate a number of interactions that are critical for the regulation of nuclear import. This domain binds the imp α cNLS adapter, as well as the import regulator Ran, and also mediates interaction with the NPC during transport.
The interactions of imp β with nuclear pore proteins, called nucleoporins (Nups), permit this karyopherin to traverse the NPC. The NPC is a 44- to 60-MDa structure that is composed of ∼30 Nups (14, 42). Nearly one-third of the NPC proteins contain variable numbers of hydrophobic phenylalanine-glycine (FG) repeats. Several variants of this repeated motif are found within these FG Nups, including FxFG and GLFG. The FG Nups perform essential functions but individually are somewhat redundant (45). FG Nups are primary components of the central channel and are thought to form the permeability barrier of the NPC by limiting access of the narrow channel in an NPC (17, 18). The ability of karyopherins to bind the FG domains appears to facilitate their transport with their cargo through the NPC (reviewed in reference 46).
Ciliated protozoans such as Tetrahymena thermophila have an added challenge for specific nuclear import. These unicellular eukaryotes contain two separate and functionally distinct nuclei in a common cytoplasm (28). The macronucleus contains the somatic genome and is the site of all gene transcription during vegetative growth, while the smaller micronucleus harbors a silent germ line that is passed on to future generations upon conjugation. These two nuclei not only differ in their transcriptional activities and DNA content (the macronucleus is polyploid, the micronucleus diploid) but also replicate their DNA and divide asynchronously. These differences set up the need for regulated distribution of proteins to distinct nuclei. This need is best documented for specific histones. For example, transcription-associated histone variants hv1 and hv2, the Tetrahymena equivalents of H2AZ and H3.3, respectively, are exclusively found in the somatic macronucleus (1, 2, 48). Furthermore, macro- and micronuclei utilize distinct linker histones (2, 51). Differential nuclear targeting of proteins, beyond the histones, is surely important for the different roles these nuclei play.
To understand how nucleus-specific protein import is achieved in Tetrahymena, we have examined the localization of 24 putative karyopherins (13 encoded by imp α-like genes that were initially designated IMA1 to -13 and 11 encoded by imp β-like genes, IMB1 to -11). This analysis revealed that while most of the imp α-like family members were specific for one of the two nuclei, the imp β-like proteins primarily localized to both. Nevertheless, a single imp α protein (Ima10) was found to be essential; thus, these proteins have nonredundant functions. Furthermore, by localizing putative Tetrahymena FG Nups, we found that the NPCs of the micronucleus and macronucleus are assembled with distinct components, which is further evidence that FG repeats define NPC permeability.
Strains and growth conditions.Tetrahymena cells were cultured at 30°C in SPP or Neff's medium as previously described (5, 24). Cells were starved and mated at 30°C in 10 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.5. Inbred laboratory strains CU427 [chx1-1/chx1-1 (VI, cy-s)], CU428 [mpr1-1/mpr1-1 (VII, mp-s)], and B2086 (II) were used for all transformation and green fluorescent protein (GFP) and yellow fluorescent protein (YFP) fusion localization studies. Micronucleus-defective "star" strains B*(VI) and B*(VII) were used to make IMA10 knockout (KO) heterokaryon strains. Strains are available from the National Tetrahymena Stock Center.
Identification of putative IMA, IMB, and NUP genes.IMA-encoded candidate proteins were identified by BLASTP searches of the Tetrahymena Genome Database (TGD) (http://seq.ciliate.org/cgi-bin/blast-tgd.pl) against The Institute for Genome Resources (TIGR) gene predictions (preliminary gene predictions, August 2004). The protein sequences used in queries were as follows: (i) for imp α, Saccharomyces cerevisiae SRP1 (GenBank accession gi1302179), Drosophila melanogaster Kap-α3 (CG9423-PA) (gi24645425), and Homo sapiens karyopherin α1 (gi88758611); (ii) for imp β, S. cerevisiae Kap95 (gi6323379), H. sapiens imp 7 (gi5453998), Mus musculus RanBP5 (gi45476916), and Caenorhabditis elegans Imb-2 (gi17535481) and Imb-4 (gi25149807); (iii) for FG Nups, S. cerevisiae Nup49 (gi400618), Nup100 (gi400320), Nup116 (gi1346645), and Nup145 (gi1346647). For most gene candidates, the TGD-predicted coding sequence was used to design subsequent functional studies.
Conserved protein domains were identified by combining information from both the Pfam (http://www.sanger.ac.uk/Software/Pfam/) (16) and SMART (http://smart.embl-heidelberg.de/) (35) databases. Protein structural analyses were also performed with the SWISS-MODEL (http://swissmodel.expasy.org/) (31, 32) and PROMALS3D (http://prodata.swmed.edu/promals3d/promals3d.php) (40, 41) tools. For the original TGD gene prediction numbers, TIGR locus designations, GenBank accession numbers, and scaffold positions, see Table S1 in the supplemental material.
Generation of GFP fusion constructs.The IMA10 coding sequence was PCR amplified from Tetrahymena genomic DNA, adding XhoI and ApaI restriction sites immediately upstream and downstream of the start and stop codons, and cloned downstream of GFP into vector pIGF-1 (38). To expedite the creation of other GFP fusion constructs, a Gateway recombination cassette (Invitrogen) from pEARLYGATE104 (15) was cloned downstream of the GFP coding sequence in pIGF-1 (52). Similarly, the Gateway cassette-YFP fusion from pEarlyGate101 was cloned downstream of the MTT1 promoter to generate ribosomal DNA-based expression vector pICY-gtw.
For the oligonucleotide primers used to amplify the coding regions of the IMA, IMB, and NUP genes from CU428 genomic DNA, see Table S2 in the supplemental material. The upstream primers began with 5′CACC before the ATG to guide directional cloning into pENTR/D via directional TOPO cloning (Invitrogen). For some genes, an additional 5′CTCGAG sequence was added between this 5′CACC sequence and the start codon, and the sequence 5′CCCGGG was added after the stop codon during amplification. After verification of the sequence of each clone, the gene was exchanged with the Gateway cassette in pIGF-GTW (IMA and IMB) or pICY-GTW (NUP) by mixing 100 to 200 ng of a pENTR-IMA/IMB/NUP entry clone with ∼400 ng of the destination vector and LR Clonase II (Invitrogen) for 16 to 24 h at 25°C. After proteinase K digestion, recombination reactions were transformed into chemically or electrocompetent TOP10 Escherichia coli (Invitrogen).
Generation of IMA chimeric constructs.An XhoI site (underlined) was introduced within the coding regions of IMA1 and IMA10 by inverse PCR of pENTR-IMA1 and -IMA10 with the following primer pairs: IMA1, 5′-ATACTCGAGGATTCTCCTCCCATTTAAATTGCC-3′ and 5′-ATACTCGAGAATAGAAAGCAACTTTCTAAGACC-3′; IMA10, 5′-ATACTCGAGTAATAATCAGCTTCTGTTATCACA-3′ and 5′-ATACTCGAGAAAACTAAACTAACGCAAATGGTT-3′. The first 124 aa of IMA1 and 132 aa of IMA10 were then exchanged by digesting the resulting plasmids with XhoI and NotI (a site within pENTR-D) and ligating the appropriate isolated DNA fragments.
After verification of chimeric clones by sequence analysis, the hybrid pENTR clones were recombined with pIGF-gtw as described above. Entry clones containing only the amino-terminal region or the carboxy-terminal region of either IMA1 or IMA10 were recombined into pICY-gtw or pIGF-gtw, respectively.
Localization of GFP fusion proteins.GFP and YFP fusions were transformed into Tetrahymena sp. strains CU427 and CU428 by conjugative electroporation (19, 20). Transformants were selected by growth in medium containing 100 μg/ml paromomycin sulfate (Sigma, St. Louis, MO). Fusion protein expression was induced for 1 to 20 h by adding CdCl2 (1 μg/ml) to cultures of log-phase transformants. For conjugative localization, transformed lines were starved in 10 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, containing 0.05 μg/ml CdCl2 for 14 to 20 h. Cells were mixed with equal numbers of starved CU428 or CU427 cells to initiate conjugation, and the concentration of CdCl2 was increased to 0.08 to 0.1 μg/ml. To visualize GFP fluorescence, 0.5 to 1 ml of cells was concentrated by centrifugation at 1,000 × g for 2 to 3 min; 4′,6′-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI; 1 to 5 μg/ml) was added to visualize DNA. Cells were mixed with 5 μl of 2% methylcellulose on glass slides and immobilized under coverslips. Epifluorescence microscopy was performed on a Nikon E600 upright microscope equipped with a 60× Plan Apo lens (numerical aperture, 1.4), and images were acquired with a Qimaging RetigaEX charge-coupled device camera (Burnaby, British Columbia, Canada) and Openlab software v4.0.2 to v4.0.4 (Improvision).
Disruption of IMA10 and phenotypic analysis.The NEO3 selection cassette (44), which confers resistance to paromomycin, was cloned in place of IMA10 coding sequence such that targeting this construct via homologous recombination to the IMA10 locus would remove the first 323 of 520 coding aa of the predicted protein. The cloned upstream IMA10 sequence spanned nucleotides 475449 to 476464 of scaffold CH445689 (gi62422257), and the downstream region spanned nucleotides 477754 to 478731 (see Table S1 in the supplemental material). ApaI and XhoI restriction sites were added to the upstream fragment, and BamHI and NotI sites were added to the downstream fragment to assist cloning into sites flanking NEO3 in pMNBL with the following primers: Upstream, 5′-ATAGGGCCCTTCTCATTCTTACTAATCTA-3′ and 5′-ATACTCGAGCTCCTTATATACCCGCGTAA-3′; Downstream, 5′-ATAGGATCCTAATATATTAGTTATGTG-3′ and 5′-ATAGAGCTCCTATTTATTGTACATTTCTT-3′. The resulting IMA10 KO cassette, linearized with ApaI and NotI, was introduced into mating CU428 and B2086 cells between 2 and 3 h postmixing with a PDS-1000/He particle bombardment system (Bio-Rad) as previously described (8, 9). Treatment and selection of cells postbombardment, assessment of germ line disruption, and genomic exclusion crosses with B*(VI) and B*(VII) strains to generate homozygous heterokaryon lines were all performed as previously described (38). The ratio of the KO to wild-type alleles remaining in polyploid macronuclei was assessed by PCR of crude cell extracts (10) with the following primers: neo3-3351, 5′-TCGCCTTCTTGACGAGTTCT-3′; IMP_DN, 5′-ATATGAAACTCCATATTGGCAAGCA-3′; IMP_WT, 5′-ATAAGCAGAAAAGTAAGTAATGCAAAAT-3′.
To generate strains lacking all wild-type IMA10 genes, two mating-compatible IMA10 KO heterokaryons were crossed and individual mating pairs were isolated in growth medium to assess viability, counting live and dead cells >48 h after the start of mating. Cells derived from representative cultures were fixed in 70% ethanol and stained with DAPI to visualize nuclear morphologies.
Reverse transcription-PCR analysis.Total RNA was isolated from growing, starved, and conjugating CU428 and B2086 cells, and reverse transcription-PCR was performed as described previously (38). Amplification was performed on cDNA from 200 ng of total RNA for 28 to 32 PCR cycles at 72°C for 50 s after 30-s denaturation and annealing steps at 94°C and 55°C, respectively. Oligonucleotide primers amplified products from IMA and IMB coding regions that ranged in size from 200 to 400 bp (see Table S3 in the supplemental material). Amplification of α-tubulin (ATU1) confirmed cDNA conversion.
FG repeat-containing Nups differentiate NPCs of micro- and macronuclei.Tetrahymena cells direct many proteins to either the micro- or macronucleus, which suggested to us that the NPCs of these nuclei are different. We searched the Tetrahymena genome for homologues of S. cerevisiae Nups (43, 49) and then further examined the FG Nups. We reasoned that this class of Nups, many of which line the central channel and contribute to NPC selectivity, may differentiate the NPCs of these nuclei. Tetrahymena encodes at least five FG repeat proteins, which we named Nup1 to -5 (see Table S1 in the supplemental material), that vary in predicted size from 405 to 2,017 aa. As C-terminal fusions to yeast Nups have been shown to functionally assemble into the NPC (42), we generated C-terminal fusions of three of these FG Nups (NUP1, -3, and -4) to YFP and examined their localization (Fig. 1). The fusion constructs were maintained in Tetrahymena cells on a ribosomal DNA minichromosome ectopically expressed from the cadmium-inducible MTT1 promoter.
FG Nups distinguish micro- and macronuclear NPCs. Tetrahymena FG repeat-containing Nups are diagramed above images of cells expressing the corresponding Nup-YFP fusion. Each panel of a series shows the same cell visualized by differential interference contrast (DIC) light microscopy, DNA stained with DAPI, and YFP fluorescence. Micronuclei are identified by white arrowheads. The position and type of FG repeats are identified as follows: a = GGLFGG, b = GLFG, c = SLFG; d = FG. Asparagine-, glycine-, and glutamine-rich regions are denoted by boxes with the percentages of those amino acids indicated.
Nup1 is encoded by the smallest open reading frame of the putative FG Nups identified and contains two strings of three and four mixed GLFG and SLFG repeats. Nup1-YFP localized brightly to both micro- and macronuclei (Fig. 1). The fusion protein accumulated to very high levels in the nucleoplasm of the macronucleus, which hampered our ability to visualize any association with the macronuclear membrane and limited the evidence that Nup1 encodes a bona-fide Nup. FG Nups have been showed to localize to both the outer and inner faces of NPCs, in addition to lining the central channel (42). Thus, if would not be surprising that, if we were overexpressing Nup1-YFP, excess protein may have accumulated in the nucleoplasm. Compellingly, Nup1-YFP localized to the micronuclear periphery, consistent with assembly into NPCs.
Nup3 contains a string of 10 repeating GLFG motifs, followed by a single FG at intervals of roughly 15 aa. Nup3-YFP localized strongly to the periphery of the macronucleus, with relatively minimal accumulation in the nucleoplasm (Fig. 1). Although we expressed Nup3 and Nup1 fusion proteins from the same vector system, the amount of total protein accumulation was specific for each fusion. We detected no association with micronuclei. Localization appears somewhat "patchy" on the macronuclear membrane, which could be indicative of regions with higher or lower densities of NPCs in the focal plane of the image.
Nup4 consists of a 349-aa N-terminal region that is composed of 43.8% asparagine residues and a conserved Nup2 domain (Pfam) at its C terminus. While this protein is clearly homologous to Nup98/Nup100, it only contains three FG repeat sequences. In striking contrast to Nup3-YFP, Nup4-YFP localized to the periphery of the micronucleus and was excluded from the macronucleus (Fig. 1). Taken together, these Nup localization studies revealed that the NPCs of these functionally distinct nuclei have unique components. Furthermore, differential localization of the FG Nups implies that specific nuclear transport receptors may exist to target proteins to individual nuclei.
IMA10 encodes a micronucleus-specific imp α-like protein.We suspected that particular Tetrahymena karyopherins may have specificity for individual nuclei, as we previously identified a GFP-cDNA fusion protein that localized only to micronuclei and encoded an imp α-like protein named Ima10 (52). To verify its nuclear specificity, we GFP tagged the entire IMA10 coding region and examined its localization (Fig. 2). Rapidly upon induction, the GFP-Ima10 fusion protein accumulated to high levels in the cytoplasm. Ima10p was excluded from the macronucleus but localized to the periphery of the micronucleus (Fig. 2A). This is in striking contrast to GFP expressed alone, which accumulates throughout the cytoplasm and the macronucleus but is excluded from the micronucleus (Fig. 2A). This suggests that micronuclear import is very selective while macronuclei are somewhat permeable to macromolecules at least as large as GFP, ∼28 kDa.
Ima10 localizes specifically to mitotic micronuclei. The localization of GFP-Ima10 was visualized in live cells. (A) Representative images show GFP alone (top panels) or the Ima10 fusion protein with the corresponding differential interference contrast (DIC) and DAPI-stained images of each cell. (B, C) Cells expressing GFP-Ima10 (green) entering mitosis counterstained with DAPI (blue). Micronuclei are denoted by arrowheads. Note that the cell expressing GFP alone contains two micronuclei, an atypical state often observed after conjugative electroporation. Vegetative cells can semistably propagate the second micronucleus. DAPI accumulation can also be observed within vacuoles.
Ima10 localization changed during the cell cycle. Before cells entered mitosis, this protein was primarily cytoplasmic (data not shown), but as micronuclei began to divide, it localized within micronuclei. Tetrahymena undergoes closed mitosis, and the Ima10 protein accumulated near the nuclear membrane and in the nucleoplasm (Fig. 2B and C), which is consistent with a putative role in transporting cargo into micronuclei. Even as GFP-Ima10 accumulated in dividing micronuclei, cytoplasmic GFP-Ima10 remained abundant in cells. This likely is due to initial overexpression from the strong MTT1 promoter, as some cells with high levels of GFP-Ima10 showed defects in micronuclear division (see Fig. S1 in the supplemental material). This phenotype does not appear to be caused by the GFP tag, as the fusion protein can rescue a KO of IMA10 (described below). This overexpression phenotype provided the first clue that Ima10 is critical for micronuclear function.
IMA10 localizes preferentially to dividing micronuclei.The accumulation of GFP-Ima10 in mitotic micronuclei suggested that this protein contributes to the temporal regulation of micronuclear division. If this is so, then Ima10 should be enriched in meiotic, as well as mitotic, nuclei. Tetrahymena synchronously undergoes meiosis upon mixing prestarved populations of complementary mating types, initiating conjugation. Typically, mating cells will enter meiosis within 2 h of pairing. IMA10 transcription is upregulated during this meiosis (see Fig. S2 in the supplemental material), indicating that this protein acts during these events. To explore the connection between IMA10 expression and meiotic divisions, we examined the localization of the Ima10 protein during conjugation (Fig. 3).
Ima10 localizes to diving micronuclei during conjugation. Conjugating cells expressing GFP-Ima10 were examined throughout development, and representative images at specific stages shown are as follows: i, cell pairing (premeiosis); ii to iv, meiosis I; v and vi, postmeiosis, nuclear exchange; vii, first postzygotic division; viii to x, second postzygotic division; xi, macronuclear differentiation. (For a schematic time line of conjugation events, see Fig. S2 in the supplemental material.) White arrows indicate micronuclear membrane fragments that retain GFP-Ima10 after nuclear division. DIC, differential interference contrast.
Enrichment of GFP-Ima10 to micronuclei was apparent at the beginning of conjugation (Fig. 3i; see Fig. S2 in the supplemental material for a developmental time line). The protein was highly enriched on and within micronuclei as they completed the first meiotic division (Fig. 3ii to iv). In addition to the meiotic divisions that occur during conjugation, the selected postmeiotic micronucleus in each conjugating cell undergoes one prezygotic mitosis and, after karyogamy to form the zygotic nucleus, two additional nuclear divisions. GFP-Ima10 remained localized to micronuclei through the completion of all postmeiotic mitoses (Fig. 3v and xi). After meiosis and the prezygotic division of selected micronuclei, it appeared to localize preferentially to the gametic nuclei that are exchanged between partners (Fig. 3v and vi). After gametic nuclei fuse in each partner, Ima10 was evenly distributed to the micronuclei through the first postzygotic division (Fig. 3vii) until after the second postzygotic division, when Ima10 was observed to be either enriched on the more posteriorly positioned nuclei that will remain micronuclei (Fig. 3viii) or was present at equally low levels on both the precursors of the new micro- and macronuclei (Fig. 3ix).
After this last division preceding nuclear differentiation, Ima10 showed mostly cytoplasmic localization, with little association with any nuclei. In some cells, we observed localization to extranuclear membrane fragments that appear to be the by-products of the closed mitoses (white arrows in Fig. 3ix and x). This raises the possibility that the nuclear membrane is remodeled during this last nuclear division in such a way as to lose micronucleus-type NPCs on the precursors of the new macronuclei that allows for incorporation of macronucleus-specific NPCs. We observed similar membrane fragments after other divisions as well (e.g., Fig. 3iv). The rapid switch between NPCs with different specificities during nuclear differentiation warrants further investigation. Nevertheless, the strong localization of Ima10 primarily to meiotic and mitotic nuclei during these developmental stages indicates that this protein likely participates in the import of cargo important for micronuclear division. Alternatively, Ima10p may regulate the assembly of the mitotic spindle, as has been observed for karyopherins in other systems (22, 25, 34, 36).
IMA10 is essential for micronuclear division.In addition to its localization to dividing micronuclei, we observed that cells overexpressing GFP-Ima10 exhibited a delay or failure of micronuclear mitosis (see Fig. S1 in the supplemental material). In the most severe examples, we observed cells that had completed macronuclear division and were undergoing cytokinesis but had undivided micronuclei (in wild-type cells, micronuclear mitosis precedes macronuclear division). This seemed to indicate that precise regulation of micronuclear protein import or other Ima10p function is critical for coordinating division. To examine the possibility that this imp α-like protein is actually required for nuclear division, we disrupted the IMA10 gene by utilizing homologous recombination to replace its coding region with the NEO3 selection cassette (44) (Fig. 4A). Initially, we disrupted the IMA10 gene copies within the somatic macronucleus but were unable to drive the complete replacement of all ∼45 wild-type macronuclear copies with the KO cassette by growth under increasingly stringent drug selection, which indicates that Ima10 is essential for vegetative growth. To further study the IMA10 KO (ΔIMA10) phenotype, we disrupted IMA10 in the germ line. This was achieved by introducing the IMA10 KO construct into cells during meiosis. The resulting germ line transformants had one of their two micronuclear IMA10 copies disrupted (i.e., IMA10/ΔIMA10 germ line heterozygotes) and a mixture of wild-type and mutant alleles in the newly formed macronuclei. We then crossed these strains to generate complete IMA10 KO lines as their progeny had all gene copies derived from their micronuclei (Fig. 4).
IMA10 is required for micronuclear division. (A) The genomic region of IMA10 is displayed with a double line indicating the coding region of IMA10. Stop or start codons of predicted neighboring genes are indicated. Below is depicted the IMA10 KO construct in which the first 323 (of 520) aa, including the 5′ untranslated region and two of the three ARM repeats (round-edged rectangles), are replaced with the NEO3 cassette. IMA10 was disrupted with this construct via homologous recombination to generate ΔIMA10 cell lines. (B) Strains wild type in their macronuclei but containing ΔIMA10 alleles in their micronuclei were crossed, and the fate of the resulting ΔIMA10 progeny was monitored. Each mating pair produced 45 ± 8 progeny cells, which corresponds to three to four postconjugative divisions before cell death. (C) ΔIMA10 progeny cells fixed and stained with DAPI to visualize nuclear morphologies. White arrows denote lagging chromosomes or abnormal micronuclei. AA, amino acids.
To investigate the ΔIMA10 phenotype, we first crossed two lines, each heterozygous in their micronuclei for the disrupted allele (ΔIMA10), and distributed 44 mating pairs into individual drops of culture medium. Meiosis and the subsequent exchange of haploid gametic nuclei result in zygotic nuclei that have the same genetic content in both cells of a mating pair. Thus, all progeny of a single pair will emerge with identical genotypes. One-quarter (11) of the mating pairs produced no viable progeny, exactly the expected number of homozygous ΔIMA10 cells, further indicating that IMA10 is an essential gene. Genotype analysis of the 33 viable progeny showed that none were homozygous for the ΔIMA10 allele, while 9 were homozygous for the wild-type IMA10 gene and 24 were heterozygous, having one wild-type and one mutant allele (data not shown). Thus, IMA10 is an essential gene.
To examine the lethality associated with loss of Ima10 function, we generated heterokaryon strains of complementary mating types that were wild type for IMA10 in their macronuclei but homozygous for the ΔIMA10 allele in their micronuclei. All progeny resulting from crossing these strains are devoid of the IMA10 gene, allowing visualization of the phenotypes as cells deplete the parental load of Ima10. All mating pairs from these crosses produced inviable offspring. We could rescue the progeny of these ΔIMA10 heterokaryon crosses by introducing our IMA10-GFP fusion construct during conjugation, which showed that the lethality is due to loss of IMA10 and that our GFP fusion protein used for localization studies is functional.
One day after cells completed conjugation, most of the cells appeared healthy, but by the second day, most of the cells had stopped dividing and had become rounded and heterogeneous in size. On average, each mating pair produced 45 ± 8 cells. In other words, each ΔIMA10 progeny cell could undergo three to four cell divisions after the first caryonidal division that occurs upon exit of conjugation. We fixed cells 24 to 48 h after the completion of conjugation and stained DNA with DAPI to examine the state of the nuclei in the dying progeny. We observed a number of nuclear division defects, including lagging micronuclear chromosomes (Fig, 4C, left), loss of micronuclear DNA content (Fig. 4C, center), asymmetric division of macronuclei or micronuclei (Fig. 4C, center and right, respectively), and abnormal nuclear numbers (Fig. 4C, right). Thus, in addition to aberrant micronuclear divisions, as one would predict for an essential micronucleus-specific imp α protein, we observed macronuclear division defects as well. These macronuclear abnormalities may be caused by secondary alterations of the cell cycle associated with defective micronuclear division.
Tetrahymena imp α-like proteins are targeted to specific nuclei.GFP-Ima10 localization to micronuclei suggested that the Tetrahymena genome should encode a macronucleus-specific imp α-like protein as well. To examine this possibility, we searched the TGD sequence for potential imp α homologues. We initially identified 13 TGD-predicted open reading frames, including IMA10, that in reciprocal BLASTp comparisons matched known imp α proteins in the nonredundant database (Fig. 5A), and named these candidate genes IMA1 to -13 (see Table S1 in the supplemental material). IMA1 and -6 showed the greatest similarity to known imp α coding sequences, whereas IMA10 and most of the others were significantly divergent. For all imp α candidates, the primary homology was found in ARM-like repeats (reviewed in reference 23). The relatively large number of imp α-like proteins is quite unusual for a unicellular organism.
T. thermophila encodes a large, karyopherin alpha-like protein family. The diagram in panel A depicts the conserved domains of yeast SRP1 and 13 ARM repeat proteins, determined by using both the Pfam and SMART databases. The names they have been given, IMA1 to -13 and SPG6, are on the left. The scale indicates the predicted protein length (amino acids). IBBput, putative IBB. The regions of each that show recognizable structural similarity to imp α in the Protein Structure Database are shaded. The alignment of the putative IBB domains in each imp α-like gene is shown in panel B. The consensus positions listed are found in at least half of the aligned sequences. The position of the starting sequence in the alignment is given between the name and the first amino acid. The consensus sequence of the 10 imp α-like proteins at the top of the alignment is compared to the putative IBB in IMA1 and that of SRP1 at the bottom.
We used various sequence analysis tools to examine the domain structures of these candidate proteins (Fig. 5A). Ima1 had a domain structure similar to that of the yeast Srp1 protein, with eight clearly conserved ARM repeats and predicted alpha-helical structure throughout its entire coding sequence. ARM repeats are relatively low-complexity alpha-helical domains; thus, many sequences may be able to form an ARM-like structure without significant sequence identity. Multiple ARM repeats were detectable throughout the other 12 imp α-like coding regions (only clearly conserved ARM repeats are indicated in Fig. 5A), but overall, these protein sequences were much less conserved than that of Ima1. Nevertheless, the initial BLAST searches and comparison of these to the Protein Structure Database with the SWISS-MODEL and PROMALS3D tools revealed that all had significant similarity to imp α proteins (Fig. 5A) and are predicted to have alpha-helical structure throughout their coding regions. Furthermore, the typical spacing between recognizably conserved ARM repeats was observed to be in increments of one or multiple repeat lengths (∼50 aa), which may indicate structural homology even in the absence of primary sequence similarity.
Of these 13, only Ima5 had a recognizable IBB domain in our initial bioinformatic analyses. However, realignment of the N-terminal regions of multiple candidates with ClustalW (http://www.ebi.ac.uk/Tools/clustalw/) identified a conserved basic sequence in eight (Ima2 to -5, -8, and -10 to -12) of the 13 candidates that is similar in composition to the IBB domain of imp α proteins (Fig. 5B). Ima1 was also found to contain a similar basic domain in its N terminus, but it did not conform as well to this putative IBB consensus found in the more divergent imp α-like proteins. The difference between the putative IBB domains in Ima1 and these other candidates appears to be, in part, responsible for their distinct targeting to macro- and micronuclei, respectively (Fig. 6). The identification of the IBB-like domain together with the ARM repeats supports the tentative assignment of these nine as imp α-like proteins.
Imp α localizations are primarily nucleus specific. Representative images of N-terminal GFP-IMA fusions, together with differential interference contrast (DIC) light microscopy and DAPI-stained DNA images, are shown. The abbreviated name of each (A1 to -13) is given in the upper left of the differential interference contrast image. Micronuclei are denoted by white arrowheads. Ima proteins localizing within macro- and micronuclei are shown in panels A and B, respectively. (C) Localization of Spg6 and Ima9 to the oral apparatus and basal bodies (indicated by small white arrows). Cytoplasmic DAPI accumulation can also be observed within vacuoles.
Not all of these 13 likely function as imp α proteins. For example, IMA7 was subsequently renamed SPG6 because of its similarity to H. sapiens SPAG6 (gi49065530) and Chlamydomonas reinhardtii PF16 (44a) and its localization to basal bodies (Fig. 6C) (29). Furthermore, even though SPG6, IMA6, and IMA9 showed strong similarity to imp α proteins within their ARM repeat regions, these candidates did not have an apparent IBB domain, and the arrangement of the first ARM domain within <50 aa of their amino termini is not consistent with imp α structure.
If these predicted proteins function in nuclear import, they should localize to nuclei. We GFP tagged each as we had done for IMA10 and examined their localization. Most of the GFP fusion proteins accumulated to high levels in the cytoplasm. More importantly, and consistent with their predicted nuclear transport activity, we observed that the majority also localized to one or both types of nuclei (Fig. 6B). The most conserved imp α-like protein, Ima1, localized strongly to macronuclei (Fig. 6A). This protein is expressed constitutively through growth and development (see Fig. S2 in the supplemental material). Together with its domain structure and localization, Ima1 appears to be the primary imp α-like protein directing macronuclear import. Ima6 was also exclusively localized to macronuclei in growing cells, but it lacked a putative IBB domain and contained a nucleoplasmin domain within its C-terminal half and thus is not a clear imp α homologue. This does not exclude a possible role for this ARM repeat protein in macronuclear import.
As the macronucleus provides all of the cell's gene expression, we were somewhat surprised to find that, including Ima10, 9 of the 13 ARM repeat proteins (Ima2, -3, -4, -5, -8, -10, -11, -12, and -13) localized to micronuclei (Fig. 6B). These GFP-Ima fusions were primarily restricted to the nuclear periphery, appearing as a ring surrounding the dense, DAPI-staining interior (Fig. 6B). This is in contrast to the GFP-micronuclear linker histone, which localized strongly within the chromatin-rich nucleoplasm (52). Most of the micronucleus-localized Ima proteins showed very strong cytoplasmic accumulation (Fig. 6B, panels A2, A3, A4, A5, A8, A10, and A13), which initially made the localization pattern around the micronuclear periphery challenging to interpret. The micronucleus sits in an invagination of the macronuclear membrane prior to mitosis; thus, the ring of fluorescence around the micronucleus could result from cytoplasmic GFP filling the gap between the two nuclei when viewed in the focal plane of the micronucleus. By examining cells during mitosis or during conjugation, when the nuclei are apart, we were able to confirm the micronuclear localization of all of the candidates except Spg6 and Ima9 (data not shown). For these two, we detected localization to basal bodies and to the oral apparatus (white arrows in Fig. 6C). Given that these also lack a putative IBB domain, they likely do not participate in nuclear import.
The localization patterns (e.g., the ratio of cytoplasmic to nuclear localization) of the individual micronucleus Ima fusion proteins varied. Ima8, -10, -12, and -13 typically exhibited nuclear fluorescence above cytoplasmic levels, while Ima2, -4, and -5 had signals equal to cytoplasmic levels. As all of these proteins are ectopically expressed from the MTT1 promoter, specific patterns may reflect different import-export rates or overall cargo abundance. Two of the micronucleus-localized imp α-like proteins, Ima3 and -12, also exhibited localization to macronuclei within the first few hours after the induction of expression. However, the stable protein remaining after overnight culturing was predominantly lost from macronuclei (Fig. 6B; data not shown). It is possible that the macronuclear localization observed was an artifact of initial overexpression and, at equilibrium, these importins are targeted to micronuclei. With the possible exception of these two candidates, the GFP-Ima fusion proteins associated preferentially with either the macronucleus or the micronucleus. These data lead us to suggest that the imp α-like proteins, together with specific FG Nups, significantly contribute to the specificity of the Tetrahymena nuclear import system.
Imp α proteins are directed to specific nuclei by both the putative IBB and cargo binding domains.While the highly structured ARM repeats of imp α proteins bind cNLS containing cargo, the IBB domain regulates cargo binding and mediates the formation of the cargo/imp α/imp β ternary complex (see reference 23). To test the role of putative IBB domains (Fig. 5) in nuclear targeting, we exchanged the N termini of the macronucleus-specific Ima1 and micronucleus-specific Ima10 proteins. These Ima1/10 chimeras exchanged sequences downstream of codon 124 (IMA1) or 132 (IMA10), which is the beginning of the first ARM repeat of each. IMA1 with the IMA10 N terminus (IMA1N10) and IMA10 with the IMA1 N terminus (IMA10N1) were fused to the GFP coding sequence, and their localizations are visualized (Fig. 7).
Chimeric Ima1 and -10 proteins localize to both micro- and macronuclei. (A) Diagrams of IMA1 (the wide, single line), IMA10 (the double line), and chimeras IMA1N10 and IMA10N1 display the relevant amino acid (AA) positions and conserved Arm repeats (round-edged rectangles). (B) Representative localizations of the GFP-chimeric proteins are displayed as a series of differential interference contrast (DIC), DAPI-stained, and GFP fluorescent images as indicated. Micronuclei are denoted by white arrowheads. (C) Localization of the IMA1 IBB domain fused to the N terminus of YFP (IMA1N) and the ARM domains of IMA1 and -10 fused to the C termini of GFP, IMA1C, and IMA10C, respectively. DAPI-stained DNA, blue; fluorescent protein localization, green.
Whereas the original Ima1 and -10 GFP fusions showed very specific macronucleus or micronucleus targeting (Fig. 6A and B), respectively, both Ima1N10 and Ima10N1 exhibited dual localization (Fig. 7B). Thus, the putative IBB domains in the N termini of Ima1 and Ima10 was sufficient to provide novel nuclear targeting of the predicted NLS binding domain of each to different nuclei. Nevertheless, the N-terminal region was unable to direct exclusive targeting of the chimeras. Ima1N10 was still efficiently targeted to its original macronuclear destination, but it also acquired new specificity for the micronucleus. Similarly, GFP-Ima10N1 was localized to macronuclei, as well as its original target, the micronucleus. While it is difficult to quantify, it generally appeared that the original target nucleus of the cargo domain was the preferred target for the fusion protein (compare relative abundance in the two nuclei for each chimera in Fig. 7B).
While still able to localize to micronuclei, cells expressing the GFP-Ima10NI chimera exhibited micronuclear division defects very similar to those observed upon the overexpression of GFP-Ima10 (Fig. 7B; see Fig. S1 in the supplemental material). In addition, the chimeric protein accumulated in one or more discrete foci at the periphery of micronuclei. These micronuclei were often misshapen, having very angular nuclear membranes (Fig. 7B). This appears to indicate that this protein interferes with the normal function of the nuclear division machinery.
We also generated separate fusions of the IMA1 and IMA10 cargo binding domains to the C terminus of GFP and their IBB domains to the N terminus of YFP. Both domains of IMA1 were alone sufficient to target the fluorescent protein exclusively to macronuclei (Fig. 7C). The IBB domain of IMA10 fused to YFP was not expressed to detectable levels, but the ARM domain targeted GFP primarily to micronuclei, with some accumulation in macronuclei as well (Fig. 7C). The behavior of the chimeric Ima proteins, along with that of these individual domain fusions, implies that exclusive targeting of nuclear proteins requires the interaction of the ARM repeats with their NLSs and interaction of the imp α IBB domain with an appropriate imp β protein.
Tetrahymena imp β proteins localize to both micro- and macronuclei.The putative IBB domains in these imp α-like proteins suggest that they carry their cargo through the NPCs by associating with particular imp β proteins. To identify the full repertoire of karyopherins in Tetrahymena, we queried the genome sequence with six known imp β protein sequences and identified 11 putative imp β (IMB)-related genes (Fig. 8A). Our search for conserved domains in these candidates revealed that IMB candidates 9 and 10 contained Xpo protein domains, and reciprocal comparisons against GenBank sequences identified known exportin proteins as the best matches. Hence, we renamed their genes XPO1 and XPO2 (Fig. 8A). All 11 IMB genes are expressed, and each showed uniform mRNA levels during growth and throughout conjugation (see Fig. S2 in the supplemental material). The steady-state mRNA level of each IMB gene was found to decrease when cells were cultured under starvation conditions, but this is expected for most Tetrahymena genes. Overall, IMB gene expression showed less variability than observed for the IMA genes.
Imp β-like proteins primarily exhibit binuclear localization. The diagram in panel A depicts the conserved domains of Kap95 and 11 imp β-like proteins. The names given the predicted proteins (IMB1 to -8 and -11 and XPO1 and -2) are shown at the left of the gene schematics. Predicted protein length (amino acids [AA]) can be inferred from the scale at the top. The domain names are as follows: HEAT repeats, IBN_N (imp β N terminus), and Xpo1 (exportin 1 like). The localization of N-terminal GFP fusions to nine imp β-like (B) and two exportin-like (C) proteins in live cells is shown. The representative images show differential interference contrast (DIC) light microscopy, DAPI-stained DNA, and GFP fusion localization of the same cell. Micronuclei are denoted by white arrowheads.
We somewhat expected nucleus-specific Imb localization that would match the imp α-like proteins. Counter to this expectation, the majority of the GFP-Imb fusion proteins localized to both nuclei, with the exceptions being Imb3 and -4, which localized exclusively to macronuclei (Fig. 8B). The two exportin-related proteins also localized to both nuclei. Most of the macronucleus- or dual-localized GFP-Imb fusions accumulated to the greatest extent at the macronuclear envelop (the high degree of cytoplasmic accumulation of GFP-Imb2 and -11 obscured any enrichment). This membrane association is consistent with these proteins acting in nuclear import.
Even among the six imp β-like proteins that localized to both micronuclei and macronuclei, the relative abundance of cytoplasmic accumulation and distributions between nuclei varied. Imb1, -5, -6, and -8 exhibited higher accumulation on or in macronuclei than within the cytoplasm, whereas Imb7 and -11 accumulated equally strongly in the cytoplasm and the two nuclei. Imb2 had very strong cytoplasmic accumulation and relatively weak localization to either nucleus. Imb6 was unique in that it showed stronger localization to micronuclei than to macronuclei. The diversity of localization patterns of these imp β proteins, all expressed from the same vector system, seems to indicate that they likely transport different cargos that can vary widely in their abundance and transport rates.
The two exportin homologs encoded by XPO1 and XPO2 also exhibit distinct localization patterns. GFP-Xpo1 accumulated on or within the macronucleus and the micronuclear envelop; GFP-Xpo2 was predominantly cytoplasmic. These two proteins clearly have different subcellular distributions during growth, which likely reflects distinct equilibria in their transport functions. When taken together, the diverse localization patterns of both the imp α- and imp β-like proteins indicate extensive functional specialization within these large karyopherin families, which is likely required to coordinate the respective activities of these distinct nuclei.
Tetrahymena encodes a large number of karyopherins. The diversification of the imp α family is particularly striking. In this study, we characterized 13 ARM repeat-containing proteins, 11 of which localized to micro- or macronuclei and likely participate in nuclear import and/or regulate other nuclear processes. Additional bioinformatics indicates that Tetrahymena encodes at least four additional candidates, two of which possess the conserved IBB-like domain found in eight of nine micronucleus-specific Ima proteins (Fig. 5B). The diversification of the imp α-like karyopherins in this ciliate is in dramatic contrast to the situation in S. cerevisiae, which encodes a single imp α protein. Even the metazoan C. elegans encodes only three imp α homologs (21). The extensive divergence in coding sequence, the variable expression patterns (see Fig. S2 in the supplemental material), and the finding that IMA10 is essential suggest that the different Tetrahymena imp α-like proteins are not simply redundant in function. It is compelling to speculate that the expansion of this gene family is directly related to the need to accurately import proteins to the two functionally distinct nuclei for the regulation of cellular processes. As macronucleus-targeted Ima1 is much more similar in sequence to imp α proteins of other eukaryotes than to the divergent micronucleus-localized Ima proteins, we conclude that the macronucleus import machinery has preserved greater similarity to conventional cNLS-directed import. In support of this, heterologous nuclear proteins are specifically imported into Tetrahymena macronuclei (50).
The number of imp β-like proteins is similar to that of many eukaryotes. The fact that these proteins localize predominantly to both nuclei (Fig. 8) seems to indicate that these are involved largely in the transport of cargos that are common to both nuclei. It appears likely that either the macronucleus-specific Imb3 or -4 protein acts with Ima1 to import proteins into macronuclei. None of the imp β-like proteins were clearly micronucleus specific; although Imb6 was preferentially associated. It is possible that micronuclear imp α proteins may transport their cargo through the pore without a collaborating imp β protein (33, 39). However, when we switched N-terminal domains between Ima1 and -10, we found that both chimeras localized to micro- and macronuclei. This finding suggests that these putative IBBs interact with imp β proteins and leads us to believe that micro- or macronuclear specificity is conferred by the ternary complex of cargo/imp α/imp β.
One implication of such a large number of micronucleus-specific imp α proteins is that micronuclear functions are regulated, in part, by protein import. We show that loss of IMA10 leads to micronuclear division defects (Fig. 3). Overexpression of GFP-Ima10p also delayed or blocked division (Fig. 1; see Fig. S1 in the supplemental material), possibly due to the sequestration of bound cargo in the cytoplasm, which further demonstrates that this imp α protein regulates micronuclear mitosis and meiosis. Studies with several systems have linked imp α proteins to the control of nuclear division (22, 25, 34, 36). During mitosis and particularly meiosis, we observed that GFP-Ima10 localized to foci within micronuclei. These Ima10 foci could represent association with the spindle or kinetochore, which has been observed for several nuclear transport proteins in diverse eukaryotes (reviewed in reference 27). The micronuclear and macronuclear cell cycles in Tetrahymena are asynchronous. Regulated protein import may be one mechanism this ciliate uses to coordinate these events. The finding that an imp α-like protein is essential for nuclear division in Tetrahymena, as has been shown in other organisms, suggests that a role for these proteins in coordinating mitosis may have arisen very early in the evolution of eukaryotes.
We are intrigued that the NPCs of the individual nuclei have unique components, as demonstrated by the differential localizations of Nup3 and -4 to macro- and micronuclei, respectively (Fig. 1). While these are both FG Nups that are related to Nup98/Nup100, they clearly have sequences divergent from each other. Compared to other eukaryotic FG Nups, micronucleus-associated Nup4 is more divergent in sequence than macronuclear Nup3. Likewise, the micronuclear imp α-like proteins are more divergent relative to Ima1, observations that further argue that import into micronuclei has become highly specialized. We speculate that the various FG Nups have distinct transport affinities for specific karyopherins, making the channels through the NPCs of the micro- and macronuclei differentially permeable to importin-cargo complexes. We do not know the full extent of the unique NPC components of the different nuclei. In our bioinformatic analyses, we did not see any evidence for two complete but divergent sets of Nups encoded in the genome. The NPC differences could be limited to a small number of components that interact with the karyopherins during transport. The observation that FG Nups are differentially associated with discrete nuclei further indicates that FG repeats serve as major mediators of NPC permeability (45, 46).
While some studies have indicated that NPCs of different tissues have unique components (47), Tetrahymena appear to be able to assemble distinct NPCs in a single cell. We do not know how this is achieved, but it is likely a dynamic process. This is most apparent during a short period (<1 h) of conjugation immediately following the second postzygotic nuclear division, when the four micronucleus-derived zygotic nuclei differentiate into two micronuclei and two macronuclei (Fig. 3viii to xi). The new macronuclei must quickly lose their micronuclear NPCs and acquire new macronuclear NPCs. This may occur by discarding membrane during division, as we observed extranuclear membrane remnants that were associated with GFP-Ima10 (Fig. 3). This stage of Tetrahymena development should provide a unique opportunity with which to investigate new NPC assembly in vivo.
We thank Washington University in St. Louis (WUSTL) Biology 3492 teaching assistants Brent Brower-Toland and Elizabeth Tank, laboratory coordinator Carol Kohring, and Victoria Coppard for technical assistance during this project. We also thank K. Earley and C. Pikaard, WUSTL, for providing pEarlyGate vectors; Martin Gorovsky, University of Rochester, for providing pMNBL; Chad Pearson and Mark Winey, University of Colorado, Boulder, for discussions of unpublished data pertaining to SPG6; and Susan Wente (Vanderbilt University) for advice on Nup-YFP fusions. We are grateful for the contributions of David Goldfarb (University of Rochester), Aaron Turkewitz (University of Chicago), and Deborah Frank (WUSTL), who provided very insightful suggestions on the manuscript. Tetrahymena genome sequence data and protein predictions were obtained from TIGR (www.tigr.org), accessed via the TGD (www.ciliate.org).
This work was largely supported by National Science Foundation research grant MCB-0131421 and National Institutes of Health research grant GM06593 to D.L.C. L. Liu was supported by a Summer Pre-Freshman Scholars Fellowship funded by an Undergraduate Biological Sciences Education Program grant from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute to Washington University.
D.L.C. is a member of the scientific advisory board of Tetragenetics, Inc. (Ithaca, NY), and could receive equity based on expertise gained from this study.
Accepted 20 July 2008.
↵▿ Published ahead of print on 1 August 2008.
↵† Supplemental material for this article may be found at http://ec.asm.org/.
Allis, C. D., C. V. Glover, J. K. Bowen, and M. A. Gorovsky. 1980. Histone variants specific to the transcriptionally active, amitotically dividing macronucleus of the unicellular eucaryote, Tetrahymena thermophila. Cell 20:609-617.
Allis, C. D., C. V. Glover, and M. A. Gorovsky. 1979. Micronuclei of Tetrahymena contain two types of histone H3. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 76:4857-4861.
Andrade, M. A., and P. Bork. 1995. HEAT repeats in the Huntington's disease protein. Nat. Genet. 11:115-116.
Andrade, M. A., C. Petosa, S. I. O'Donoghue, C. W. Muller, and P. Bork. 2001. Comparison of ARM and HEAT protein repeats. J. Mol. Biol. 309:1-18.
Asai, D. J., and J. D. Forney (ed.). 2000. Tetrahymena thermophila, vol. 62. Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
Bayliss, R., T. Littlewood, and M. Stewart. 2000. Structural basis for the interaction between FxFG nucleoporin repeats and importin-beta in nuclear trafficking. Cell 102:99-108.
Bayliss, R., T. Littlewood, L. A. Strawn, S. R. Wente, and M. Stewart. 2002. GLFG and FxFG nucleoporins bind to overlapping sites on importin-beta. J. Biol. Chem. 277:50597-50606.
Bruns, P. J., and D. Cassidy-Hanley. 2000. Biolistic transformation of macro- and micronuclei. Methods Cell Biol. 62:501-512.
Cassidy-Hanley, D., J. Bowen, J. H. Lee, E. Cole, L. A. VerPlank, J. Gaertig, M. A. Gorovsky, and P. J. Bruns. 1997. Germline and somatic transformation of mating Tetrahymena thermophila by particle bombardment. Genetics 146:135-147.
Chalker, D. L., P. Fuller, and M. C. Yao. 2005. Communication between parental and developing genomes during Tetrahymena nuclear differentiation is likely mediated by homologous RNAs. Genetics 169:149-160.
Conti, E., and J. Kuriyan. 2000. Crystallographic analysis of the specific yet versatile recognition of distinct nuclear localization signals by karyopherin alpha. Structure 8:329-338.
Conti, E., M. Uy, L. Leighton, G. Blobel, and J. Kuriyan. 1998. Crystallographic analysis of the recognition of a nuclear localization signal by the nuclear import factor karyopherin alpha. Cell 94:193-204.
Cook, A., F. Bono, M. Jinek, and E. Conti. 2007. Structural biology of nucleocytoplasmic transport. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 76:647-671.
Cronshaw, J. M., A. N. Krutchinsky, W. Zhang, B. T. Chait, and M. J. Matunis. 2002. Proteomic analysis of the mammalian nuclear pore complex. J. Cell Biol. 158:915-927.
Earley, K. W., J. R. Haag, O. Pontes, K. Opper, T. Juehne, K. Song, and C. S. Pikaard. 2006. Gateway-compatible vectors for plant functional genomics and proteomics. Plant J. 45:616-629.
Finn, R. D., J. Tate, J. Mistry, P. C. Coggill, S. J. Sammut, H. R. Hotz, G. Ceric, K. Forslund, S. R. Eddy, E. L. Sonnhammer, and A. Bateman. 2008. The Pfam protein families database. Nucleic Acids Res. 36:D281-D288.
Frey, S., and D. Gorlich. 2007. A saturated FG-repeat hydrogel can reproduce the permeability properties of nuclear pore complexes. Cell 130:512-523.
Frey, S., R. P. Richter, and D. Gorlich. 2006. FG-rich repeats of nuclear pore proteins form a three-dimensional meshwork with hydrogel-like properties. Science 314:815-817.
Gaertig, J., L. Gu, B. Hai, and M. A. Gorovsky. 1994. High frequency vector-mediated transformation and gene replacement in Tetrahymena. Nucleic Acids Res. 22:5391-5398.
Gaertig, J., and G. Kapler. 2000. Transient and stable DNA transformation of Tetrahymena thermophila by electroporation. Methods Cell Biol. 62:485-500.
Geles, K. G., and S. A. Adam. 2001. Germline and developmental roles of the nuclear transport factor importin alpha3 in C. elegans. Development 128:1817-1830.
Geles, K. G., J. J. Johnson, S. Jong, and S. A. Adam. 2002. A role for Caenorhabditis elegans importin IMA-2 in germ line and embryonic mitosis. Mol. Biol. Cell 13:3138-3147.
Goldfarb, D. S., A. H. Corbett, D. A. Mason, M. T. Harreman, and S. A. Adam. 2004. Importin alpha: a multipurpose nuclear-transport receptor. Trends Cell Biol. 14:505-514.
Gorovsky, M. A., M. C. Yao, J. B. Keevert, and G. L. Pleger. 1975. Isolation of micro- and macronuclei of Tetrahymena pyriformis. Methods Cell Biol. 9:311-327.
Gruss, O. J., R. E. Carazo-Salas, C. A. Schatz, G. Guarguaglini, J. Kast, M. Wilm, N. Le Bot, I. Vernos, E. Karsenti, and I. W. Mattaj. 2001. Ran induces spindle assembly by reversing the inhibitory effect of importin alpha on TPX2 activity. Cell 104:83-93.
Harel, A., and D. J. Forbes. 2004. Importin beta: conducting a much larger cellular symphony. Mol. Cell 16:319-330.
Hetzer, M. W., T. C. Walther, and I. W. Mattaj. 2005. Pushing the envelope: structure, function, and dynamics of the nuclear periphery. Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 21:347-380.
Karrer, K. M. 2000. Tetrahymena genetics: two nuclei are better than one. Methods Cell Biol. 62:127-186.
Kilburn, C. L., C. G. Pearson, E. P. Romijn, J. B. Meehl, T. H. Giddings, Jr., B. P. Culver, J. R. Yates III, and M. Winey. 2007. New Tetrahymena basal body protein components identify basal body domain structure. J. Cell Biol. 178:905-912.
Kobe, B. 1999. Autoinhibition by an internal nuclear localization signal revealed by the crystal structure of mammalian importin alpha. Nat. Struct. Biol. 6:388-397.
Kopp, J., and T. Schwede. 2004. The SWISS-MODEL repository of annotated three-dimensional protein structure homology models. Nucleic Acids Res. 32:D230-D234.
Kopp, J., and T. Schwede. 2006. The SWISS-MODEL repository: new features and functionalities. Nucleic Acids Res. 34:D315-D318.
Kotera, I., T. Sekimoto, Y. Miyamoto, T. Saiwaki, E. Nagoshi, H. Sakagami, H. Kondo, and Y. Yoneda. 2005. Importin alpha transports CaMKIV to the nucleus without utilizing importin beta. EMBO J. 24:942-951.
Küssel, P., and M. Frasch. 1995. Yeast Srp1, a nuclear protein related to Drosophila and mouse pendulin, is required for normal migration, division, and integrity of nuclei during mitosis. Mol. Gen. Genet. 248:351-363.
Letunic, I., R. R. Copley, B. Pils, S. Pinkert, J. Schultz, and P. Bork. 2006. SMART 5: domains in the context of genomes and networks. Nucleic Acids Res. 34:D257-D260.
Loeb, J. D., G. Schlenstedt, D. Pellman, D. Kornitzer, P. A. Silver, and G. R. Fink. 1995. The yeast nuclear import receptor is required for mitosis. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 92:7647-7651.
Malik, H. S., T. H. Eickbush, and D. S. Goldfarb. 1997. Evolutionary specialization of the nuclear targeting apparatus. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 94:13738-13742.
Malone, C. D., A. M. Anderson, J. A. Motl, C. H. Rexer, and D. L. Chalker. 2005. Germ line transcripts are processed by a Dicer-like protein that is essential for developmentally programmed genome rearrangements of Tetrahymena thermophila. Mol. Cell. Biol. 25:9151-9164.
Miyamoto, Y., M. Hieda, M. T. Harreman, M. Fukumoto, T. Saiwaki, A. E. Hodel, A. H. Corbett, and Y. Yoneda. 2002. Importin alpha can migrate into the nucleus in an importin beta- and Ran-independent manner. EMBO J. 21:5833-5842.
Pei, J., B. H. Kim, and N. V. Grishin. 2008. PROMALS3D: a tool for multiple protein sequence and structure alignments. Nucleic Acids Res. 36:2295-2300.
Pei, J., M. Tang, and N. V. Grishin. 2008. PROMALS3D web server for accurate multiple protein sequence and structure alignments. Nucleic Acids Res. 36:W30-W34.
Rout, M. P., J. D. Aitchison, A. Suprapto, K. Hjertaas, Y. Zhao, and B. T. Chait. 2000. The yeast nuclear pore complex: composition, architecture, and transport mechanism. J. Cell Biol. 148:635-651.
Rout, M. P., and G. Blobel. 1993. Isolation of the yeast nuclear pore complex. J. Cell Biol. 123:771-783.
Shang, Y., X. Song, J. Bowen, R. Corstanje, Y. Gao, J. Gaertig, and M. A. Gorovsky. 2002. A robust inducible-repressible promoter greatly facilitates gene knockouts, conditional expression, and overexpression of homologous and heterologous genes in Tetrahymena thermophila. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 99:3734-3739.
44a.↵
Smith, E. F., and P. A. Lefebvre. 1996. PF16 encodes a protein with armadillo repeats and localizes to a single microtubule of the central apparatus in Chlamydomonas flagella. J. Cell Biol. 132:359-370.
Strawn, L. A., T. Shen, N. Shulga, D. S. Goldfarb, and S. R. Wente. 2004. Minimal nuclear pore complexes define FG repeat domains essential for transport. Nat. Cell Biol. 6:197-206.
Tran, E. J., and S. R. Wente. 2006. Dynamic nuclear pore complexes: life on the edge. Cell 125:1041-1053.
Uv, A. E., P. Roth, N. Xylourgidis, A. Wickberg, R. Cantera, and C. Samakovlis. 2000. members only encodes a Drosophila nucleoporin required for Rel protein import and immune response activation. Genes Dev. 14:1945-1957.
Wenkert, D., and C. D. Allis. 1984. Timing of the appearance of macronuclear-specific histone variant hv1 and gene expression in developing new macronuclei of Tetrahymena thermophila. J. Cell Biol. 98:2107-2117.
Wente, S. R., M. P. Rout, and G. Blobel. 1992. A new family of yeast nuclear pore complex proteins. J. Cell Biol. 119:705-723.
White, E. M., C. D. Allis, D. S. Goldfarb, A. Srivastva, J. W. Weir, and M. A. Gorovsky. 1989. Nucleus-specific and temporally restricted localization of proteins in Tetrahymena macronuclei and micronuclei. J. Cell Biol. 109:1983-1992.
Wu, M., C. D. Allis, R. Richman, R. G. Cook, and M. A. Gorovsky. 1986. An intervening sequence in an unusual histone H1 gene of Tetrahymena thermophila. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 83:8674-8678.
Yao, M.-C., C.-H. Yao, L. M. Halasz, P. Fuller, C. H. Rexer, S. H. Wang, R. Jain, R. S. Coyne, and D. L. Chalker. 2007. Identification of novel chromatin-associated proteins involved in programmed genome rearrangements in Tetrahymena. J. Cell Sci. 120:1978-1989.
Eukaryotic Cell Sep 2008, 7 (9) 1487-1499; DOI: 10.1128/EC.00193-08
Thank you for sharing this Eukaryotic Cell article.
You are going to email the following Nucleus-Specific Importin Alpha Proteins and Nucleoporins Regulate Protein Import and Nuclear Division in the Binucleate Tetrahymena thermophila
Message Subject (Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Eukaryotic Cell
Message Body (Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Eukaryotic Cell.
Submit a Manuscript to mSphere


Recently, every time I ask Eamon what he's sniggering at on his phone, he says "Memes", word pictures meant to simplify a concept or convey a joke or a truth. I role my eyes at him. But you know these quotes below from Instagram have rocked my "Aha" in just the right way. They may give you one too.
How often do you overthink things? Feel overwhelmed by how complex things seem? I was reminded of this recently when I tried to work something out intellectually. Tried to make sure I understood every last bit of it. But it started to feel overwhelming, unsustainable and exhausting and I lost the light and easeful feeling ideas flow in. This for me is a telltale sign that I'm off track would benefit from stepping away and letting that deeper part of me have the space to be heard. Whether it's at work or at home, life always feels simpler.
Thoughts to motivate me for the upcoming 100 Day Project perhaps ?
Have an inspired Weekend !!!


Tag Archive | "Red Line Rasbora (Rasbora pauciperforata)"
The Red Line Rasbora (Rasbora pauciperforata) is found in the still, slow moving, blackwater streams, rivers and lakes of South east Asia, Malaysia, and Sumatra. They prefer overgrown, dimly lit, slow moving streams with overhanging vegetation.
The Red Line Rasbora is an elongated fish with a forked tail. The body is a brownish gray color with an olive brown back and a white belly. The fins are a smokey gray. The Red Line Rasbora develops a bright neon style red stripe that runs laterally from the tip of the snout, through the upper part of the eye to the caudal fin when the fish is in good condition. Females are generally more plump than males, especially during spawning.
Tropical fish keeping enthusiasts sometimes confuse the Red Line Rasbora (Rasbora pauciperforata) with the unrelated Glowlight Tetra (Hemigrammus erythrozonus). Among other differences, Red Line Rasboras have a brighter red stripe than the Glowlight Tetra.
Red Line Rasboras are a peaceful schooling fish that swim in the middle and upper water levels of the aquarium. They do best in groups of at least 8 or more individuals and can be housed with other peaceful similarly sized species such as Colisa, Corydoras, Apistogramma, Loricarids, Loaches, Danios, hatchet fish and other Rasboras. Although they are sensitive to pollutants and require frequent partial water changes, they make an excellent addition to any black water community aquarium.
Red Line Rasboras should be housed in at least a 15 gallon tank with a dark fine gravel or sandy substrate, that is densely planted and aquascaped with some smooth river rock, driftwood or bogwood logs. Allow them plenty of swimming room. Peat filtration and a cover of floating plants like water lettuce is recommended to give them the low light conditions they require.
Red Line Rasboras have been bred in an aquarium environment but breeding them is extremely difficult. They require a pH of 5.5-6.0, a water hardness of 2-3 dH, a water temperature between 79-84°F and a well planted tank of fine leaved or grassy plants.
Because Red Line Rasboras are very selective about their breeding partners, it is best to keep a large number of fish together in a school and watch for pairs to develop. These fish are egg scatterers and will deposit their eggs on the plants and among the grasses in the tank. The eggs normally hatch in 24-28 hours and the fry will be free swimming 3 to 5 days later. The fry are very sensitive to water changes and should be fed infusoria, rotifers or liquid foods until they are able to fend for themselves.
Red Line Rasboras are not picky eaters and can be fed a mixed diet of live, frozen or freeze dried insects, tubifex , daphnia , insect larvae, crustaceans along with a high quality flake food.
When available for purchase, Red Line Rasboras can be anywhere from 1/2″ to 2-1/4″ in length.


text:
Step this way for a dose of empathy
By Hannah Francis
October 31, 2019 — 4.54pm
Before you judge someone, walk a mile in their shoes, so they say.
Well, whether they be sneakers, comfy slippers, patent leather stilettos or neon yellow and blue boxing boots, now you can do just that the next time you're at the Arts Centre.
A Mile in My Shoes invites passers-by to step inside a pop-up "shoe shop" (it looks like a giant shoebox) and put on a pair of shoes once owned by someone else. They'll then don headphones and take a walk in the shoes – while their former owner tells them a story.
Ania Obolewics (left) and Tiphaine Tailleux try on someone else's shoes while listening to their stories. Credit:Eddie Jim
"People often have emotional responses to what may seem like quite a basic, simple experience," says creative producer Tiphaine Tailleux.
"You're listening to a story told by someone you might not normally meet, and the storyteller goes into quite a lot of personal details about an aspect of their life."
Visitors are given a random pair of footwear that corresponds to one of 35 short personal podcasts, ranging from eight to 12 minutes long. Twenty-three of the stories are told by Melburnians and the rest are from a previous iteration of the project in London. Most focus on the theme of water or, more specifically, the Yarra River.
The interior of the ''shoe shop''. Credit:Eddie Jim
"Wherever we go we always try to collect local stories to make a new, local, bespoke version of it," says producer Ania Obolewicz.
The storytellers range from children and teenagers to a refugee, a Metro train driver, a Vietnam vet, an insomniac, a garbage collector, a Big Issue vendor and a former nun. There is also a wheelchair-accessible story.
I swapped my Birkenstocks for a pair of pink Converse sneakers that had been owned by 16-year-old Indigenous dancer Ky-ya. Listening as she named the trees, birds and clouds in the Woiwurrung language while walking in her comfy sneakers was quite transporting – even a little eerie.
It touches on our common humanity.
Tiphaine Tailleux, creative producer
A Mile in My Shoes was created by the Empathy Museum, founded in Britain by artist Clare Patey and Australian-born philosopher and School of Life founding faculty member Roman Krznaric (he literally wrote the book on empathy, 2014's Empathy, available through Penguin), to explore ideas around empathy through interactive projects.
Listening to people's stories is a powerful enough device for that, says Tailleux, but it's the "physical and emotional journey together" that takes the experience to another level – that, and the knowledge that the shoes really were worn by the storyteller.
"The point of the whole experience is that it touches on our common humanity," Tailleux says.
"People often feel very touched when they realise that actually we have a lot more in common than not … that actually we share so much more."
The unique work has toured the world and collected about 400 stories along the way, from Brazil to Belgium, Ireland, America and even Siberia. Many of the stories can also be accessed online at empathymuseum.com.
This is only the second time A Mile in My Shoes has been to Australia; it travelled to the Perth International Arts Festival in 2016.
Empathy Museum's A Mile in My Shoes is at the Arts Centre Melbourne forecourt until November 17, 10am-6pm Sunday to Wednesday and 10am-8pm Thursday to Saturday. Entry is free.
Hannah Francis
Hannah Francis is Arts Editor at The Age

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Does Medicare Pay for Durable Medical Equipment Repairs?
If you use durable medical equipment (DME) such as walkers, hospital beds and oxygen units, you might be wondering who's responsible for repairs and maintenance. The answer depends on the situation. But first, let's start with a little background about what durable medical equipment is.
As far as Medicare is concerned, durable medical equipment (DME) refers to certain items your doctor orders for you to use in the home. These items must be used for medical reasons, able to withstand repeated use (for at least three years), used primarily at home, and not useful to someone who's healthy and not injured. Although this equipment is durable, it might need repair or maintenance from time to time.
Does Medicare pay for durable medical equipment?
Generally, Medicare coverage of durable medical equipment falls under Medicare Part B. Part A may pay for certain DME if you're under hospice care.
Medicare will typically pay 80% of the Medicare-allowed amount for most covered durable medical equipment. Your doctor needs to prescribe it for you to use in your home. You are responsible for the other 20%, unless you have other coverage such as a Medicare Supplement plan. Your Medicare deductible applies.
If you're enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan, your plan is required to provide at least the same level of coverage as Medicare Part A and Part B. If you need hospice care, that will still be covered under Part A and not through your Medicare Advantage plan.
Some Medicare Advantage plans provide additional coverage besides Part A and Part B benefits. To learn more details about your durable medical equipment coverage, contact your plan's customer service department.
What types of durable medical equipment does Medicare cover?
Medicare may cover different kinds of durable medical equipment and supplies. Here are some examples of what Medicare might cover: wheelchairs, blood sugar monitors, commode chairs, hospital beds, infusion pumps and supplies, nebulizers and nebulizer medications, sleep apnea and Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) devices, suction pumps, oxygen equipment and supplies, lifting devices, traction equipment, canes, crutches, and walkers.
Who's responsible for durable medical equipment maintenance and repairs?
Your durable medical equipment supplier usually takes care of any maintenance and repairs, if you're renting your equipment. In fact, you may want to ask the supplier whether they even let you do your own repairs or maintenance.
If you're a do-it-yourselfer, or have a friend who is, there are some videos you can view online that may be helpful.
You may want to have the supplier maintain and repair your equipment, especially if it's complex. For example, if you have a wheelchair, your supplier's professional technicians can inspect and repair (as necessary) wheels, castors, arm and leg rests, the wheelchair frame, electronics and positioning device.
Who pays for durable medical equipment maintenance and repairs?
Durable medical equipment repair and maintenance might be paid mostly by Medicare or the supplier, depending on the situation. In some cases, you may need to pay a portion of the repair or maintenance costs.
If you're renting your durable medical equipment, the supplier should cover repair and maintenance costs. The supplier usually picks up the equipment so you don't have to transport it.
If Medicare has already covered your durable medical equipment, Medicare might cover the costs to repair or replace the DME if it's lost or damaged. Medicare may even cover rental costs of durable medical equipment while yours is being repaired. You might need to pay 20% of the rental or repair costs.
If you own your DME, Medicare generally pays 80% of the costs to repair your durable medical equipment.
Please note: If you use a DME supplier who does not accept Medicare assignment, you may have to pay more for durable medical equipment, including maintenance, repairs, or replacement. Read more about durable medical equipment suppliers.
If you have questions about Medicare durable medical equipment benefits or your Medicare coverage options, I can help you.
Use the links below to schedule a phone call or have me email information to you.
Begin by searching for plans in your service area by clicking the Compare Plans or Find Plans buttons on this page.


PPE for hearing protection consists of earplugs and earmuffs, also known as ear defenders. Workers who are regularly exposed to high noise levels should be furnished hearing protection by the employers, as they are a low-cost intervention. Ear defenders protect the wearer from extreme noises. The head-band and outer covering is usually made from a hard thermoplastic or metal. The protection comes from acoustic foam, this absorbs sound waves by increasing air resistance, thus reducing the amplitude of the waves. The energy is transformed into heat. An earplug is a device that is meant to be inserted in the ear canal to protect the user's ears from loud noises.


text:
Psycho-Spiritual Relief Work in the Tsunami Hit Areas of Japan
by admin | Nov 8, 2011 | Seed of peace | 0 comments
An Interview with Rev. Jin Hitoshi
Rev. Hitoshi Jin is the Director of the Zenseikyo Foundation & Buddhist Council for Youth and Child Welfare and the Rinbutsuken Institute for Socially Engaged Buddhism. Since the tragic triple disaster in northern Japan on March 11, he has adapted his skills in psycho-spiritual counseling for troubled youth and the suicidal to helping all those in the disaster stricken areas struggling with trauma and grief. Rev. Jin has been making extended visits to the three prefectures Fukushima, Miyagi, and Iwate that were directly hit by the tsunami.
Since the tragic events of March 11th, the relief activities of numerous Buddhist denominations, their youth associations and other smaller denominational groups, individual temples and individual priests, and Buddhist based NGOs have been quite well documented. In the hardest hit areas, Buddhist temples have acted as short and long-term shelters for those left homeless by the tsunami. In Ishinomaki City in Miyagi prefecture, 4 out of 68 shelters are Buddhist temples, including the Soto Zen temple Dogen-in which was taking care 134 people at the end of April and still had about 80 people in June. In Kesenuma City, also in Miyagi, 6 out of 77 shelters are Buddhist temples. Buddhist priests not only in the disaster-hit areas but also in other parts of the country have been very active to hold regular memorial services for those who perished in the disaster. As honoring the dead and revisiting grief through Buddhist memorial rites is a cornerstone of Japanese spirituality, Buddhist priests have played an important role in helping many people face the massive grief brought on by the disaster.
While Rev. Jin has been active in such memorial services in the disaster areas, he has been more principally focusing on offering direct psycho-spiritual care for those still struggling with rebuilding their daily lives in these areas. Under the auspices of Zenseikyo, he conducted three emergency training sessions in May for volunteers who wanted to help out in the disaster areas. In total, they have drawn 50 volunteers, 90% of whom are Buddhist priests from various denominations and the remaining being temple family members and lay people. In such a short period, these volunteers were given basic training in 1st phase emergency counseling and support work.
This 1st phase has sought to deal with the initial trauma after the disaster and adjustment to new lives in the shelters. In this way, the emphasis is on supporting people through camaraderie and natural conversation rather than direct intervention or inquiry into their trauma. When formal activities are held, they are in the form of peer counseling in groups of people with the group leader acting as an active listener rather than a psychological counselor. However, much of the work is done in a more informal style through sharing time and conversation over tea and snacks. There have also been many activities for children who may become bored and frustrated with the constraints of life in the shelters. Many volunteers have spent time with them doing ?play therapy? through balloon art and providing punching bags on which they can take out pent up frustrations. Zenseikyo held a 3-day summer camp in August in Kurihara in northern Miyagi for 100 kids from the shelters. Many other groups have started doing similar such camps, including the Buddhist NGO AYUS which held a camp in Yamanashi next to Mt. Fuji in mid-August.
Many different Buddhist groups have been engaged in this level of psycho-spiritual care, such as the Buddhist Counseling Group of the Jodo Pure Land denomination?s Ho-on Meishokai Foundation based at Zojo-ji temple in Tokyo consisting of about 20 counselors and priests, and the Soto Zen Youth Association which has set up Monk (bozu) Caf?s for adults to talk over tea. There are also examples of local temples engaged in such work, such as the Jodo temple Sainen-ji in Ishinomaki where the female abbot and her mother use the means of delivering fish to various homes as a way to engage in conversation and support for people in the community. Unfortunately, the main headquarters of the major denominations have not been able to mobilize much consistent institutional support for this kind of work. Indeed, some have shown more concern with rebuilding their own temples in the region. This situation is in keeping with the general trend towards social engagement by Buddhists before the March disaster. In general, denominational headquarters have exhibited little initiative and foresightedness to engage in meaningful social activities that deal with the real suffering of people. Meanwhile, individual priests have gone ahead and started their own initiatives, and on some social issues have started building networks either within their denominations or across denominations.
One of the special activities that Rev. Jin and Zenseikyo have been involved in is mobilizing the Japan Association of Biwa Onkyu Treatment Providers (??????????) a group based in Kumamoto prefecture in southern Japan that specializes in a special form of moxibustion called onkyu (??) based on ancient Buddhist Aryuvedic methods. Onkyu involves the heating of acupressure points and meridians through medicinal herbs, in this case the leaves of the Japanese biwa tree, which release the healing properties of the herb into the bloodstream. The elderly, who make up a large portion of the population in the disaster areas, have been the special object of this work. The treatment has served as both a substitute care for people who after the disaster have not been able to get their regular medicines and also as preventative medical and psychological care. Being sequestered in shelters for long periods of time have exacerbated the health problems of the elderly who are not able to get enough regular exercise and also suffer from stress that induces high blood pressure, heart attack, and stroke. This onkyu therapy helps to support both their physical and psychological stress.
The 2nd phase of this psycho-spiritual counseling is the more intensive one-on-one work dealing with the more long-term effects of the trauma in individuals? post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), depression, and suicidal tendencies. This is very difficult work to initiate with local people in the disaster areas because of communication barriers due to their heavy dialect, the insular nature of their rural communities that do not open up easily to outsiders, and the lack of long-term counselors who can build trust with these people. Slowly, Rev. Jin is beginning to shift the work from 1st phase shock and adjustment care to 2nd phase trauma and grief care. In October, Zenseikyo plans to begin establishing Sunday schools in the shelters, where children can access trauma counseling. At the same time, they will begin setting up more Monk Caf?s to offer support for adults as prevention for suicides and dying alone. One Rinzai Zen monk involved in suicide prevention work has estimated the suicide rate in Japan will soar beyond its chronic number of 30,000 annually upwards to 40,000 this year due to the trauma and destruction of livelihoods in the tsunami hit regions.
This 2nd phase level of psycho-spiritual work has more quickly proceeded amongst the large volunteer and care community that has entered the region since the disaster. Relief workers and care givers (such as those working in refugee shelters), temple people who have offered their temples as shelters, doctors and medical workers, and especially Self-Defense soldiers who have had to recover so many corpses, have suffered from exhaustion, burnout, and trauma in their work. Rev. Jin has especially worked with local priests and temple people who have needed support during this time. However, amongst his group of counselors there are only 2-3 people qualified to do such 2nd phase counseling work that requires professional skills and experience.
There is certainly potential for Buddhists to be more involved in this 2nd phase of psycho-spiritual work. Over the past 10 years, more Buddhists (priests and temple family members alike) have become interested in developing counseling skills. The aforementioned Jodo Buddhist Counseling Group is a representative example. There is also a network of priests that has been engaging in suicidal counseling for the past five years or so. In addition, there are priests, especially in the Jodo Shin denomination, who have developed counseling skills as chaplains for the dying and bereaved. Both Rev. Jin and Prof. Iwayumi Suzuki of Tohoku University in Sendai have called for the development of chaplaincy training programs for Buddhist priests in part to meet this most critical need in the disaster areas. At present, there is no systematic training system to develop chaplains run by any of the large Buddhist denominations. There exist only a few small private initiatives by concerned clergy of both Buddhist and Christian backgrounds. Rev. Jin is now looking into adapting models of Buddhist chaplaincy training already highly developed outside of Japan, such as in Taiwan and the United States.
Even if there were a large cadre of such Buddhist chaplains, Rev. Jin says that the biggest problem at this time is the coordination of needs and services. There are not enough people right now who act as coordinators to match skilled people to the areas where their skills and background are most appropriate. In this way, Rev. Jin is planning to set up a dispatch center in Sendai City by mid September for Buddhist psycho-spiritual counselors to better coordinate such work. Finally, there is a need for counselors and care givers to commit to the region. Because of the aforementioned barriers to these local communities and the basic intimacy needed to do such counseling work, counselors cannot come from other regions of Japan for 2-3 days at a time and expect to be of much help. In this way, the most effective means would be to train local Buddhist priests and family members in such counseling skills. As in the aforementioned case of the Jodo nun in Ishinomaki, such local priests and temples have long established ties to their communities and can most readily offer the kind of psycho-spiritual support they will need in the coming years.
International Buddhist Exchange Center, Yokohama


text:
February 21, 2017 February 22, 2017 Mo
Gentry's past gives hints as to what the Pelicans Offense will look like
The buzzer people heard at the end of the All-Star game was not the end of the game but the end of DeMarcus Cousins' time as a Sacramento King. It appeared he was notified right after the game while addressing reports that he was going to be teaming up with All-Star MVP Anthony Davis in New Orleans. They will be forming one of the best frontcourts in the NBA, well on paper at least. The Pelicans are far from complete and the biggest question will be how can Coach Alvin Gentry make the pairing work?
A look into his past coaching history gives a few hints as to some of the sets/actions that Pelican fans might see. Coach Gentry's was an assistant for Mike D'Antoni during the Seven Seconds or Less era and eventually replaced D'Antoni to become the head coach. At his peak with the Suns in the 2009-10 season the Suns averaged 110.2 points a night for the top spot in the NBA.
The Suns were a run and gun team, and were known for a particular set that they ran, Fist Up Short. It starts with the point guard and either big in a high pick-and-roll, the other big shifting from the strong side block to the other block as the ballscreen is happening. The wing players are in the corner and the weakside wing relocates from the corner to the above the break three to take the weakside help away. The play puts the low big man defender in a bind, do you take the roller and leave your man or let the roller go?
The clips below courtesy of Coach Pyper from Half Court Hoops are from the Gentry era in Phoenix. The first example Steve Nash found Gortat on the roll, then Nash hit the short man who whipped it to Gortat underneath the rim, in the final example the weakside defense got sucked in which opened a lane for a three point shot from the short man.
Immediately after the trade NBA Twitter was clamoring for Gentry to run an all-big man pick-and-roll, often referred to as a 4-5 pick-and-roll. This is also an area where Gentry has some experience. While an assistant for the Clippers under Doc Rivers, they ran a few plays where Blake Griffin would often come off a pick-and-roll with DeAndre Jordan setting the pick. The Clippers have also mastered using Jordan as the short man in pick-and-rolls, Griffin constantly finds Jordan for a lob after setting a ballscreen for Chris Paul. Pelican fans should expect to see this more between Jrue Holiday, Cousins, and Davis.
Another possible set that doesn't get a lot of run in games but could be a real interesting set for this combination. It shares the same principles of the Fist Up Short set. It is a side pick-and-roll with either Cousins or Davis setting the ballscreen and the other big on the strong side block. As Holiday comes off the screen, the big rolls to the rim while the low big pops out to the corner-wing area. It is depicted in the diagram below.
There are several options for Coach Gentry offensively can run with the duo of Cousins and Davis. The team is still not complete, as they will need to add more shooters. The Pelicans currently are 17th in three-point percentage, so they will need to add more shooting on the floor. It may not click right away but this is a step in the right direction. The Pelicans are definitely attempting to zig while the league is zagging by playing two bigs at the same time. It may or may not work but this will be an opportunity for Coach Gentry to show some creativity on the offensive end.
NBA Notes:
Timing of the Trade – The Sacramento Kings are getting killed for not waiting until the deadline. It might be possible that they made the move as soon as they got the green light from their owner Vivek Ranadive who was long the obstacle for any Cousins trade. There had to be a fear that they need to make the move before he changes his mind.
It's the Magic Show – The Los Angeles Lakers have officially put Magic Johnson in charge of the Lakers while relieving Mitch Kupchak, Jim Buss, and John Black (Longtime Spokesman). Lots of rumors about who will be the General Manager, looks like it is going to be Rob Pelinka (courtesy of Ramona Shelburne) once he divests from his agency. How this works will really depends on who Magic surrounds himself with and if he's able to listen to them.
Paul locked up – What will get lost in the Laker news, their neighbor the Los Angeles Clippers and Chris Paul have a verbal agreement on a new contract for around $200 million dollars. I would guess they are committing up to five more years of him running the show. Might not look that pretty at the end of the deal. (via Bleacher Report's Tim Daniels)
Fake Trades – With the deadline approaching be aware of trade news on twitter, there are a number of fake twitter accounts that will try to fire off trade news that is false or without any sources. Just a friendly heads up!
Related Notes:
Fist Up Short clips from (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHU-Xc8s4xQ) by Coach Pyper (@HalfCourtHoops) A great follow.
Stats from basketball-reference.com
Photo Credit: Crystal LoGiudice-USA TODAY Sports
Previous The Jump Ball Podcast Ep 14 with Oliver Maroney
Next The Jump Ball Podcast Ep 15 with SB Nation's Mike Prada


text:
Major defence merger surge as global tensions rise
Northrop Grumman jumps into the race with $7.8 billion Orbital ATK acquisition.
Photo courtesy of Orbital ATK
FALLS CHURCH, Va. — Northrop Grumman is buying Orbital ATK for about $7.8 billion as activity in defence sector heats up amid rising global tensions.
Earlier this month, United Technologies said it would pay $22.75 billion for defence contractor Rockwell Collins.
Legislation is expected to pass easily Monday pumping $700 billion into the Pentagon budget as the U.S. responds to growing hostility from North Korea.
The U.S. military on Monday flew advanced bombers and stealth jets over the Korean Peninsula and near Japan, three days after North Korea fired a missile over Japan.
Saudi Arabia has a pending deal to acquire $500 million in precision-guided munitions from the U.S., part of a proposed $110 billion arms package to Riyadh, which is enmeshed in a civil war in Yemen. A Saudi-led coalition, which is supported by the United States, has been carrying out airstrikes in Yemen since March 2015.
The acquisition of Orbital would strengthen Northrop Grumman's capabilities in military aircraft technology and missile defence. Orbital ATK makes launch vehicles and their propulsion systems; missile technology, defence electronics, precision weapons, armament systems and ammunition. It also builds up Northrop's space operations with Orbital's satellites and advanced aerospace structures.
Orbital ATK shareholders will receive $134.50 per share, a 22 per cent premium to the company's Friday closing price of $110.04. The deal's total value is approximately $9.2 billion, including debt.
Shares of Orbital ATK surged 20 per cent in Monday premarket trading. It appears the company will join most major defence contractors that have seen shares hit all-time highs this year as clashes escalate.
Rockwell Collins Inc., Boeing Co., Northrop Grumman, Raytheon Co., Lockheed Martin Corp. and Honeywell International Inc., are all hitting new highs.
Northrop Grumman Corp., which is based in Falls Church, Virginia, said that after the deal closes, Orbital ATK Inc., based in Dulles, Virginia, will become a separate sector within its business operations.
The boards of both companies have approved the deal and it's expected to close in the first half of next year.
News from © Canadian Press Enterprises Inc. 2016
New detection system uses AI to find distracted drivers on the road
Auto alliance bets it all on electric car market pivot
St. Catharines-based engineering firm ensures tugboats' power systems navigate the Great Lakes safely. →


text:
HomeUK News
Manchester bomber's father and brother arrested in Tripoli
FILE PHOTO © Ammar Abdullah © Reuters
The father and a brother of Manchester Arena suicide bomber Salman Abedi have been arrested in Tripoli, with counter-terror officials stating the attacker's brother knew about the plan.
The father of the bomber, Ramadan Abedi, was arrested by a counter-terrorism force, Reuters reported, citing a spokesman and a witness.
Hashem Abedi, an engineering student in Manchester University, "was aware of all the details" of his brother's plans to attack the arena, Libyan counter terrorism police (RADA) said in a statement. Hashem Abedi was arrested in Tripoli on Tuesday on suspicion of links to Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL).
In its statement, RADA said the 20-year-old admitted that his brother had links with IS and confessed that he himself was in Britain during the planning and preparation of the attack. RADA say Hashem left Britain on April 16 but was constantly in contact with his brother Salman Abedi prior to the terrorist attack.
Ramadan Abedi had proclaimed his son's innocence, but had himself been branded an extremist by a Libyan security official.
Abedi had told Associated Press that his son – who blew himself up at Manchester Arena on Monday night, killing 22 people – had been acting normally and was preparing for a visit to Saudi Arabia when they last spoke five days ago.
Manchester bomber Salman Abedi 'trained in Syria'
Salman Abedi died in the blast at the arena and his older brother, Ismail, is thought to be in custody after a police and special forces raid on their Manchester home.
Speaking from Tripoli, Ramadan Abedi confirmed that his son had recently returned from Libya and told AP: "We don't believe in killing innocents. This is not us."
However, soon after he was quoted by the press Ramadan Abedi was himself accused of having extremist links.
Former Libyan security official Abdel-Basit Haroun told AP he knew the senior Abedi personally and that he had been a member of the Al-Qaeda-linked Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) during the 1990s.
When the LIFG disbanded Abedi became associated with the Salafi Jihadi movement, an extreme strand of political Islam from which both Al-Qaeda and, later, Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) sprang.
Haroun said Abedi was better known in Libya as Abu Ismail. Several LIFG-linked Libyans appear to have settled in the same area of Manchester as the Abedi family.
Among them was Abd al-Baset Azzouz, who left Manchester to go to Libya and run a 200-300-strong militant network for Osama Bin Laden's successor, Ayman al-Zawahiri.
Azzouz is reported to be an expert bomb-maker. Salman Abedi, who was born in Britain, is also reported to have visited Syria and was known to both UK and French intelligence agencies.
Hashem Abedi, Salman's younger brother, was arrested in Tripoli on Wednesday afternoon.