A conserved histidine modulates HSPB5 structure to trigger chaperone activity in response to stress-related acidosis

  1. Ponni Rajagopal
  2. Eric Tse
  3. Andrew J Borst
  4. Scott P Delbecq
  5. Lei Shi
  6. Daniel P Southworth
  7. Rachel E Klevit  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Washington, United Kingdom
  2. University of Michigan, United States
  3. University of Washington, United States

Abstract

Small heat shock proteins (sHSPs) are essential 'holdase' chaperones that form large assemblies and respond dynamically to pH and temperature stresses to protect client proteins from aggregation. While the alpha-crystallin domain (ACD) dimer of sHSPs is the universal building block, how the ACD transmits structural changes in response to stress to promote holdase activity is unknown. We found that the dimer interface of HSPB5 is destabilized over physiological pHs and a conserved histidine (His-104) controls interface stability and oligomer structure in response to acidosis. Destabilization by pH or His-104 mutation shifts the ACD from dimer to monomer but also results in a large expansion of HSPB5 oligomer states. Remarkably, His-104 mutant-destabilized oligomers are efficient holdases that reorganize into structurally distinct client-bound complexes. Our data support a model for sHSP function wherein cell stress triggers small perturbations that alter the ACD building blocks to unleash a cryptic mode of chaperone action.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Ponni Rajagopal

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Washington, Seattle, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Eric Tse

    Department of Biological Chemistry, Life Sciences Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Andrew J Borst

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Scott P Delbecq

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Lei Shi

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Daniel P Southworth

    Department of Biological Chemistry, Life Sciences Institute, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Rachel E Klevit

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Washington, Seattle, United States
    For correspondence
    klevit@u.washington.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Volker Dötsch, Goethe University, Germany

Version history

  1. Received: March 3, 2015
  2. Accepted: May 8, 2015
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: May 11, 2015 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: June 5, 2015 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2015, Rajagopal et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,092
    views
  • 493
    downloads
  • 46
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Ponni Rajagopal
  2. Eric Tse
  3. Andrew J Borst
  4. Scott P Delbecq
  5. Lei Shi
  6. Daniel P Southworth
  7. Rachel E Klevit
(2015)
A conserved histidine modulates HSPB5 structure to trigger chaperone activity in response to stress-related acidosis
eLife 4:e07304.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.07304

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.07304

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Cell Biology
    Natalia Dolgova, Eva-Maria E Uhlemann ... Oleg Y Dmitriev
    Research Article

    Mediator of ERBB2-driven Cell Motility 1 (MEMO1) is an evolutionary conserved protein implicated in many biological processes; however, its primary molecular function remains unknown. Importantly, MEMO1 is overexpressed in many types of cancer and was shown to modulate breast cancer metastasis through altered cell motility. To better understand the function of MEMO1 in cancer cells, we analyzed genetic interactions of MEMO1 using gene essentiality data from 1028 cancer cell lines and found multiple iron-related genes exhibiting genetic relationships with MEMO1. We experimentally confirmed several interactions between MEMO1 and iron-related proteins in living cells, most notably, transferrin receptor 2 (TFR2), mitoferrin-2 (SLC25A28), and the global iron response regulator IRP1 (ACO1). These interactions indicate that cells with high MEMO1 expression levels are hypersensitive to the disruptions in iron distribution. Our data also indicate that MEMO1 is involved in ferroptosis and is linked to iron supply to mitochondria. We have found that purified MEMO1 binds iron with high affinity under redox conditions mimicking intracellular environment and solved MEMO1 structures in complex with iron and copper. Our work reveals that the iron coordination mode in MEMO1 is very similar to that of iron-containing extradiol dioxygenases, which also display a similar structural fold. We conclude that MEMO1 is an iron-binding protein that modulates iron homeostasis in cancer cells.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Isabelle Petit-Hartlein, Annelise Vermot ... Franck Fieschi
    Research Article

    NADPH oxidases (NOX) are transmembrane proteins, widely spread in eukaryotes and prokaryotes, that produce reactive oxygen species (ROS). Eukaryotes use the ROS products for innate immune defense and signaling in critical (patho)physiological processes. Despite the recent structures of human NOX isoforms, the activation of electron transfer remains incompletely understood. SpNOX, a homolog from Streptococcus pneumoniae, can serves as a robust model for exploring electron transfers in the NOX family thanks to its constitutive activity. Crystal structures of SpNOX full-length and dehydrogenase (DH) domain constructs are revealed here. The isolated DH domain acts as a flavin reductase, and both constructs use either NADPH or NADH as substrate. Our findings suggest that hydride transfer from NAD(P)H to FAD is the rate-limiting step in electron transfer. We identify significance of F397 in nicotinamide access to flavin isoalloxazine and confirm flavin binding contributions from both DH and Transmembrane (TM) domains. Comparison with related enzymes suggests that distal access to heme may influence the final electron acceptor, while the relative position of DH and TM does not necessarily correlate with activity, contrary to previous suggestions. It rather suggests requirement of an internal rearrangement, within the DH domain, to switch from a resting to an active state. Thus, SpNOX appears to be a good model of active NOX2, which allows us to propose an explanation for NOX2’s requirement for activation.