Ancestral resurrection reveals evolutionary mechanisms of kinase plasticity

  1. Conor Howard
  2. Victor Hanson-Smith
  3. Kristopher J Kennedy
  4. Chad J Miller
  5. Hua Jane Lou
  6. Alexander D Johnson
  7. Benjamin Turk
  8. Liam J Holt  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of California Berkeley, United States
  2. University of California, San Francisco, United States
  3. Yale University School of Medicine, United States
  4. University of California San Francisco, United States

Abstract

Protein kinases have evolved diverse specificities to enable cellular information processing. To gain insight into the mechanisms underlying kinase diversification, we studied the CMGC protein kinases using ancestral reconstruction. Within this group, the cyclin dependent kinases (CDKs) and mitogen activated protein kinases (MAPKs), require proline at the +1 position of their substrates, while Ime2 prefers arginine. The resurrected common ancestor of CDKs, MAPKs and Ime2 could phosphorylate substrates with +1 proline or arginine, with preference for proline. This specificity changed to a strong preference for +1 arginine in the lineage leading to Ime2 via an intermediate with equal specificity for proline and arginine. Mutant analysis revealed that a variable residue within the kinase catalytic cleft, DFGx, modulates +1 specificity. Expansion of Ime2 kinase specificity by mutation of this residue did not cause dominant deleterious effects in vivo. Tolerance of cells to new specificities likely enabled the evolutionary divergence of kinases.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Conor Howard

    University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Victor Hanson-Smith

    University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Kristopher J Kennedy

    University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Chad J Miller

    Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Hua Jane Lou

    Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Alexander D Johnson

    University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Benjamin Turk

    Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Liam J Holt

    University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    For correspondence
    liamholt@berkeley.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Copyright

© 2014, Howard 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

  • 5,005
    views
  • 679
    downloads
  • 56
    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. Conor Howard
  2. Victor Hanson-Smith
  3. Kristopher J Kennedy
  4. Chad J Miller
  5. Hua Jane Lou
  6. Alexander D Johnson
  7. Benjamin Turk
  8. Liam J Holt
(2014)
Ancestral resurrection reveals evolutionary mechanisms of kinase plasticity
eLife 3:e04126.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.04126

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.04126

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    Gabriella O Estevam, Edmond Linossi ... James S Fraser
    Research Article

    Mutations in the kinase and juxtamembrane domains of the MET Receptor Tyrosine Kinase are responsible for oncogenesis in various cancers and can drive resistance to MET-directed treatments. Determining the most effective inhibitor for each mutational profile is a major challenge for MET-driven cancer treatment in precision medicine. Here, we used a deep mutational scan (DMS) of ~5764 MET kinase domain variants to profile the growth of each mutation against a panel of 11 inhibitors that are reported to target the MET kinase domain. We validate previously identified resistance mutations, pinpoint common resistance sites across type I, type II, and type I ½ inhibitors, unveil unique resistance and sensitizing mutations for each inhibitor, and verify non-cross-resistant sensitivities for type I and type II inhibitor pairs. We augment a protein language model with biophysical and chemical features to improve the predictive performance for inhibitor-treated datasets. Together, our study demonstrates a pooled experimental pipeline for identifying resistance mutations, provides a reference dictionary for mutations that are sensitized to specific therapies, and offers insights for future drug development.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Kira Breunig, Xuifen Lei ... Luiz O Penalva
    Research Article

    RNA binding proteins (RBPs) containing intrinsically disordered regions (IDRs) are present in diverse molecular complexes where they function as dynamic regulators. Their characteristics promote liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS) and the formation of membraneless organelles such as stress granules and nucleoli. IDR-RBPs are particularly relevant in the nervous system and their dysfunction is associated with neurodegenerative diseases and brain tumor development. Serpine1 mRNA-binding protein 1 (SERBP1) is a unique member of this group, being mostly disordered and lacking canonical RNA-binding domains. We defined SERBP1’s interactome, uncovered novel roles in splicing, cell division and ribosomal biogenesis, and showed its participation in pathological stress granules and Tau aggregates in Alzheimer’s brains. SERBP1 preferentially interacts with other G-quadruplex (G4) binders, implicated in different stages of gene expression, suggesting that G4 binding is a critical component of SERBP1 function in different settings. Similarly, we identified important associations between SERBP1 and PARP1/polyADP-ribosylation (PARylation). SERBP1 interacts with PARP1 and its associated factors and influences PARylation. Moreover, protein complexes in which SERBP1 participates contain mostly PARylated proteins and PAR binders. Based on these results, we propose a feedback regulatory model in which SERBP1 influences PARP1 function and PARylation, while PARylation modulates SERBP1 functions and participation in regulatory complexes.