Architecture and dynamics of the autophagic phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase complex

  1. Sulochanadevi Baskaran
  2. Lars-Anders Carlson
  3. Goran Stjepanovic
  4. Lindsey N Young
  5. Do Jin Kim
  6. Patricia Grob
  7. Robin E Stanley
  8. Eva Nogales
  9. James H Hurley  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of California, Berkeley, United States
  2. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of California, Berkeley, United States
  3. Laboratory of Molecular Biology, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, United States

Abstract

The class III phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase complex I (PI3KC3-C1) that functions in early autophagy consists of the lipid kinase VPS34, the scaffolding protein VPS15, the tumor suppressor BECN1, and the autophagy-specific subunit ATG14. The structure of the ATG14-containing PI3KC3-C1 was determined by single-particle EM, revealing a V-shaped architecture. All of the ordered domains of VPS34, VPS15, and BECN1 were mapped by MBP tagging. The dynamics of the complex were defined using hydrogen-deuterium exchange, revealing a novel 20-residue ordered region C-terminal to the VPS34 C2 domain. VPS15 organizes the complex and serves as a bridge between VPS34 and the ATG14:BECN1 subcomplex. Dynamic transitions occur in which the lipid kinase domain is ejected from the complex and VPS15 pivots at the base of the V. The N-terminus of BECN1, the target for signaling inputs, resides near the pivot point. These observations provide a framework for understanding the allosteric regulation of lipid kinase activity.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Sulochanadevi Baskaran

    Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Lars-Anders Carlson

    Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Goran Stjepanovic

    Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Lindsey N Young

    Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Do Jin Kim

    Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Patricia Grob

    Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Robin E Stanley

    National Institutes of Health, Laboratory of Molecular Biology, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Bethesda, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Eva Nogales

    Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. James H Hurley

    Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    For correspondence
    jimhurley@berkeley.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Copyright

This is an open-access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.

Metrics

  • 5,551
    views
  • 902
    downloads
  • 132
    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. Sulochanadevi Baskaran
  2. Lars-Anders Carlson
  3. Goran Stjepanovic
  4. Lindsey N Young
  5. Do Jin Kim
  6. Patricia Grob
  7. Robin E Stanley
  8. Eva Nogales
  9. James H Hurley
(2014)
Architecture and dynamics of the autophagic phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase complex
eLife 3:e05115.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.05115

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.05115

Further reading

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Jinsai Shang, Douglas J Kojetin
    Research Advance

    Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPARγ) is a nuclear receptor transcription factor that regulates gene expression programs in response to ligand binding. Endogenous and synthetic ligands, including covalent antagonist inhibitors GW9662 and T0070907, are thought to compete for the orthosteric pocket in the ligand-binding domain (LBD). However, we previously showed that synthetic PPARγ ligands can cooperatively cobind with and reposition a bound endogenous orthosteric ligand to an alternate site, synergistically regulating PPARγ structure and function (Shang et al., 2018). Here, we reveal the structural mechanism of cobinding between a synthetic covalent antagonist inhibitor with other synthetic ligands. Biochemical and NMR data show that covalent inhibitors weaken—but do not prevent—the binding of other ligands via an allosteric mechanism, rather than direct ligand clashing, by shifting the LBD ensemble toward a transcriptionally repressive conformation, which structurally clashes with orthosteric ligand binding. Crystal structures reveal different cobinding mechanisms including alternate site binding to unexpectedly adopting an orthosteric binding mode by altering the covalent inhibitor binding pose. Our findings highlight the significant flexibility of the PPARγ orthosteric pocket, its ability to accommodate multiple ligands, and demonstrate that GW9662 and T0070907 should not be used as chemical tools to inhibit ligand binding to PPARγ.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Jie Luo, Jeff Ranish
    Tools and Resources

    Dynamic conformational and structural changes in proteins and protein complexes play a central and ubiquitous role in the regulation of protein function, yet it is very challenging to study these changes, especially for large protein complexes, under physiological conditions. Here, we introduce a novel isobaric crosslinker, Qlinker, for studying conformational and structural changes in proteins and protein complexes using quantitative crosslinking mass spectrometry. Qlinkers are small and simple, amine-reactive molecules with an optimal extended distance of ~10 Å, which use MS2 reporter ions for relative quantification of Qlinker-modified peptides derived from different samples. We synthesized the 2-plex Q2linker and showed that the Q2linker can provide quantitative crosslinking data that pinpoints key conformational and structural changes in biosensors, binary and ternary complexes composed of the general transcription factors TBP, TFIIA, and TFIIB, and RNA polymerase II complexes.