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

  • 5,556
    views
  • 908
    downloads
  • 135
    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
    Gabriel E Jara, Francesco Pontiggia ... Dorothee Kern
    Research Article

    Transition-state (TS) theory has provided the theoretical framework to explain the enormous rate accelerations of chemical reactions by enzymes. Given that proteins display large ensembles of conformations, unique TSs would pose a huge entropic bottleneck for enzyme catalysis. To shed light on this question, we studied the nature of the enzymatic TS for the phosphoryl-transfer step in adenylate kinase by quantum-mechanics/molecular-mechanics calculations. We find a structurally wide set of energetically equivalent configurations that lie along the reaction coordinate and hence a broad transition-state ensemble (TSE). A conformationally delocalized ensemble, including asymmetric TSs, is rooted in the macroscopic nature of the enzyme. The computational results are buttressed by enzyme kinetics experiments that confirm the decrease of the entropy of activation predicted from such wide TSE. TSEs as a key for efficient enzyme catalysis further boosts a unifying concept for protein folding and conformational transitions underlying protein function.

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Joseph Clayton, Aarion Romany ... Jana Shen
    Research Article

    Aberrant signaling of BRAFV600E is a major cancer driver. Current FDA-approved RAF inhibitors selectively inhibit the monomeric BRAFV600E and suffer from tumor resistance. Recently, dimer-selective and equipotent RAF inhibitors have been developed; however, the mechanism of dimer selectivity is poorly understood. Here, we report extensive molecular dynamics (MD) simulations of the monomeric and dimeric BRAFV600E in the apo form or in complex with one or two dimer-selective (PHI1) or equipotent (LY3009120) inhibitor(s). The simulations uncovered the unprecedented details of the remarkable allostery in BRAFV600E dimerization and inhibitor binding. Specifically, dimerization retrains and shifts the αC helix inward and increases the flexibility of the DFG motif; dimer compatibility is due to the promotion of the αC-in conformation, which is stabilized by a hydrogen bond formation between the inhibitor and the αC Glu501. A more stable hydrogen bond further restrains and shifts the αC helix inward, which incurs a larger entropic penalty that disfavors monomer binding. This mechanism led us to propose an empirical way based on the co-crystal structure to assess the dimer selectivity of a BRAFV600E inhibitor. Simulations also revealed that the positive cooperativity of PHI1 is due to its ability to preorganize the αC and DFG conformation in the opposite protomer, priming it for binding the second inhibitor. The atomically detailed view of the interplay between BRAF dimerization and inhibitor allostery as well as cooperativity has implications for understanding kinase signaling and contributes to the design of protomer selective RAF inhibitors.