The brown adipocyte protein CIDEA promotes lipid droplet fusion via a phosphatidic acid-binding amphipathic helix

  1. David Barneda
  2. Joan Planas-Iglesias
  3. Maria L Gaspar
  4. Dariush Mohammadyani
  5. Sunil Prasannan
  6. Dirk Dormann
  7. Gil-Soo Han
  8. Stephen A Jesch
  9. George M Carman
  10. Valerian Kagan
  11. Malcolm G Parker
  12. Nicholas T Ktistakis
  13. Ann M Dixon
  14. Judith Klein-Seetharaman
  15. Susan Henry
  16. Mark Christian  Is a corresponding author
  1. Imperial College London, United Kingdom
  2. University of Warwick, United Kingdom
  3. Cornell University, United States
  4. University of Pittsburgh, United States
  5. Imperial College London, United States
  6. Rutgers University, United States
  7. Babraham Institute, United Kingdom

Abstract

Maintenance of energy homeostasis depends on the highly regulated storage and release of triacylglycerol primarily in adipose tissue and excessive storage is a feature of common metabolic disorders. CIDEA is a lipid droplet (LD)-protein enriched in brown adipocytes promoting the enlargement of LDs which are dynamic, ubiquitous organelles specialized for storing neutral lipids. We demonstrate an essential role in this process for an amphipathic helix in CIDEA, which facilitates embedding in the LD phospholipid monolayer and binds phosphatidic acid (PA). LD pairs are docked by CIDEA trans-complexes through contributions of the N-terminal domain and a C-terminal dimerization region. These complexes, enriched at the LD-LD contact site, interact with the cone-shaped phospholipid PA and likely increase phospholipid barrier permeability, promoting LD fusion by transference of lipids. This physiological process is essential in adipocyte differentiation as well as serving to facilitate the tight coupling of lipolysis and lipogenesis in activated brown fat.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. David Barneda

    Institute of Reproductive and Developmental Biology, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Joan Planas-Iglesias

    Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Maria L Gaspar

    Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Cornell University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Dariush Mohammadyani

    Department of Bioengineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Sunil Prasannan

    Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Dirk Dormann

    Microscopy Facility, MRC Clinical Sciences Centre, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Gil-Soo Han

    Microscopy Facility, MRC Clinical Sciences Centre, Imperial College London, London, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Stephen A Jesch

    Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Cornell University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. George M Carman

    Department of Food Science, Rutgers Center for Lipid Research, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Valerian Kagan

    Department of Bioengineering, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Malcolm G Parker

    Institute of Reproductive and Developmental Biology, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Nicholas T Ktistakis

    Signalling Programme, Babraham Institute, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Ann M Dixon

    Department of Chemistry, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Judith Klein-Seetharaman

    Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Susan Henry

    Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Cornell University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Mark Christian

    Institute of Reproductive and Developmental Biology, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    m.christian@warwick.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Stephen G Young, University of California, Los Angeles, United States

Publication history

  1. Received: March 13, 2015
  2. Accepted: November 25, 2015
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: November 26, 2015 (version 1)
  4. Accepted Manuscript updated: December 10, 2015 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record published: February 3, 2016 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2015, Barneda 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

  • 4,210
    Page views
  • 1,069
    Downloads
  • 69
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, Scopus, PubMed Central.

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. David Barneda
  2. Joan Planas-Iglesias
  3. Maria L Gaspar
  4. Dariush Mohammadyani
  5. Sunil Prasannan
  6. Dirk Dormann
  7. Gil-Soo Han
  8. Stephen A Jesch
  9. George M Carman
  10. Valerian Kagan
  11. Malcolm G Parker
  12. Nicholas T Ktistakis
  13. Ann M Dixon
  14. Judith Klein-Seetharaman
  15. Susan Henry
  16. Mark Christian
(2015)
The brown adipocyte protein CIDEA promotes lipid droplet fusion via a phosphatidic acid-binding amphipathic helix
eLife 4:e07485.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.07485

Further reading

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Marina Schrecker et al.
    Research Article

    The DNA sliding clamp proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA) is an essential co-factor for many eukaryotic DNA metabolic enzymes. PCNA is loaded around DNA by the ATP-dependent clamp loader replication factor C (RFC), which acts at single-stranded (ss)/double-stranded DNA (dsDNA) junctions harboring a recessed 3’ end (3’ ss/dsDNA junctions) and at DNA nicks. To illuminate the loading mechanism we have investigated the structure of RFC:PCNA bound to ATPγS and 3’ ss/dsDNA junctions or nicked DNA using cryogenic electron microscopy. Unexpectedly, we observe open and closed PCNA conformations in the RFC:PCNA:DNA complex, revealing that PCNA can adopt an open, planar conformation that allows direct insertion of dsDNA, and raising the question of whether PCNA ring closure is mechanistically coupled to ATP hydrolysis. By resolving multiple DNA-bound states of RFC:PCNA we observe that partial melting facilitates lateral insertion into the central channel formed by RFC:PCNA. We also resolve the Rfc1 N-terminal domain and demonstrate that its single BRCT domain participates in coordinating DNA prior to insertion into the central RFC channel, which promotes PCNA loading on the lagging strand of replication forks in vitro. Combined, our data suggest a comprehensive and fundamentally revised model for the RFC-catalyzed loading of PCNA onto DNA.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Rajesh Sharma et al.
    Research Article

    Cyclic GMP-dependent protein kinases (PKGs) are key mediators of the nitric oxide/cGMP signaling pathway that regulates biological functions as diverse as smooth muscle contraction, cardiac function, and axon guidance. Understanding how cGMP differentially triggers mammalian PKG isoforms could lead to new therapeutics that inhibit or activate PKGs, complementing drugs that target nitric oxide synthases and cyclic nucleotide phosphodiesterases in this signaling axis. Alternate splicing of PRKG1 transcripts confers distinct leucine zippers, linkers, and auto-inhibitory pseudo-substrate sequences to PKG Iα and Iβ that result in isoform-specific activation properties, but the mechanism of enzyme auto-inhibition and its alleviation by cGMP is not well understood. Here we present a crystal structure of PKG Iβ in which the auto-inhibitory sequence and the cyclic nucleotide binding domains are bound to the catalytic domain, providing a snapshot of the auto-inhibited state. Specific contacts between the PKG Iβ auto-inhibitory sequence and the enzyme active site help explain isoform-specific activation constants and the effects of phosphorylation in the linker. We also present a crystal structure of a PKG I cyclic nucleotide binding domain with an activating mutation linked to Thoracic Aortic Aneurysms and Dissections. Similarity of this structure to wild type cGMP-bound domains and differences with the auto-inhibited enzyme provide a mechanistic basis for constitutive activation. We show that PKG Iβ auto-inhibition is mediated by contacts within each monomer of the native full-length dimeric protein, and using the available structural and biochemical data we develop a model for the regulation and cooperative activation of PKGs.