Centriolar satellites assemble centrosomal microcephaly proteins to recruit CDK2 and promote centriole duplication

  1. Andrew Kodani
  2. Timothy W Yu
  3. Jeffrey R Johnson
  4. Divya Jayaraman
  5. Tasha L Johnson
  6. Lihadh Al-Gazali
  7. Lāszló Sztriha
  8. Jennifer N Partlow
  9. Hanjun Kim
  10. Alexis L Krup
  11. Alexander Dammermann
  12. Nevan Krogan
  13. Christopher A Walsh
  14. Jeremy F Reiter  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of California, San Francisco, United States
  2. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Boston Children's Hospital, United States
  3. United Arab Emirates University, United Arab Emirates
  4. University of Vienna, Austria
  5. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, United States

Abstract

Primary microcephaly (MCPH) associated proteins CDK5RAP2, CEP152, WDR62 and CEP63 colocalize at the centrosome. We found that they interact to promote centriole duplication and form a hierarchy in which each is required to localize another to the centrosome, with CDK5RAP2 at the apex, and CEP152, WDR62 and CEP63 at sequentially lower positions. MCPH proteins interact with distinct centriolar satellite proteins; CDK5RAP2 interacts with SPAG5 and CEP72, CEP152 with CEP131, WDR62 with MOONRAKER, and CEP63 with CEP90 and CCDC14. These satellite proteins localize their cognate MCPH interactors to centrosomes and also promote centriole duplication. Consistent with a role for satellites in microcephaly, homozygous mutations in one satellite gene,CEP90, may cause MCPH. The satellite proteins, with the exception of CCDC14, and MCPH proteins promote centriole duplication by recruiting CDK2 to the centrosome. Thus, centriolar satellites build a MCPH complex critical for human neurodevelopment that promotes CDK2 centrosomal localization and centriole duplication.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Andrew Kodani

    Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, Cardiovascular Research Institute, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Timothy W Yu

    Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Jeffrey R Johnson

    Department of Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Divya Jayaraman

    Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Tasha L Johnson

    Department of Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Lihadh Al-Gazali

    Department of Paediatrics, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, United Arab Emirates University, Al-Ain, United Arab Emirates
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Lāszló Sztriha

    Department of Paediatrics, College of Medicine and Health Sciences, United Arab Emirates University, Al-Ain, United Arab Emirates
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Jennifer N Partlow

    Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Hanjun Kim

    Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, Cardiovascular Research Institute, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Alexis L Krup

    Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, Cardiovascular Research Institute, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Alexander Dammermann

    Max F. Perutz Laboratories, University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Nevan Krogan

    Department of Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Christopher A Walsh

    Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Jeremy F Reiter

    Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, Cardiovascular Research Institute, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    For correspondence
    Jeremy.Reiter@ucsf.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Ethics

Human subjects: Subjects were identified and evaluated in a clinical setting for medical history, cognitive impairment and physical abnormalities. Peripheral blood samples were collected from the affected individuals and family members after obtaining written informed consent according to the protocols approved by the participating institutions and the ethical standards of the responsible national and institutional committees on human subject research.

Copyright

© 2015, Kodani 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

  • 4,084
    views
  • 1,280
    downloads
  • 117
    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. Andrew Kodani
  2. Timothy W Yu
  3. Jeffrey R Johnson
  4. Divya Jayaraman
  5. Tasha L Johnson
  6. Lihadh Al-Gazali
  7. Lāszló Sztriha
  8. Jennifer N Partlow
  9. Hanjun Kim
  10. Alexis L Krup
  11. Alexander Dammermann
  12. Nevan Krogan
  13. Christopher A Walsh
  14. Jeremy F Reiter
(2015)
Centriolar satellites assemble centrosomal microcephaly proteins to recruit CDK2 and promote centriole duplication
eLife 4:e07519.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.07519

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.07519

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    Kaima Tsukada, Rikiya Imamura ... Mikio Shimada
    Research Article

    Polynucleotide kinase phosphatase (PNKP) has enzymatic activities as 3′-phosphatase and 5′-kinase of DNA ends to promote DNA ligation and repair. Here, we show that cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKs) regulate the phosphorylation of threonine 118 (T118) in PNKP. This phosphorylation allows recruitment to the gapped DNA structure found in single-strand DNA (ssDNA) nicks and/or gaps between Okazaki fragments (OFs) during DNA replication. T118A (alanine)-substituted PNKP-expressing cells exhibited an accumulation of ssDNA gaps in S phase and accelerated replication fork progression. Furthermore, PNKP is involved in poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase 1 (PARP1)-dependent replication gap filling as part of a backup pathway in the absence of OFs ligation. Altogether, our data suggest that CDK-mediated PNKP phosphorylation at T118 is important for its recruitment to ssDNA gaps to proceed with OFs ligation and its backup repairs via the gap-filling pathway to maintain genome stability.

    1. Cell Biology
    Jittoku Ihara, Yibin Huang ... Koichi Yamamoto
    Research Article

    Chronic kidney disease (CKD) and atherosclerotic heart disease, frequently associated with dyslipidemia and hypertension, represent significant health concerns. We investigated the interplay among these conditions, focusing on the role of oxidized low-density lipoprotein (oxLDL) and angiotensin II (Ang II) in renal injury via G protein αq subunit (Gq) signaling. We hypothesized that oxLDL enhances Ang II-induced Gq signaling via the AT1 (Ang II type 1 receptor)-LOX1 (lectin-like oxLDL receptor) complex. Based on CHO and renal cell model experiments, oxLDL alone did not activate Gq signaling. However, when combined with Ang II, it significantly potentiated Gq-mediated inositol phosphate 1 production and calcium influx in cells expressing both LOX-1 and AT1 but not in AT1-expressing cells. This suggests a critical synergistic interaction between oxLDL and Ang II in the AT1-LOX1 complex. Conformational studies using AT1 biosensors have indicated a unique receptor conformational change due to the oxLDL-Ang II combination. In vivo, wild-type mice fed a high-fat diet with Ang II infusion presented exacerbated renal dysfunction, whereas LOX-1 knockout mice did not, underscoring the pathophysiological relevance of the AT1-LOX1 interaction in renal damage. These findings highlight a novel mechanism of renal dysfunction in CKD driven by dyslipidemia and hypertension and suggest the therapeutic potential of AT1-LOX1 receptor complex in patients with these comorbidities.