Distinct functional determinants of influenza hemagglutinin-mediated membrane fusion

  1. Tijana Ivanovic  Is a corresponding author
  2. Stephen C Harrison
  1. Brandeis University, United States
  2. Harvard Medical School, United States

Abstract

Membrane fusion is the critical step for infectious cell penetration by enveloped viruses. We have previously used single-virion measurements of fusion kinetics to study the molecular mechanism of influenza-virus envelope fusion. Published data on fusion inhibition by antibodies to the 'stem' of influenza virus hemagglutinin (HA) now allow us to incorporate into simulations the provision that some HAs are inactive. We find that more than half of the HAs are unproductive even for virions with no bound antibodies, but that the overall mechanism is extremely robust. Determining the fraction of competent HAs allows us to determine their rates of target-membrane engagement. Comparison of simulations with data from H3N2 and H1N1 viruses reveals three independent functional variables of HA-mediated membrane fusion closely linked to neutralization susceptibility. Evidence for compensatory changes in the evolved mechanism sets the stage for studies aiming to define the molecular constraints on HA evolvability.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Tijana Ivanovic

    Department of Biochemistry, Brandeis University, Waltham, United States
    For correspondence
    ivanovic@brandeis.edu
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  2. Stephen C Harrison

    Department of Biological Chemistry and Molecular Pharmacology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    Stephen C Harrison, Reviewing editor, eLife.

Copyright

© 2015, Ivanovic & Harrison

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

  • 1,984
    views
  • 457
    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. Tijana Ivanovic
  2. Stephen C Harrison
(2015)
Distinct functional determinants of influenza hemagglutinin-mediated membrane fusion
eLife 4:e11009.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.11009

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.11009

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Yamato Niitani, Kohei Matsuzaki ... Michio Tomishige
    Research Article

    The two identical motor domains (heads) of dimeric kinesin-1 move in a hand-over-hand process along a microtubule, coordinating their ATPase cycles such that each ATP hydrolysis is tightly coupled to a step and enabling the motor to take many steps without dissociating. The neck linker, a structural element that connects the two heads, has been shown to be essential for head–head coordination; however, which kinetic step(s) in the chemomechanical cycle is ‘gated’ by the neck linker remains unresolved. Here, we employed pre-steady-state kinetics and single-molecule assays to investigate how the neck-linker conformation affects kinesin’s motility cycle. We show that the backward-pointing configuration of the neck linker in the front kinesin head confers higher affinity for microtubule, but does not change ATP binding and dissociation rates. In contrast, the forward-pointing configuration of the neck linker in the rear kinesin head decreases the ATP dissociation rate but has little effect on microtubule dissociation. In combination, these conformation-specific effects of the neck linker favor ATP hydrolysis and dissociation of the rear head prior to microtubule detachment of the front head, thereby providing a kinetic explanation for the coordinated walking mechanism of dimeric kinesin.

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Christopher T Schafer, Raymond F Pauszek III ... David P Millar
    Research Article

    The canonical chemokine receptor CXCR4 and atypical receptor ACKR3 both respond to CXCL12 but induce different effector responses to regulate cell migration. While CXCR4 couples to G proteins and directly promotes cell migration, ACKR3 is G-protein-independent and scavenges CXCL12 to regulate extracellular chemokine levels and maintain CXCR4 responsiveness, thereby indirectly influencing migration. The receptors also have distinct activation requirements. CXCR4 only responds to wild-type CXCL12 and is sensitive to mutation of the chemokine. By contrast, ACKR3 recruits GPCR kinases (GRKs) and β-arrestins and promiscuously responds to CXCL12, CXCL12 variants, other peptides and proteins, and is relatively insensitive to mutation. To investigate the role of conformational dynamics in the distinct pharmacological behaviors of CXCR4 and ACKR3, we employed single-molecule FRET to track discrete conformational states of the receptors in real-time. The data revealed that apo-CXCR4 preferentially populates a high-FRET inactive state, while apo-ACKR3 shows little conformational preference and high transition probabilities among multiple inactive, intermediate and active conformations, consistent with its propensity for activation. Multiple active-like ACKR3 conformations are populated in response to agonists, compared to the single CXCR4 active-state. This and the markedly different conformational landscapes of the receptors suggest that activation of ACKR3 may be achieved by a broader distribution of conformational states than CXCR4. Much of the conformational heterogeneity of ACKR3 is linked to a single residue that differs between ACKR3 and CXCR4. The dynamic properties of ACKR3 may underly its inability to form productive interactions with G proteins that would drive canonical GPCR signaling.