Huntingtin's spherical solenoid structure enables polyglutamine tract-dependent modulation of its structure and function

  1. Ravi Vijayvargia
  2. Raquel Epand
  3. Alexander Leitner
  4. Tae-Yang Jung
  5. Baehyun Shin
  6. Roy Jung
  7. Alejandro Lloret
  8. Randy Singh Atwal
  9. Hyeongseok Lee
  10. Jong-Min Lee
  11. Ruedi Aebersold
  12. Hans Hebert
  13. Ji-Joon Song
  14. Ihn Sik Seong  Is a corresponding author
  1. The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, India
  2. McMaster University, Canada
  3. Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich, Switzerland
  4. Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Republic of Korea
  5. Massachusetts General Hospital, United States
  6. Universidad Autónoma de Querétaro, Mexico
  7. Karolinska Institute, Sweden

Abstract

The polyglutamine expansion in huntingtin protein causes Huntington's disease. Here, we investigated structural and biochemical properties of huntingtin and the effect of the polyglutamine expansion using various biophysical experiments including circular dichroism, single-particle electron microscopy and cross-linking mass spectrometry. Huntingtin is likely composed of five distinct domains and adopts a spherical α-helical solenoid where the amino-terminal and carboxyl-terminal regions fold to contain a circumscribed central cavity. Interestingly we showed that the polyglutamine expansion increases α-helical properties of huntingtin and affects the intramolecular interactions among the domains. Our work delineates the structural characteristics of full-length huntingtin, which are affected by the polyglutamine expansion, and provides an elegant solution to the apparent conundrum of how the extreme amino-terminal polyglutamine tract confers a novel property on huntingtin, causing the disease.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Ravi Vijayvargia

    Department of Biochemistry, The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara, India
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Raquel Epand

    Biochemical ad Biomedical Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Alexander Leitner

    Department of Biology, Institute of Molecular Systems Biology, Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Tae-Yang Jung

    Department of Biological Sciences, Cancer Metastasis Control Center, KAIST Institute for the BioCentury, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Daejeon, Republic of Korea
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Baehyun Shin

    Center for Human Genetic Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Roy Jung

    Center for Human Genetic Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Alejandro Lloret

    Facultad de Medicina, Universidad Autónoma de Querétaro, Santiago de Querétaro, Mexico
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Randy Singh Atwal

    Center for Human Genetic Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Hyeongseok Lee

    Department of Biological Sciences, Cancer Metastasis Control Center, KAIST Institute for the BioCentury, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Daejeon, Republic of Korea
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Jong-Min Lee

    Center for Human Genetic Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Ruedi Aebersold

    Department of Biology, Institute of Molecular Systems Biology, Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule Zürich, Zurich, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Hans Hebert

    Department of Biosciences and Nutrition, Karolinska Institute, Solna, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Ji-Joon Song

    Department of Biological Sciences, Cancer Metastasis Control Center, KAIST Institute for the BioCentury, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Daejeon, Republic of Korea
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Ihn Sik Seong

    Center for Human Genetic Research, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, United States
    For correspondence
    iseong@mgh.harvard.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Bart De Strooper, VIB Center for the Biology of Disease, KU Leuven, Belgium

Version history

  1. Received: August 29, 2015
  2. Accepted: March 13, 2016
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: March 22, 2016 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: April 5, 2016 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2016, Vijayvargia 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

  • 5,587
    views
  • 958
    downloads
  • 51
    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. Ravi Vijayvargia
  2. Raquel Epand
  3. Alexander Leitner
  4. Tae-Yang Jung
  5. Baehyun Shin
  6. Roy Jung
  7. Alejandro Lloret
  8. Randy Singh Atwal
  9. Hyeongseok Lee
  10. Jong-Min Lee
  11. Ruedi Aebersold
  12. Hans Hebert
  13. Ji-Joon Song
  14. Ihn Sik Seong
(2016)
Huntingtin's spherical solenoid structure enables polyglutamine tract-dependent modulation of its structure and function
eLife 5:e11184.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.11184

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.11184

Further reading

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Marco van den Noort, Panagiotis Drougkas ... Bert Poolman
    Research Article

    Bacteria utilize various strategies to prevent internal dehydration during hypertonic stress. A common approach to countering the effects of the stress is to import compatible solutes such as glycine betaine, leading to simultaneous passive water fluxes following the osmotic gradient. OpuA from Lactococcus lactis is a type I ABC-importer that uses two substrate-binding domains (SBDs) to capture extracellular glycine betaine and deliver the substrate to the transmembrane domains for subsequent transport. OpuA senses osmotic stress via changes in the internal ionic strength and is furthermore regulated by the 2nd messenger cyclic-di-AMP. We now show, by means of solution-based single-molecule FRET and analysis with multi-parameter photon-by-photon hidden Markov modeling, that the SBDs transiently interact in an ionic strength-dependent manner. The smFRET data are in accordance with the apparent cooperativity in transport and supported by new cryo-EM data of OpuA. We propose that the physical interactions between SBDs and cooperativity in substrate delivery are part of the transport mechanism.

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Xiao-Ru Chen, Karuna Dixit ... Tatyana I Igumenova
    Research Article

    Regulated hydrolysis of the phosphoinositide phosphatidylinositol(4,5)-bis-phosphate to diacylglycerol and inositol-1,4,5-P3 defines a major eukaryotic pathway for translation of extracellular cues to intracellular signaling circuits. Members of the lipid-activated protein kinase C isoenzyme family (PKCs) play central roles in this signaling circuit. One of the regulatory mechanisms employed to downregulate stimulated PKC activity is via a proteasome-dependent degradation pathway that is potentiated by peptidyl-prolyl isomerase Pin1. Here, we show that contrary to prevailing models, Pin1 does not regulate conventional PKC isoforms α and βII via a canonical cis-trans isomerization of the peptidyl-prolyl bond. Rather, Pin1 acts as a PKC binding partner that controls PKC activity via sequestration of the C-terminal tail of the kinase. The high-resolution structure of full-length Pin1 complexed to the C-terminal tail of PKCβII reveals that a novel bivalent interaction mode underlies the non-catalytic mode of Pin1 action. Specifically, Pin1 adopts a conformation in which it uses the WW and PPIase domains to engage two conserved phosphorylated PKC motifs, the turn motif and hydrophobic motif, respectively. Hydrophobic motif is a non-canonical Pin1-interacting element. The structural information combined with the results of extensive binding studies and experiments in cultured cells suggest that non-catalytic mechanisms represent unappreciated modes of Pin1-mediated regulation of AGC kinases and other key enzymes/substrates.