Nucleophosmin integrates within the nucleolus via multi-modal interactions with proteins displaying R-rich linear motifs and rRNA

  1. Diana M Mitrea
  2. Jaclyn A Cika
  3. Clifford S Guy
  4. David Ban
  5. Priya R Banerjee
  6. Christopher B Stanley
  7. Amanda Nourse
  8. Ashok A Deniz
  9. Richard W Kriwacki  Is a corresponding author
  1. St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, United States
  2. University of Louisville, United States
  3. The Scripps Research Institute, United States
  4. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, United States

Abstract

The nucleolus is a membrane-less organelle formed through liquid-liquid phase separation of its components from the surrounding nucleoplasm. Here, we show that nucleophosmin (NPM1) integrates within the nucleolus via a multi-modal mechanism involving multivalent interactions with proteins containing arginine-rich linear motifs (R-motifs) and rRNA. Importantly, these R-motifs are found in canonical nucleolar localization signals. Based on a novel combination of approaches, including smFRET, NMR, and SANS, we propose a model for the molecular organization within liquid-like droplets formed by the N-terminal domain of NPM1 and R-motif peptides, thus providing insights into the structural organization of the nucleolus. We identify multivalency of acidic tracts and folded nucleic acid binding domains, mediated by N-terminal domain oligomerization, as structural features required for phase separation of NPM1 with other nucleolar components in vitro and for localization within mammalian nucleoli. We propose that one mechanism of nucleolar localization involves phase separation of proteins within the nucleolus.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Diana M Mitrea

    Department of Structural Biology, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Jaclyn A Cika

    Department of Structural Biology, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Clifford S Guy

    Department of Immunology, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. David Ban

    Cancer Center, University of Louisville, Louisville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Priya R Banerjee

    Department of Integrative Structural and Computational Biology, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Christopher B Stanley

    Biology and Biomedical Sciences Group, Biology and Soft Matter Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Amanda Nourse

    Department of Structural Biology, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Ashok A Deniz

    Department of Integrative Structural and Computational Biology, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Richard W Kriwacki

    Department of Structural Biology, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, United States
    For correspondence
    richard.kriwacki@stjude.org
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Copyright

© 2016, Mitrea 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

  • 9,879
    views
  • 2,116
    downloads
  • 455
    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. Diana M Mitrea
  2. Jaclyn A Cika
  3. Clifford S Guy
  4. David Ban
  5. Priya R Banerjee
  6. Christopher B Stanley
  7. Amanda Nourse
  8. Ashok A Deniz
  9. Richard W Kriwacki
(2016)
Nucleophosmin integrates within the nucleolus via multi-modal interactions with proteins displaying R-rich linear motifs and rRNA
eLife 5:e13571.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.13571

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.13571

Further reading

    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.

    1. Immunology and Inflammation
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Colleen A Maillie, Kiana Golden ... Marco Mravic
    Research Article

    A potent class of HIV-1 broadly neutralizing antibodies (bnAbs) targets the envelope glycoprotein’s membrane proximal exposed region (MPER) through a proposed mechanism where hypervariable loops embed into lipid bilayers and engage headgroup moieties alongside the epitope. We address the feasibility and determinant molecular features of this mechanism using multi-scale modeling. All-atom simulations of 4E10, PGZL1, 10E8, and LN01 docked onto HIV-like membranes consistently form phospholipid complexes at key complementarity-determining region loop sites, solidifying that stable and specific lipid interactions anchor bnAbs to membrane surfaces. Ancillary protein-lipid contacts reveal surprising contributions from antibody framework regions. Coarse-grained simulations effectively capture antibodies embedding into membranes. Simulations estimating protein-membrane interaction strength for PGZL1 variants along an inferred maturation pathway show bilayer affinity is evolved and correlates with neutralization potency. The modeling demonstrated here uncovers insights into lipid participation in antibodies’ recognition of membrane proteins and highlights antibody features to prioritize in vaccine design.