Seipin is required for converting nascent to mature lipid droplets

  1. Huajin Wang
  2. Michel Becuwe
  3. Benjamin E Housden
  4. Chandramohan Chitraju
  5. Ashley J Porras
  6. Morven M Graham
  7. Xinran N Liu
  8. Abdou Rachid Thiam
  9. David B Savage
  10. Anil K Agarwal
  11. Abhimanyu Garg
  12. Maria-Jesus Olarte
  13. Qingqing Lin
  14. Florian Fröhlich
  15. Hans Kristian Hannibal-Bach
  16. Srigokul Upadhyayula
  17. Norbert Perrimon
  18. Tomas Kirchhausen
  19. Christer S Ejsing
  20. Tobias C Walther  Is a corresponding author
  21. Robert V Farese  Is a corresponding author
  1. Carnegie Mellon University, United States
  2. Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, United States
  3. Harvard Medical School, United States
  4. Yale School of Medicine, United States
  5. PSL Research University, France
  6. The University of Cambridge Metabolic Research Laboratories, United Kingdom
  7. UT Southwestern Medical Center, United States
  8. University of Southern Denmark, Denmark

Abstract

How proteins control the biogenesis of cellular lipid droplets (LDs) is poorly understood. Using Drosophila and human cells, we show here that seipin, an ER protein implicated in LD biology, mediates a discrete step in LD formation-the conversion of small, nascent LDs to larger, mature LDs. Seipin forms discrete and dynamic foci in the ER that interact with nascent LDs to enable their growth. In the absence of seipin, numerous small, nascent LDs accumulate near the ER and most often fail to grow. Those that do grow prematurely acquire lipid synthesis enzymes and undergo expansion, eventually leading to the giant LDs characteristic of seipin deficiency. Our studies identify a discrete step of LD formation, namely the conversion of nascent LDs to mature LDs, and define a molecular role for seipin in this process, most likely by acting at ER-LD contact sites to enable lipid transfer to nascent LDs.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Huajin Wang

    Department of Biological Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Michel Becuwe

    Department of Genetics and Complex Diseases, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Benjamin E Housden

    Department of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Chandramohan Chitraju

    Department of Genetics and Complex Diseases, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Ashley J Porras

    Department of Genetics and Complex Diseases, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Morven M Graham

    Department of Cell Biology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Xinran N Liu

    Department of Cell Biology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Abdou Rachid Thiam

    Laboratoire de Physique Statistique, École Normale Supérieure, PSL Research University, Paris, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. David B Savage

    Wellcome Trust-MRC Institute of Metabolic Science, The University of Cambridge Metabolic Research Laboratories, Cambridge, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Anil K Agarwal

    Division of Nutrition and Metabolic Diseases, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Abhimanyu Garg

    Division of Nutrition and Metabolic Diseases, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Maria-Jesus Olarte

    Department of Genetics and Complex Diseases, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Qingqing Lin

    Department of Genetics and Complex Diseases, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Florian Fröhlich

    Department of Genetics and Complex Diseases, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Hans Kristian Hannibal-Bach

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Srigokul Upadhyayula

    Departments of Cell Biology and Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Norbert Perrimon

    Department of Genetics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Tomas Kirchhausen

    Departments of Cell Biology and Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  19. Christer S Ejsing

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  20. Tobias C Walther

    Department of Genetics and Complex Diseases, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, United States
    For correspondence
    twalther@hsph.harvard.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  21. Robert V Farese

    Department of Genetics and Complex Diseases, Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, United States
    For correspondence
    robert@hsph.harvard.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8103-2239

Funding

National Institutes of Health (GM099844, GM097194, GM-075252)

  • Tomas Kirchhausen
  • Tobias C Walther
  • Robert V Farese

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

  • Norbert Perrimon
  • Tobias C Walther

G Harold and Leila Y. Mathers Foundation

  • Tobias C Walther

Villum Fonden (VKR023439)

  • Christer S Ejsing

Danish Council for Strategic Research (11-116196)

  • Christer S Ejsing

Wellcome Trust (WT107064)

  • David B Savage

Cambridge NIHR BRC

  • David B Savage

Biogen

  • Tomas Kirchhausen

Canadian Institutes of Health Research (Fellowship Award)

  • Huajin Wang

European Molecular Biology Organization (Longterm Fellowship EMBOLFT355)

  • Michel Becuwe

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Copyright

© 2016, Wang 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

  • 8,687
    views
  • 2,132
    downloads
  • 320
    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. Huajin Wang
  2. Michel Becuwe
  3. Benjamin E Housden
  4. Chandramohan Chitraju
  5. Ashley J Porras
  6. Morven M Graham
  7. Xinran N Liu
  8. Abdou Rachid Thiam
  9. David B Savage
  10. Anil K Agarwal
  11. Abhimanyu Garg
  12. Maria-Jesus Olarte
  13. Qingqing Lin
  14. Florian Fröhlich
  15. Hans Kristian Hannibal-Bach
  16. Srigokul Upadhyayula
  17. Norbert Perrimon
  18. Tomas Kirchhausen
  19. Christer S Ejsing
  20. Tobias C Walther
  21. Robert V Farese
(2016)
Seipin is required for converting nascent to mature lipid droplets
eLife 5:e16582.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.16582

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.16582

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    Tomoharu Kanie, Beibei Liu ... Peter K Jackson
    Research Article

    Distal appendages are nine-fold symmetric blade-like structures attached to the distal end of the mother centriole. These structures are critical for formation of the primary cilium, by regulating at least four critical steps: ciliary vesicle recruitment, recruitment and initiation of intraflagellar transport (IFT), and removal of CP110. While specific proteins that localize to the distal appendages have been identified, how exactly each protein functions to achieve the multiple roles of the distal appendages is poorly understood. Here we comprehensively analyze known and newly discovered distal appendage proteins (CEP83, SCLT1, CEP164, TTBK2, FBF1, CEP89, KIZ, ANKRD26, PIDD1, LRRC45, NCS1, CEP15) for their precise localization, order of recruitment, and their roles in each step of cilia formation. Using CRISPR-Cas9 knockouts, we show that the order of the recruitment of the distal appendage proteins is highly interconnected and a more complex hierarchy. Our analysis highlights two protein modules, CEP83-SCLT1 and CEP164-TTBK2, as critical for structural assembly of distal appendages. Functional assays revealed that CEP89 selectively functions in RAB34+ ciliary vesicle recruitment, while deletion of the integral components, CEP83-SCLT1-CEP164-TTBK2, severely compromised all four steps of cilium formation. Collectively, our analyses provide a more comprehensive view of the organization and the function of the distal appendage, paving the way for molecular understanding of ciliary assembly.

    1. Cell Biology
    Tomoharu Kanie, Roy Ng ... Peter K Jackson
    Research Article

    The primary cilium is a microtubule-based organelle that cycles through assembly and disassembly. In many cell types, formation of the cilium is initiated by recruitment of ciliary vesicles to the distal appendage of the mother centriole. However, the distal appendage mechanism that directly captures ciliary vesicles is yet to be identified. In an accompanying paper, we show that the distal appendage protein, CEP89, is important for the ciliary vesicle recruitment, but not for other steps of cilium formation (Tomoharu Kanie, Love, Fisher, Gustavsson, & Jackson, 2023). The lack of a membrane binding motif in CEP89 suggests that it may indirectly recruit ciliary vesicles via another binding partner. Here, we identify Neuronal Calcium Sensor-1 (NCS1) as a stoichiometric interactor of CEP89. NCS1 localizes to the position between CEP89 and a ciliary vesicle marker, RAB34, at the distal appendage. This localization was completely abolished in CEP89 knockouts, suggesting that CEP89 recruits NCS1 to the distal appendage. Similarly to CEP89 knockouts, ciliary vesicle recruitment as well as subsequent cilium formation was perturbed in NCS1 knockout cells. The ability of NCS1 to recruit the ciliary vesicle is dependent on its myristoylation motif and NCS1 knockout cells expressing a myristoylation defective mutant failed to rescue the vesicle recruitment defect despite localizing properly to the centriole. In sum, our analysis reveals the first known mechanism for how the distal appendage recruits the ciliary vesicles.