Implications of the differing roles of the β1 and β3 transmembrane and cytosplasmic domains for integrin function

  1. Zhenwei Lu
  2. Sijo Mathew
  3. Jiang Chen
  4. Arina Hadziselimovic
  5. Riya Palamuttam
  6. Billy G Hudson
  7. Reinhard Faessler
  8. Ambra Pozzi
  9. Charles R Sanders  Is a corresponding author
  10. Roy Zent  Is a corresponding author
  1. Vanderbilt University Medical Center, United States
  2. Vanderbilt Medical Center, United States
  3. Virginia Tech, United States
  4. Max Planck Institute of Biochemistry, Germany

Abstract

Integrins are transmembrane receptors composed of α and β subunits. Although most integrins contain β1, canonical activation mechanisms are based on studies of the platelet integrin, αIIbβ3. Its inactive conformation is characterized by association of the αIIb transmembrane and cytosolic domain (TM/CT) with a tilted β3 TM/CT that leads to activation when disrupted. We show significant structural differences between β1 and β3 TM/CT in bicelles. Moreover, the 'snorkeling' lysine at the TM/CT interface of β subunits, previously proposed to regulate αIIbβ3 activation by ion pairing with nearby lipids, plays opposite roles in β1 and β3 integrin function and in neither case is responsible for TM tilt. Affinities ranging from almost no interaction to the relatively high avidity that characterizes αIIbβ3 exist between various α subunits and β1 TM/CTs. The αIIbβ3-based canonical model for the roles of the TM/CT in integrin activation and function clearly does not extend to all mammalian integrins.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Zhenwei Lu

    Department of Biochemistry, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  2. Sijo Mathew

    Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt Medical Center, Nashville, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  3. Jiang Chen

    Department of Biomedical Sciences and Pathobiology, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. Arina Hadziselimovic

    Department of Biochemistry, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  5. Riya Palamuttam

    Department of Biochemistry, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  6. Billy G Hudson

    Department of Biochemistry, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  7. Reinhard Faessler

    Department of Molecular Medicine, Max Planck Institute of Biochemistry, Martinsried, Germany
    Competing interests
    Reinhard Faessler, Reviewing editor, eLife.
  8. Ambra Pozzi

    Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, United States
    Competing interests
    Ambra Pozzi, Reviewing editor, eLife.
  9. Charles R Sanders

    Department of Biochemistry, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, United States
    For correspondence
    chuck.sanders@vanderbilt.edu
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2046-2862
  10. Roy Zent

    Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, United States
    For correspondence
    roy.zent@vanderbilt.edu
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2983-8133

Funding

Veterans Affairs San Diego Healthcare System

  • Ambra Pozzi
  • Roy Zent

National Institutes of Health

  • Billy G Hudson
  • Ambra Pozzi
  • Charles R Sanders
  • Roy Zent

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Maddy Parsons, King's College London, United Kingdom

Version history

  1. Received: June 9, 2016
  2. Accepted: December 7, 2016
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: December 8, 2016 (version 1)
  4. Accepted Manuscript updated: December 9, 2016 (version 2)
  5. Accepted Manuscript updated: December 9, 2016 (version 3)
  6. Version of Record published: January 3, 2017 (version 4)
  7. Version of Record updated: January 4, 2017 (version 5)

Copyright

© 2016, Lu 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

  • 1,934
    views
  • 520
    downloads
  • 26
    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. Zhenwei Lu
  2. Sijo Mathew
  3. Jiang Chen
  4. Arina Hadziselimovic
  5. Riya Palamuttam
  6. Billy G Hudson
  7. Reinhard Faessler
  8. Ambra Pozzi
  9. Charles R Sanders
  10. Roy Zent
(2016)
Implications of the differing roles of the β1 and β3 transmembrane and cytosplasmic domains for integrin function
eLife 5:e18633.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.18633

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.18633

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Cell Biology
    Natalia Dolgova, Eva-Maria E Uhlemann ... Oleg Y Dmitriev
    Research Article

    Mediator of ERBB2-driven Cell Motility 1 (MEMO1) is an evolutionary conserved protein implicated in many biological processes; however, its primary molecular function remains unknown. Importantly, MEMO1 is overexpressed in many types of cancer and was shown to modulate breast cancer metastasis through altered cell motility. To better understand the function of MEMO1 in cancer cells, we analyzed genetic interactions of MEMO1 using gene essentiality data from 1028 cancer cell lines and found multiple iron-related genes exhibiting genetic relationships with MEMO1. We experimentally confirmed several interactions between MEMO1 and iron-related proteins in living cells, most notably, transferrin receptor 2 (TFR2), mitoferrin-2 (SLC25A28), and the global iron response regulator IRP1 (ACO1). These interactions indicate that cells with high MEMO1 expression levels are hypersensitive to the disruptions in iron distribution. Our data also indicate that MEMO1 is involved in ferroptosis and is linked to iron supply to mitochondria. We have found that purified MEMO1 binds iron with high affinity under redox conditions mimicking intracellular environment and solved MEMO1 structures in complex with iron and copper. Our work reveals that the iron coordination mode in MEMO1 is very similar to that of iron-containing extradiol dioxygenases, which also display a similar structural fold. We conclude that MEMO1 is an iron-binding protein that modulates iron homeostasis in cancer cells.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Isabelle Petit-Hartlein, Annelise Vermot ... Franck Fieschi
    Research Article

    NADPH oxidases (NOX) are transmembrane proteins, widely spread in eukaryotes and prokaryotes, that produce reactive oxygen species (ROS). Eukaryotes use the ROS products for innate immune defense and signaling in critical (patho)physiological processes. Despite the recent structures of human NOX isoforms, the activation of electron transfer remains incompletely understood. SpNOX, a homolog from Streptococcus pneumoniae, can serves as a robust model for exploring electron transfers in the NOX family thanks to its constitutive activity. Crystal structures of SpNOX full-length and dehydrogenase (DH) domain constructs are revealed here. The isolated DH domain acts as a flavin reductase, and both constructs use either NADPH or NADH as substrate. Our findings suggest that hydride transfer from NAD(P)H to FAD is the rate-limiting step in electron transfer. We identify significance of F397 in nicotinamide access to flavin isoalloxazine and confirm flavin binding contributions from both DH and Transmembrane (TM) domains. Comparison with related enzymes suggests that distal access to heme may influence the final electron acceptor, while the relative position of DH and TM does not necessarily correlate with activity, contrary to previous suggestions. It rather suggests requirement of an internal rearrangement, within the DH domain, to switch from a resting to an active state. Thus, SpNOX appears to be a good model of active NOX2, which allows us to propose an explanation for NOX2’s requirement for activation.