Molecular basis of sidekick-mediated cell-cell adhesion and specificity

  1. Kerry M Goodman
  2. Masahito Yamagata
  3. Xiangshu Jin
  4. Seetha Mannepalli
  5. Phinikoula S Katsamba
  6. Göran Ahlsén
  7. Alina P Sergeeva
  8. Barry Honig  Is a corresponding author
  9. Joshua R Sanes  Is a corresponding author
  10. Lawrence Shapiro  Is a corresponding author
  1. Columbia University, United States
  2. Harvard University, United States
  3. Michigan State University, United States

Abstract

Sidekick (Sdk) 1 and 2 are related immunoglobulin superfamily cell adhesion proteins required for appropriate synaptic connections between specific subtypes of retinal neurons. Sdks mediate cell-cell adhesion with homophilic specificity that underlies their neuronal targeting function. Here we report crystal structures of Sdk1 and Sdk2 ectodomain regions, revealing similar homodimers mediated by the four N-terminal immunoglobulin domains (Ig1-4), arranged in a horseshoe conformation. These Ig1-4 horseshoes interact in a novel back-to-back orientation in both homodimers through Ig1:Ig2, Ig1:Ig1 and Ig3:Ig4 interactions. Structure-guided mutagenesis results show that this canonical dimer is required for both Sdk-mediated cell aggregation (via trans interactions) and Sdk clustering in isolated cells (via cis interactions). Sdk1/Sdk2 recognition specificity is encoded across Ig1-4, with Ig1-2 conferring the majority of binding affinity and differential specificity. We suggest that competition between cis and trans interactions provides a novel mechanism to sharpen the specificity of cell-cell interactions.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Kerry M Goodman

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics, Columbia University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Masahito Yamagata

    Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology and Center for Brain Science, Harvard University, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8193-2931
  3. Xiangshu Jin

    Department of Chemistry, Michigan State University, East Lansing, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Seetha Mannepalli

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics, Columbia University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Phinikoula S Katsamba

    Department of Systems Biology, Columbia University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Göran Ahlsén

    Department of Systems Biology, Columbia University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Alina P Sergeeva

    Department of Systems Biology, Columbia University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Barry Honig

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics, Columbia University, New York, United States
    For correspondence
    bh6@cumc.columbia.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2480-6696
  9. Joshua R Sanes

    Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology and Center for Brain Science, Harvard University, Cambridge, United States
    For correspondence
    sanesj@mcb.harvard.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8926-8836
  10. Lawrence Shapiro

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics, Columbia University, New York, United States
    For correspondence
    shapiro@convex.hhmi.columbia.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9943-8819

Funding

National Institutes of Health

  • Lawrence Shapiro

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

  • Xiangshu Jin
  • Phinikoula S Katsamba
  • Alina P Sergeeva
  • Barry Honig

National Institutes of Health

  • Joshua R Sanes

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Mingjie Zhang, The Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, China

Version history

  1. Received: June 23, 2016
  2. Accepted: September 17, 2016
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: September 19, 2016 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: September 30, 2016 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record updated: October 4, 2016 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2016, Goodman 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

  • 2,875
    views
  • 586
    downloads
  • 25
    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. Kerry M Goodman
  2. Masahito Yamagata
  3. Xiangshu Jin
  4. Seetha Mannepalli
  5. Phinikoula S Katsamba
  6. Göran Ahlsén
  7. Alina P Sergeeva
  8. Barry Honig
  9. Joshua R Sanes
  10. Lawrence Shapiro
(2016)
Molecular basis of sidekick-mediated cell-cell adhesion and specificity
eLife 5:e19058.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.19058

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.19058

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Shun Kai Yang, Shintaroh Kubo ... Khanh Huy Bui
    Research Article

    Acetylation of α-tubulin at the lysine 40 residue (αK40) by αTAT1/MEC-17 acetyltransferase modulates microtubule properties and occurs in most eukaryotic cells. Previous literatures suggest that acetylated microtubules are more stable and damage resistant. αK40 acetylation is the only known microtubule luminal post-translational modification site. The luminal location suggests that the modification tunes the lateral interaction of protofilaments inside the microtubule. In this study, we examined the effect of tubulin acetylation on the doublet microtubule (DMT) in the cilia of Tetrahymena thermophila using a combination of cryo-electron microscopy, molecular dynamics, and mass spectrometry. We found that αK40 acetylation exerts a small-scale effect on the DMT structure and stability by influencing the lateral rotational angle. In addition, comparative mass spectrometry revealed a link between αK40 acetylation and phosphorylation in cilia.

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Sebastian Jojoa-Cruz, Adrienne E Dubin ... Andrew B Ward
    Research Advance

    The dimeric two-pore OSCA/TMEM63 family has recently been identified as mechanically activated ion channels. Previously, based on the unique features of the structure of OSCA1.2, we postulated the potential involvement of several structural elements in sensing membrane tension (Jojoa-Cruz et al., 2018). Interestingly, while OSCA1, 2, and 3 clades are activated by membrane stretch in cell-attached patches (i.e. they are stretch-activated channels), they differ in their ability to transduce membrane deformation induced by a blunt probe (poking). Here, in an effort to understand the domains contributing to mechanical signal transduction, we used cryo-electron microscopy to solve the structure of Arabidopsis thaliana (At) OSCA3.1, which, unlike AtOSCA1.2, only produced stretch- but not poke-activated currents in our initial characterization (Murthy et al., 2018). Mutagenesis and electrophysiological assessment of conserved and divergent putative mechanosensitive features of OSCA1.2 reveal a selective disruption of the macroscopic currents elicited by poking without considerable effects on stretch-activated currents (SAC). Our results support the involvement of the amphipathic helix and lipid-interacting residues in the membrane fenestration in the response to poking. Our findings position these two structural elements as potential sources of functional diversity within the family.