Regulation of signaling directionality revealed by 3D snapshots of a kinase:regulator complex in action
- Institut Pasteur de Montevideo, Uruguay
- Universidad de Buenos Aires, Argentina
Abstract
Two-component systems (TCS) are protein machineries that enable cells to respond to input signals. Histidine kinases (HK) are the sensory component, transferring information toward downstream response regulators (RR). HKs transfer phosphoryl groups to their specific RRs, but also dephosphorylate them, overall ensuring proper signaling. The mechanisms by which HKs discriminate between such disparate directions, are yet unknown. We now disclose crystal structures of the HK:RR complex DesK:DesR from Bacillus subtilis, comprising snapshots of the phosphotransfer and the dephosphorylation reactions. The HK dictates the reactional outcome through conformational rearrangements that include the reactive histidine. The phosphotransfer center is asymmetric, poised for dissociative nucleophilic substitution. The structural bases of HK phosphatase/phosphotransferase control are uncovered, and the unexpected discovery of a dissociative reactional center, sheds light on the evolution of TCS phosphotransfer reversibility. Our findings should be applicable to a broad range of signaling systems and instrumental in synthetic TCS rewiring.
Data availability
-
Crystal structure of phosphorylated DesKCPublicly available at the RCSB Protein Data Bank (accession no: 5IUM).
-
Crystal structure of the DesK-DesR complex in the phosphatase statePublicly available at the RCSB Protein Data Bank (accession no: 5IUN).
-
Crystal structure of the DesK-DesR complex in the phosphotransfer state with low Mg2+ (20 mM)Publicly available at the RCSB Protein Data Bank (accession no: 5IUJ).
-
Crystal structure of the DesK-DesR complex in the phosphotransfer state with high Mg2+ (150 mM)Publicly available at the RCSB Protein Data Bank (accession no: 5IUK).
-
Crystal structure of the DesK-DesR complex in the phosphotransfer state with high Mg2+ (150 mM) and BeF3Publicly available at the RCSB Protein Data Bank (accession no: 5IUL).
Article and author information
Author details
Alejandro Buschiazzo
Funding
Agencia Nacional de Investigación e Innovación (FCE2009_1_2679)
- Felipe Trajtenberg
- Alejandro Buschiazzo
Agence Nationale de la Recherche (PCV06_138918)
- Alejandro Buschiazzo
FOCEM (COF 03/11)
- Alejandro Buschiazzo
Centro de Biologia Estructural del Mercosur
- Alejandro Buschiazzo
Agencia Nacional de Investigación e Innovación (FCE2007_219)
- Felipe Trajtenberg
- Alejandro Buschiazzo
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.
Copyright
© 2016, Trajtenberg 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
-
- 2,192
- views
-
- 509
- downloads
-
- 59
- 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)
Regulation of signaling directionality revealed by 3D snapshots of a kinase:regulator complex in action
eLife 5:e21422.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.21422
Further reading
-
- Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
- Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
The two identical motor domains (heads) of dimeric kinesin-1 move in a hand-over-hand process along a microtubule, coordinating their ATPase cycles such that each ATP hydrolysis is tightly coupled to a step and enabling the motor to take many steps without dissociating. The neck linker, a structural element that connects the two heads, has been shown to be essential for head–head coordination; however, which kinetic step(s) in the chemomechanical cycle is ‘gated’ by the neck linker remains unresolved. Here, we employed pre-steady-state kinetics and single-molecule assays to investigate how the neck-linker conformation affects kinesin’s motility cycle. We show that the backward-pointing configuration of the neck linker in the front kinesin head confers higher affinity for microtubule, but does not change ATP binding and dissociation rates. In contrast, the forward-pointing configuration of the neck linker in the rear kinesin head decreases the ATP dissociation rate but has little effect on microtubule dissociation. In combination, these conformation-specific effects of the neck linker favor ATP hydrolysis and dissociation of the rear head prior to microtubule detachment of the front head, thereby providing a kinetic explanation for the coordinated walking mechanism of dimeric kinesin.
-
- Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
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.
