Structural reorganization of the chromatin remodeling enzyme Chd1 upon engagement with nucleosomes
Abstract
The yeast Chd1 protein acts to position nucleosomes across genomes. Here we model the structure of the Chd1 protein in solution and when bound to nucleosomes. In the apo state the DNA binding domain contacts the edge of the nucleosome while in the presence of the non-hydrolyzable ATP analog, ADP-beryllium fluoride, we observe additional interactions between the ATPase domain and the adjacent DNA gyre 1.5 helical turns from the dyad axis of symmetry. Binding in this conformation involves unravelling the outer turn of nucleosomal DNA and requires substantial reorientation of the DNA binding domain with respect to the ATPase domains. The orientation of the DNA-binding domain is mediated by sequences in the N-terminus and mutations to this part of the protein have positive and negative effects on Chd1 activity. These observations indicate that the unfavourable alignment of C-terminal DNA binding region in solution contributes to an auto-inhibited state.
Data availability
-
Chd1-nuc-engagedPublicly available at the Electron Microscopy Data Bank (accession no. EMDB-3502).
-
Chd1 Nuc SeqPublicly available at the EMBL European Archive (accession no: PRJEB15701).
-
Chd1-nuc apoPublicly available at the Electron Microscopy Data Bank (accession no. EMDB-3517).
-
Data from: Structural reorganization of the chromatin remodeling enzyme Chd1 upon engagement with nucleosomesAvailable at Dryad Digital Repository under a CC0 Public Domain Dedication.
-
SAXSPublicly available at the Small Angle Scattering Biological Data Bank (accession no. SASDBU7).
-
SAXSPublicly available at the Small Angle Scattering Biological Data Bank (accession no. SASDBV7).
-
SAXSPublicly available at the Small Angle Scattering Biological Data Bank (accession no. SASDBW7).
-
SAXSPublicly available at the Small Angle Scattering Biological Data Bank (accession no. SASDBX7).
-
SAXSPublicly available at the Small Angle Scattering Biological Data Bank (accession no. SASDBY7).
Article and author information
Author details
Funding
Wellcome (95062)
- Ramasubramanian Sundaramoorthy
- Amanda L Hughes
- Vijender Singh
- Nicola Wiechens
- Tom Owen-Hughes
Wellcome (097945/B/11/Z)
- Ramasubramanian Sundaramoorthy
- Amanda L Hughes
- Vijender Singh
- Nicola Wiechens
- Tom Owen-Hughes
Wellcome (099149/Z/12/Z)
- Ramasubramanian Sundaramoorthy
- Hassane El-Mkami
- David G Norman
- Tom Owen-Hughes
Wellcome (97945)
- Ramasubramanian Sundaramoorthy
- Amanda L Hughes
- Nicola Wiechens
- Daniel P Ryan
- David G Norman
- Tom Owen-Hughes
European Molecular Biology Organization (ALTF 380-2015)
- Amanda L Hughes
The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.
Copyright
© 2017, Sundaramoorthy 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
-
- 3,155
- views
-
- 762
- downloads
-
- 51
- citations
Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.
Download links
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)
Further reading
-
- 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.
-
- Immunology and Inflammation
- Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
Increasing evidence suggests that mechanical load on the αβ T-cell receptor (TCR) is crucial for recognizing the antigenic peptide-bound major histocompatibility complex (pMHC) molecule. Our recent all-atom molecular dynamics (MD) simulations revealed that the inter-domain motion of the TCR is responsible for the load-induced catch bond behavior of the TCR-pMHC complex and peptide discrimination (Chang-Gonzalez et al., 2024). To further examine the generality of the mechanism, we perform all-atom MD simulations of the B7 TCR under different conditions for comparison with our previous simulations of the A6 TCR. The two TCRs recognize the same pMHC and have similar interfaces with pMHC in crystal structures. We find that the B7 TCR-pMHC interface stabilizes under ∼15 pN load using a conserved dynamic allostery mechanism that involves the asymmetric motion of the TCR chassis. However, despite forming comparable contacts with pMHC as A6 in the crystal structure, B7 has fewer high-occupancy contacts with pMHC and exhibits higher mechanical compliance during the simulation. These results indicate that the dynamic allostery common to the TCRαβ chassis can amplify slight differences in interfacial contacts into distinctive mechanical responses and nuanced biological outcomes.