Unexpected sequences and structures of mtDNA required for efficient transcription from the first heavy-strand promoter

  1. Akira Uchida
  2. Divakaran Murugesapillai
  3. Markus Kastner
  4. Yao Wang
  5. Maria F Lodeiro
  6. Shaan Prabhakar
  7. Guinevere V Oliver
  8. Jamie J Arnold
  9. L James Maher
  10. Mark C Williams  Is a corresponding author
  11. Craig E Cameron  Is a corresponding author
  1. The Pennsylvaina State University, United States
  2. Northeastern University, United States
  3. The Pennsylvania State University, United States
  4. Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, United States

Abstract

Human mtDNA contains three promoters, suggesting a need for differential expression of the mitochondrial genome. Studies of mitochondrial transcription have used a reductionist approach, perhaps masking differential regulation. Here we evaluate transcription from light–strand (LSP) and heavy–strand (HSP1) promoters using templates that mimic their natural context. These studies reveal sequences upstream, hypervariable in the human population (HVR3), and downstream of the HSP1 transcription start site required for maximal yield. The carboxy–terminal tail of TFAM is essential for activation of HSP1 but not LSP. Images of the template obtained by atomic force microscopy show that TFAM creates loops in a discrete region, the formation of which correlates with activation of HSP1; looping is lost in tail–deleted TFAM. Identification of HVR3 as a transcriptional regulatory element may contribute to between–individual variability in mitochondrial gene expression. The unique requirement of HSP1 for the TFAM tail may enable its regulation by post–translational modifications.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Akira Uchida

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, The Pennsylvaina State University, University Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Divakaran Murugesapillai

    Department of Physics, Northeastern University, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Markus Kastner

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Yao Wang

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Maria F Lodeiro

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Shaan Prabhakar

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Guinevere V Oliver

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Jamie J Arnold

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. L James Maher

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Mark C Williams

    Department of Physics, Northeastern University, Boston, United States
    For correspondence
    ma.williams@northeastern.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3219-376X
  11. Craig E Cameron

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, United States
    For correspondence
    cec9@psu.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7564-5642

Funding

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM075965)

  • L James Maher

National Science Foundation (MCB-1243883)

  • Mark C Williams

Eberly Family Chair Endowment

  • Craig E Cameron

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Antoine M van Oijen, University of Wollongong, Australia

Version history

  1. Received: March 29, 2017
  2. Accepted: July 25, 2017
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: July 26, 2017 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: August 10, 2017 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record updated: August 15, 2017 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2017, Uchida 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

  • 2,394
    views
  • 339
    downloads
  • 29
    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. Akira Uchida
  2. Divakaran Murugesapillai
  3. Markus Kastner
  4. Yao Wang
  5. Maria F Lodeiro
  6. Shaan Prabhakar
  7. Guinevere V Oliver
  8. Jamie J Arnold
  9. L James Maher
  10. Mark C Williams
  11. Craig E Cameron
(2017)
Unexpected sequences and structures of mtDNA required for efficient transcription from the first heavy-strand promoter
eLife 6:e27283.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.27283

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.27283

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.