Dissection of affinity captured LINE-1 macromolecular complexes

  1. Martin S Taylor
  2. Ilya Altukhov
  3. Kelly R Molloy
  4. Paolo Mita
  5. Hua Jiang
  6. Emily M Adney
  7. Aleksandra Wudzinska
  8. Sana Badri
  9. Dmitry Ischenko
  10. George Eng
  11. Kathleen H Burns
  12. David Fenyö
  13. Brian T Chait
  14. Dmitry Alexeev
  15. Michael P Rout
  16. Jef D Boeke
  17. John LaCava  Is a corresponding author
  1. Massachusetts General Hospital, United States
  2. Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, Russian Federation
  3. The Rockefeller University, United States
  4. NYU Langone Medical Center, United States
  5. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, United States
  6. Novosibirsk State University, Russian Federation

Abstract

Long Interspersed Nuclear Element-1 (LINE-1, L1) is a mobile genetic element active in human genomes. L1-encoded ORF1 and ORF2 proteins bind L1 RNAs, forming ribonucleoproteins (RNPs). These RNPs interact with diverse host proteins, some repressive and others required for the L1 lifecycle. Using differential affinity purifications, quantitative mass spectrometry, and next generation RNA sequencing, we have characterized the proteins and nucleic acids associated with distinctive, enzymatically active L1 macromolecular complexes. Among them, we describe a cytoplasmic intermediate that we hypothesize to be the canonical ORF1p/ORF2p/L1-RNA-containing RNP, and we describe a nuclear population containing ORF2p, but lacking ORF1p, which likely contains host factors participating in target-primed reverse transcription.

Data availability

The following data sets were generated
    1. LaCava J
    (2017) RNA-seq FASTAQ files
    Publicly available at ProteomeXchange (accession no: PXD008542).
    1. LaCava J
    (2017) RNAs associated with affinity captured LINE-1 ribonucleoproteins
    Publicly available at the NCBI Gene Expression Omnibus (accession no: GSE108270).

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Martin S Taylor

    Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Ilya Altukhov

    Department of Molecular and Bio Physics, Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, Dolgoprudny, Russian Federation
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9821-1890
  3. Kelly R Molloy

    Laboratory of Mass Spectrometry and Gaseous Ion Chemistry, The Rockefeller University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Paolo Mita

    Institute for Systems Genetics, Biochemistry and Molecular Pharmacology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2093-4906
  5. Hua Jiang

    Laboratory of Cellular and Structural Biology, The Rockefeller University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Emily M Adney

    Institute for Systems Genetics, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Pharmacology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Aleksandra Wudzinska

    Institute for Systems Genetics, Biochemistry and Molecular Pharmacology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Sana Badri

    Department of Pathology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Dmitry Ischenko

    Department of Molecular and Bio Physics, Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, Dolgoprudny, Russian Federation
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. George Eng

    Department of Pathology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Kathleen H Burns

    McKusick-Nathans Institute of Genetic Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1620-3761
  12. David Fenyö

    Institute for Systems Genetics, Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Pharmacology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5049-3825
  13. Brian T Chait

    Laboratory of Mass Spectrometry and Gaseous Ion Chemistry, The Rockefeller University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Dmitry Alexeev

    Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk, Russian Federation
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0783-1176
  15. Michael P Rout

    Laboratory of Cellular and Structural Biology, The Rockefeller University, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Jef D Boeke

    Institute for Systems Genetics, Biochemistry and Molecular Pharmacology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5322-4946
  17. John LaCava

    Laboratory of Cellular and Structural Biology, The Rockefeller University, New York, United States
    For correspondence
    jlacava@rockefeller.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6307-7713

Funding

National Institutes of Health (P41GM109824)

  • Michael P Rout

National Institutes of Health (P41GM103314)

  • Brian T Chait

National Institutes of Health (P50GM107632)

  • Jef D Boeke

National Institutes of Health (R01GM126170)

  • John LaCava

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Stephen P Goff, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Columbia University, United States

Version history

  1. Received: July 1, 2017
  2. Accepted: December 18, 2017
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: January 8, 2018 (version 1)
  4. Accepted Manuscript updated: January 10, 2018 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record published: February 21, 2018 (version 3)
  6. Version of Record updated: May 15, 2018 (version 4)
  7. Version of Record updated: September 11, 2018 (version 5)
  8. Version of Record updated: January 8, 2019 (version 6)

Copyright

© 2018, Taylor 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

  • 4,840
    views
  • 800
    downloads
  • 53
    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. Martin S Taylor
  2. Ilya Altukhov
  3. Kelly R Molloy
  4. Paolo Mita
  5. Hua Jiang
  6. Emily M Adney
  7. Aleksandra Wudzinska
  8. Sana Badri
  9. Dmitry Ischenko
  10. George Eng
  11. Kathleen H Burns
  12. David Fenyö
  13. Brian T Chait
  14. Dmitry Alexeev
  15. Michael P Rout
  16. Jef D Boeke
  17. John LaCava
(2018)
Dissection of affinity captured LINE-1 macromolecular complexes
eLife 7:e30094.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.30094

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.30094

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics
    Sandra L Martin
    Insight

    The mechanisms by which a retrotransposon called LINE-1 duplicates itself and spreads through the human genome are becoming clearer.

    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.