Mechano-redox control of integrin de-adhesion

  1. Freda Passam
  2. Joyce Chiu
  3. Lining Ju
  4. Aster Pijning
  5. Zeenat Jahan
  6. Ronit Mor-Cohen
  7. Adva Yeheskel
  8. Katra Kolšek
  9. Lena Thärichen
  10. Camilo Aponte-Santamaría
  11. Frauke Gräter
  12. Philip J Hogg  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of New South Wales, Australia
  2. University of Sydney, Australia
  3. Tel Aviv University, Israel
  4. Heidelberg Institute of Theoretical Studies, Germany
  5. University of Los Andes, Colombia

Abstract

How proteins harness mechanical force to control function is a significant biological question. Here we describe a human cell surface receptor that couples ligand binding and force to trigger a chemical event which controls the adhesive properties of the receptor. Our studies of the secreted platelet oxidoreductase, ERp5, have revealed that it mediates release of fibrinogen from activated platelet αIIbβ3 integrin. Protein chemical studies show that ligand binding to extended αIIbβ3 integrin renders the βI-domain Cys177-Cys184 disulfide bond cleavable by ERp5. Fluid shear and force spectroscopy assays indicate that disulfide cleavage is enhanced by mechanical force. Cell adhesion assays and molecular dynamics simulations demonstrate that cleavage of the disulfide induces long-range allosteric effects within the βI-domain, mainly affecting the metal-binding sites, that results in release of fibrinogen. This coupling of ligand binding, force and redox events to control cell adhesion may be employed to regulate other protein-protein interactions.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Freda Passam

    St George Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Kogarah, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Joyce Chiu

    Centenary Institute, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Lining Ju

    Heart Research Institute, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Aster Pijning

    Centenary Institute, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Zeenat Jahan

    St George Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Kogarah, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Ronit Mor-Cohen

    Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Adva Yeheskel

    George S Wise Faculty of Life Science, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Katra Kolšek

    Heidelberg Institute of Theoretical Studies, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Lena Thärichen

    Heidelberg Institute of Theoretical Studies, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Camilo Aponte-Santamaría

    Max Planck Tandem Group in Computational Biophysics, University of Los Andes, Bogotá, Colombia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8427-6965
  11. Frauke Gräter

    Heidelberg Institute of Theoretical Studies, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Philip J Hogg

    Centenary Institute, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
    For correspondence
    phil.hogg@sydney.edu.au
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6486-2863

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council (Research Fellowship 1110219)

  • Philip J Hogg

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (Research Unit FOR 1543)

  • Katra Kolšek
  • Camilo Aponte-Santamaría
  • Frauke Gräter

National Heart Foundation of Australia (Australia Postdoctoral Fellowship 101285)

  • Lining Ju

Klaus Tschira Stiftung

  • Frauke Gräter

Diabetes Australia Research Trust (Grant G179720)

  • Lining Ju

Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia (Kanematsu/Novo Nordisk Research Award)

  • Freda Passam
  • Lining Ju

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. William I Weis, Stanford University Medical Center, United States

Ethics

Human subjects: All procedures involving collection of human blood from healthy volunteers were in accordance with the St George Hospital Human Ethics Committee (HREC 12/252), Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) (Project number 2014/244) of the University of Sydney , and the Helsinki Declaration of 1983.

Version history

  1. Received: January 5, 2018
  2. Accepted: June 21, 2018
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: June 22, 2018 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: July 20, 2018 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record updated: March 6, 2019 (version 3)
  6. Version of Record updated: March 29, 2019 (version 4)

Copyright

© 2018, Passam 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

  • 3,306
    views
  • 461
    downloads
  • 48
    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. Freda Passam
  2. Joyce Chiu
  3. Lining Ju
  4. Aster Pijning
  5. Zeenat Jahan
  6. Ronit Mor-Cohen
  7. Adva Yeheskel
  8. Katra Kolšek
  9. Lena Thärichen
  10. Camilo Aponte-Santamaría
  11. Frauke Gräter
  12. Philip J Hogg
(2018)
Mechano-redox control of integrin de-adhesion
eLife 7:e34843.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.34843

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.34843

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.