1. Cell Biology
  2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
Download icon

Structural insights into the architecture and membrane interactions of the conserved COMMD proteins

  1. Michael D Healy
  2. Manuela K Hospenthal
  3. Ryan J Hall
  4. Mintu Chandra
  5. Molly Chilton
  6. Vikas Tillu
  7. Kai-En Chen
  8. Dion J Celligoi
  9. Fiona J McDonald
  10. Peter J Cullen
  11. J Shaun Lott
  12. Brett M Collins  Is a corresponding author
  13. Rajesh Ghai  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Queensland, Australia
  2. University of Auckland, New Zealand
  3. University of Bristol, United Kingdom
  4. University of Otago, New Zealand
Research Article
  • Cited 6
  • Views 2,398
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2018;7:e35898 doi: 10.7554/eLife.35898

Abstract

The COMMD proteins are a conserved family of proteins with central roles in intracellular membrane trafficking and transcription. They form oligomeric complexes with each other and act as components of a larger assembly called the CCC complex, which is localized to endosomal compartments and mediates the transport of several transmembrane cargos. How these complexes are formed however is completely unknown. Here, we have systematically characterised the interactions between human COMMD proteins, and determined structures of COMMD proteins using X-ray crystallography and X-ray scattering to provide insights into the underlying mechanisms of homo- and heteromeric assembly. All COMMD proteins possess an a-helical N-terminal domain, and a highly conserved C‑terminal domain that forms a tightly interlocked dimeric structure responsible for COMMD-COMMD interactions. The COMM domains also bind directly to components of CCC and mediate non-specific membrane association. Overall these studies show that COMMD proteins function as obligatory dimers with conserved domain architectures.

Data availability

The raw biochemical data generated in this study is included in the supporting files. Diffraction data has been deposited in PDB and accession codes are provided in the manuscript.

The following data sets were generated
    1. Hospenthal M
    2. Celligoi D
    3. Lott JS
    (2015) The crystal structure of the n-terminal domain of COMMD9
    Publicly available at the RCSB Protein Data Bank (accession no: 4OE9).

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Michael D Healy

    Institute for Molecular Bioscience, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2924-9179
  2. Manuela K Hospenthal

    School of Biological Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Ryan J Hall

    Institute for Molecular Bioscience, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8543-0370
  4. Mintu Chandra

    Institute for Molecular Bioscience, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Molly Chilton

    School of Biochemistry, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2238-9822
  6. Vikas Tillu

    Institute for Molecular Bioscience, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1034-9543
  7. Kai-En Chen

    Institute for Molecular Bioscience, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Dion J Celligoi

    Maurice Wilkins Centre for Molecular Biodiscovery, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Fiona J McDonald

    Department of Physiology, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Peter J Cullen

    MRC Centre for Synaptic Plasticity, University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. J Shaun Lott

    Maurice Wilkins Centre for Molecular Biodiscovery, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Brett M Collins

    Institute for Molecular Bioscience, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia
    For correspondence
    b.collins@imb.uq.edu.au
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6070-3774
  13. Rajesh Ghai

    Institute for Molecular Bioscience, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Australia
    For correspondence
    r.ghai@uq.edu.au
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0919-0934

Funding

National Health and Medical Research Council (1097185)

  • Rajesh Ghai

Australian Research Council (DP160101743)

  • Brett M Collins

Wellcome (89928)

  • Peter J Cullen

Royal Society of New Zealand

  • J Shaun Lott

National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1058734)

  • Brett M Collins

National Health and Medical Research Council (APP1061574)

  • Brett M Collins

Medical Research Council (MR/K018299/1)

  • Peter J Cullen

Wellcome (104568)

  • Peter J Cullen

Medical Research Council (MR/P018807/1)

  • Peter J Cullen

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Sean Munro, MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology, Cambridge, United Kingdom

Publication history

  1. Received: February 14, 2018
  2. Accepted: July 31, 2018
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: August 1, 2018 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: August 13, 2018 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2018, Healy 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

  • 2,398
    Page views
  • 359
    Downloads
  • 6
    Citations

Article citation count generated by polling the highest count across the following sources: Crossref, PubMed Central, Scopus.

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)

Download citations (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Carolina Franco Nitta et al.
    Research Article Updated

    Crosstalk between different receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) is thought to drive oncogenic signaling and allow therapeutic escape. EGFR and RON are two such RTKs from different subfamilies, which engage in crosstalk through unknown mechanisms. We combined high-resolution imaging with biochemical and mutational studies to ask how EGFR and RON communicate. EGF stimulation promotes EGFR-dependent phosphorylation of RON, but ligand stimulation of RON does not trigger EGFR phosphorylation – arguing that crosstalk is unidirectional. Nanoscale imaging reveals association of EGFR and RON in common plasma membrane microdomains. Two-color single particle tracking captured formation of complexes between RON and EGF-bound EGFR. Our results further show that RON is a substrate for EGFR kinase, and that transactivation of RON requires formation of a signaling competent EGFR dimer. These results support a role for direct EGFR/RON interactions in propagating crosstalk, such that EGF-stimulated EGFR phosphorylates RON to activate RON-directed signaling.

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Angela Kim et al.
    Research Article Updated

    Insulin-induced hypoglycemia is a major treatment barrier in type-1 diabetes (T1D). Accordingly, it is important that we understand the mechanisms regulating the circulating levels of glucagon. Varying glucose over the range of concentrations that occur physiologically between the fed and fuel-deprived states (8 to 4 mM) has no significant effect on glucagon secretion in the perfused mouse pancreas or in isolated mouse islets (in vitro), and yet associates with dramatic increases in plasma glucagon. The identity of the systemic factor(s) that elevates circulating glucagon remains unknown. Here, we show that arginine-vasopressin (AVP), secreted from the posterior pituitary, stimulates glucagon secretion. Alpha-cells express high levels of the vasopressin 1b receptor (V1bR) gene (Avpr1b). Activation of AVP neurons in vivo increased circulating copeptin (the C-terminal segment of the AVP precursor peptide) and increased blood glucose; effects blocked by pharmacological antagonism of either the glucagon receptor or V1bR. AVP also mediates the stimulatory effects of hypoglycemia produced by exogenous insulin and 2-deoxy-D-glucose on glucagon secretion. We show that the A1/C1 neurons of the medulla oblongata drive AVP neuron activation in response to insulin-induced hypoglycemia. AVP injection increased cytoplasmic Ca2+ in alpha-cells (implanted into the anterior chamber of the eye) and glucagon release. Hypoglycemia also increases circulating levels of AVP/copeptin in humans and this hormone stimulates glucagon secretion from human islets. In patients with T1D, hypoglycemia failed to increase both copeptin and glucagon. These findings suggest that AVP is a physiological systemic regulator of glucagon secretion and that this mechanism becomes impaired in T1D.