1. Cell Biology
Download icon

The ER membrane protein complex interacts cotranslationally to enable biogenesis of multipass membrane proteins

Research Article
  • Cited 73
  • Views 10,343
  • Annotations
Cite this article as: eLife 2018;7:e37018 doi: 10.7554/eLife.37018

Abstract

The endoplasmic reticulum (ER) supports biosynthesis of proteins with diverse transmembrane domain (TMD) lengths and hydrophobicity. Features in transmembrane domains such as charged residues in ion channels are often functionally important, but could pose a challenge during cotranslational membrane insertion and folding. Our systematic proteomic approaches in both yeast and human cells revealed that the ER membrane protein complex (EMC) binds to and promotes the biogenesis of a range of multipass transmembrane proteins, with a particular enrichment for transporters. Proximity-specific ribosome profiling demonstrates that the EMC engages clients cotranslationally and immediately following clusters of TMDs enriched for charged residues. The EMC can remain associated after completion of translation, which both protects clients from premature degradation and allows recruitment of substrate-specific and general chaperones. Thus, the EMC broadly enables the biogenesis of multipass transmembrane proteins containing destabilizing features, thereby mitigating the trade-off between function and stability.

Data availability

Sequencing data have been deposited in GEO under accession code GSE112891.

The following data sets were generated
The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Matthew J Shurtleff

    Department of Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Daniel N Itzhak

    Department of Proteomics and Signal Transduction, Max Planck Institute of Biochemistry, Martinsried, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Jeffrey A Hussmann

    Department of Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Nicole T Schirle Oakdale

    Department of Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Elizabeth A Costa

    Department of Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8365-0436
  6. Martin Jonikas

    Department of Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Jimena Weibezahn

    Department of Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Katerina D Popova

    Department of Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Calvin H Jan

    Department of Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Pavel Sinitcyn

    Department of Proteomics and Signal Transduction, Max Planck Institute of Biochemistry, Martinsried, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2653-1702
  11. Shruthi S Vembar

    Department of Biological Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Hilda Hernandez

    Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Jürgen Cox

    Department of Proteomics and Signal Transduction, Max Planck Institute of Biochemistry, Martinsried, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Alma L Burlingame

    Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Jeffrey Brodsky

    Department of Biological Sciences, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Adam Frost

    Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2231-2577
  17. Georg HH Borner

    Department of Proteomics and Signal Transduction, Max Planck Institute of Biochemistry, Martinsried, Germany
    For correspondence
    borner@biochem.mpg.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3166-3435
  18. Jonathan S Weissman

    Department of Cellular and Molecular Pharmacology, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States
    For correspondence
    Jonathan.Weissman@ucsf.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2445-670X

Funding

Howard Hughes Medical Institute (Investigator Program)

  • Jonathan S Weissman

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Prize MA 1764/2-1)

  • Georg HH Borner

European Research Council (ERC2012-SyG_318987-ToPAG)

  • Daniel N Itzhak

Howard Hughes Medical Institute (Faculty Scholar Grant)

  • Adam Frost

National Institutes of Health (AG041826)

  • Jonathan S Weissman

National Institutes of Health (1DP2GM110772-01)

  • Adam Frost

National Institutes of Health (8P41GM103481)

  • Alma L Burlingame

National Institutes of Health (1S10OD16229)

  • Alma L Burlingame

National Institutes of Health (GM075061)

  • Jeffrey Brodsky

Helen Hay Whitney Foundation (Postdoctoral Fellowship)

  • Matthew J Shurtleff

Jane Coffin Childs Memorial Fund for Medical Research (Postdoctoral Fellowship)

  • Nicole T Schirle Oakdale

Sandler Foundation (Program for Breakthrough Biomedical Research)

  • Adam Frost

American Asthma Foundation

  • Adam Frost

Louis-Jeantet Foundation

  • Daniel N Itzhak

Dr. Miriam and Sheldon G. Adelson Medical Research Foundation

  • Alma L Burlingame

Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science

  • Daniel N Itzhak

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. David Ron, University of Cambridge, United Kingdom

Publication history

  1. Received: March 27, 2018
  2. Accepted: May 26, 2018
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: May 29, 2018 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: June 11, 2018 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record updated: August 6, 2018 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2018, Shurtleff 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

  • 10,343
    Page views
  • 1,412
    Downloads
  • 73
    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
    Lisa M Strong et al.
    Research Article Updated

    Autophagy is a cellular process that degrades cytoplasmic cargo by engulfing it in a double-membrane vesicle, known as the autophagosome, and delivering it to the lysosome. The ATG12–5–16L1 complex is responsible for conjugating members of the ubiquitin-like ATG8 protein family to phosphatidylethanolamine in the growing autophagosomal membrane, known as the phagophore. ATG12–5–16L1 is recruited to the phagophore by a subset of the phosphatidylinositol 3-phosphate-binding seven-bladedß -propeller WIPI proteins. We determined the crystal structure of WIPI2d in complex with the WIPI2 interacting region (W2IR) of ATG16L1 comprising residues 207–230 at 1.85 Å resolution. The structure shows that the ATG16L1 W2IR adopts an alpha helical conformation and binds in an electropositive and hydrophobic groove between WIPI2 ß-propeller blades 2 and 3. Mutation of residues at the interface reduces or blocks the recruitment of ATG12–5–16 L1 and the conjugation of the ATG8 protein LC3B to synthetic membranes. Interface mutants show a decrease in starvation-induced autophagy. Comparisons across the four human WIPIs suggest that WIPI1 and 2 belong to a W2IR-binding subclass responsible for localizing ATG12–5–16 L1 and driving ATG8 lipidation, whilst WIPI3 and 4 belong to a second W34IR-binding subclass responsible for localizing ATG2, and so directing lipid supply to the nascent phagophore. The structure provides a framework for understanding the regulatory node connecting two central events in autophagy initiation, the action of the autophagic PI 3-kinase complex on the one hand and ATG8 lipidation on the other.

    1. Cell Biology
    Laura Le Pelletier et al.
    Research Article

    Aging is associated with central fat redistribution and insulin resistance. To identify age-related adipose features, we evaluated the senescence and adipogenic potential of adipose-derived-stromal cells (ASCs) from abdominal subcutaneous fat obtained from healthy normal-weight young (<25y) or older women (>60y). Increased cell passages of young-donor ASCs (in vitro aging), resulted in senescence but not oxidative stress. ASC-derived adipocytes presented impaired adipogenesis but no early mitochondrial dysfunction. Conversely, aged-donor ASCs at early passages displayed oxidative stress and mild senescence. ASC-derived adipocytes exhibited oxidative stress, and early mitochondrial dysfunction but adipogenesis was preserved. In vitro aging of aged-donor ASCs resulted in further increased senescence, mitochondrial dysfunction, oxidative stress and severe adipocyte dysfunction. When in vitro aged young-donor ASCs were treated with metformin, no alteration was alleviated. Conversely, metformin treatment of aged-donor ASCs decreased oxidative stress and mitochondrial dysfunction resulting in decreased senescence. Metformin's prevention of oxidative stress and of the resulting senescence improved the cells' adipogenic capacity and insulin sensitivity. This effect was mediated by the activation of AMP-activated-protein-kinase as revealed by its specific inhibition and activation. Overall, aging ASC-derived adipocytes presented impaired adipogenesis and insulin sensitivity. Targeting stress-induced senescence of ASCs with metformin may improve age-related adipose tissue dysfunction.