A novel mode of Capping Protein-regulation by Twinfilin

  1. Adam B Johnston
  2. Denise M Hilton
  3. Patrick McConnell
  4. Britney Johnson
  5. Meghan T Harris
  6. Avital Simone
  7. Gaya K Amarasinghe
  8. John A Cooper
  9. Bruce L Goode  Is a corresponding author
  1. Brandeis University, United States
  2. Washington University in St Louis, United States

Abstract

Cellular actin assembly is controlled at the barbed ends of actin filaments, where capping protein (CP) limits polymerization. Twinfilin is a conserved in vivo binding partner of CP, yet the significance of this interaction has remained a mystery. Here, we discover that the C-terminal tail of Twinfilin harbors a CP-interacting (CPI) motif, identifying it as a novel CPI-motif protein. Twinfilin and the CPI-motif protein CARMIL have overlapping binding sites on CP. Further, Twinfilin binds competitively with CARMIL to CP, protecting CP from barbed-end displacement by CARMIL. Twinfilin also accelerates dissociation of the CP inhibitor V-1, restoring CP to an active capping state. Knockdowns of Twinfilin and CP each cause similar defects in cell morphology, and elevated Twinfilin expression rescues defects caused by CARMIL hyperactivity. Together, these observations define Twinfilin as the first 'pro-capping' ligand of CP and lead us to propose important revisions to our understanding of the CP regulatory cycle.

Data availability

All datasets associated with this article are included in the manuscript and supporting files.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Adam B Johnston

    Department of Biology, Rosenstiel Basic Medical Science Research Center, Brandeis University, Waltham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Denise M Hilton

    Department of Biology, Rosenstiel Basic Medical Science Research Center, Brandeis University, Waltham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1577-1855
  3. Patrick McConnell

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Britney Johnson

    Department of Pathology and Immunology, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Meghan T Harris

    Department of Biology, Rosenstiel Basic Medical Science Research Center, Brandeis University, Waltham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Avital Simone

    Department of Biology, Rosenstiel Basic Medical Science Research Center, Brandeis University, Waltham, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Gaya K Amarasinghe

    Department of Pathology and Immunology, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. John A Cooper

    Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-0933-4571
  9. Bruce L Goode

    Department of Biology, Rosenstiel Basic Medical Science Research Center, Brandeis University, Waltham, United States
    For correspondence
    goode@brandeis.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6443-5893

Funding

National Institutes of Health (R01 GM063691)

  • Bruce L Goode

Defense Threat Reduction Agency (HDTRA1-16-1-0033)

  • Gaya K Amarasinghe

National Institutes of Health (R35 GM118171)

  • John A Cooper

National Science Foundation (MRSEC DMR-1420382)

  • Bruce L Goode

National Institutes of Health (P01 AI120943)

  • Gaya K Amarasinghe

National Institutes of Health (R01 AI123926)

  • Gaya K Amarasinghe

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

Copyright

© 2018, Johnston 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

  • 2,631
    views
  • 383
    downloads
  • 41
    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. Adam B Johnston
  2. Denise M Hilton
  3. Patrick McConnell
  4. Britney Johnson
  5. Meghan T Harris
  6. Avital Simone
  7. Gaya K Amarasinghe
  8. John A Cooper
  9. Bruce L Goode
(2018)
A novel mode of Capping Protein-regulation by Twinfilin
eLife 7:e41313.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.41313

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.41313

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    Jingjing Li, Xinyue Wang ... Vincent Archambault
    Research Article

    In animals, mitosis involves the breakdown of the nucleus. The reassembly of a nucleus after mitosis requires the reformation of the nuclear envelope around a single mass of chromosomes. This process requires Ankle2 (also known as LEM4 in humans) which interacts with PP2A and promotes the function of the Barrier-to-Autointegration Factor (BAF). Upon dephosphorylation, BAF dimers cross-bridge chromosomes and bind lamins and transmembrane proteins of the reassembling nuclear envelope. How Ankle2 functions in mitosis is incompletely understood. Using a combination of approaches in Drosophila, along with structural modeling, we provide several lines of evidence that suggest that Ankle2 is a regulatory subunit of PP2A, explaining how it promotes BAF dephosphorylation. In addition, we discovered that Ankle2 interacts with the endoplasmic reticulum protein Vap33, which is required for Ankle2 localization at the reassembling nuclear envelope during telophase. We identified the interaction sites of PP2A and Vap33 on Ankle2. Through genetic rescue experiments, we show that the Ankle2/PP2A interaction is essential for the function of Ankle2 in nuclear reassembly and that the Ankle2/Vap33 interaction also promotes this process. Our study sheds light on the molecular mechanisms of post-mitotic nuclear reassembly and suggests that the endoplasmic reticulum is not merely a source of membranes in the process, but also provides localized enzymatic activity.

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    Bhumil Patel, Maryke Grobler ... Needhi Bhalla
    Research Article

    Meiotic crossover recombination is essential for both accurate chromosome segregation and the generation of new haplotypes for natural selection to act upon. This requirement is known as crossover assurance and is one example of crossover control. While the conserved role of the ATPase, PCH-2, during meiotic prophase has been enigmatic, a universal phenotype when pch-2 or its orthologs are mutated is a change in the number and distribution of meiotic crossovers. Here, we show that PCH-2 controls the number and distribution of crossovers by antagonizing their formation. This antagonism produces different effects at different stages of meiotic prophase: early in meiotic prophase, PCH-2 prevents double-strand breaks from becoming crossover-eligible intermediates, limiting crossover formation at sites of initial double-strand break formation and homolog interactions. Later in meiotic prophase, PCH-2 winnows the number of crossover-eligible intermediates, contributing to the designation of crossovers and ultimately, crossover assurance. We also demonstrate that PCH-2 accomplishes this regulation through the meiotic HORMAD, HIM-3. Our data strongly support a model in which PCH-2’s conserved role is to remodel meiotic HORMADs throughout meiotic prophase to destabilize crossover-eligible precursors and coordinate meiotic recombination with synapsis, ensuring the progressive implementation of meiotic recombination and explaining its function in the pachytene checkpoint and crossover control.