Engineering a conserved RNA regulatory protein repurposes its biological function in vivo

  1. Vandita D Bhat
  2. Kathleen L McCann
  3. Yeming Wang
  4. Dallas R Fonseca
  5. Tarjani Shukla
  6. Jacqueline C Alexander
  7. Chen Qiu
  8. Marvin Wickens
  9. Te-Wen Lo
  10. Traci M Tanaka Hall  Is a corresponding author
  11. Zachary T Campbell  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Texas Dallas, United States
  2. National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, United States
  3. Ithaca College, United States
  4. University of Wisconsin-Madison, United States

Abstract

PUF (PUmilio/FBF) RNA-binding proteins recognize distinct elements. In C. elegans, PUF-8 binds to an 8-nt motif and restricts proliferation in the germline. Conversely, FBF-2 recognizes a 9-nt element and promotes mitosis. To understand how motif divergence relates to biological function, we determined a crystal structure of PUF-8. Comparison of this structure to that of FBF-2 revealed a major difference in a central repeat. We devised a modified yeast 3-hybrid screen to identify mutations that confer recognition of an 8-nt element to FBF-2. We identified several such mutants and validated structurally and biochemically their binding to 8-nt RNA elements. Using genome engineering, we generated a mutant animal with a substitution in FBF-2 that confers preferential binding to the PUF-8 element. The mutant largely rescued overproliferation in animals that spontaneously generate tumors in the absence of puf-8. This work highlights the critical role of motif length in the specification of biological function.

Data availability

All data associated with the manuscript are present in the source data file. Data have also been deposited to PDB under the accession numbers 6NOD, 6NOH, 6NOF, and 6NOC.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Vandita D Bhat

    Department of Biological Sciences, University of Texas Dallas, Richardson, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Kathleen L McCann

    Epigenetics and Stem Cell Biology Laboratory, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7144-4851
  3. Yeming Wang

    Epigenetics and Stem Cell Biology Laboratory, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Dallas R Fonseca

    Department of Biology, Ithaca College, Ithaca, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Tarjani Shukla

    Department of Biological Sciences, University of Texas Dallas, Richardson, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Jacqueline C Alexander

    Department of Biology, Ithaca College, Ithaca, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Chen Qiu

    Epigenetics and Stem Cell Biology Laboratory, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Marvin Wickens

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Wisconsin, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Te-Wen Lo

    Department of Biology, Ithaca College, Ithaca, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Traci M Tanaka Hall

    Epigenetics and Stem Cell Biology Laboratory, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Institutes of Health, Research Triangle Park, United States
    For correspondence
    hall4@niehs.nih.gov
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6166-3009
  11. Zachary T Campbell

    Department of Biological Sciences, University of Texas Dallas, Richardson, United States
    For correspondence
    zachary.campbell@utdallas.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-3768-6996

Funding

National Institutes of Health (R01NS100788)

  • Zachary T Campbell

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

Copyright

This is an open-access article, free of all copyright, and may be freely reproduced, distributed, transmitted, modified, built upon, or otherwise used by anyone for any lawful purpose. The work is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication.

Metrics

  • 2,413
    views
  • 311
    downloads
  • 15
    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. Vandita D Bhat
  2. Kathleen L McCann
  3. Yeming Wang
  4. Dallas R Fonseca
  5. Tarjani Shukla
  6. Jacqueline C Alexander
  7. Chen Qiu
  8. Marvin Wickens
  9. Te-Wen Lo
  10. Traci M Tanaka Hall
  11. Zachary T Campbell
(2019)
Engineering a conserved RNA regulatory protein repurposes its biological function in vivo
eLife 8:e43788.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.43788

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.43788

Further reading

    1. Developmental Biology
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Simon Rethemeier, Sonja Fritzsche ... Vera S Hunnekuhl
    Research Article

    The insect brain and the timing of its development underwent evolutionary adaptations. However, little is known about the underlying developmental processes. The central complex of the brain is an excellent model to understand neural development and divergence. It is produced in large parts by type II neuroblasts, which produce intermediate progenitors, another type of cycling precursor, to increase their neural progeny. Type II neuroblasts lineages are believed to be conserved among insects, but little is known on their molecular characteristics in insects other than flies. Tribolium castaneum has emerged as a model for brain development and evolution. However, type II neuroblasts have so far not been studied in this beetle. We created a fluorescent enhancer trap marking expression of Tc-fez/earmuff, a key marker for intermediate progenitors. Using combinatorial labeling of further markers, including Tc-pointed, we characterized embryonic type II neuroblast lineages. Intriguingly, we found nine lineages per hemisphere in the Tribolium embryo while Drosophila produces only eight per brain hemisphere. These embryonic lineages are significantly larger in Tribolium than they are in Drosophila and contain more intermediate progenitors. Finally, we mapped these lineages to the domains of head patterning genes. Notably, Tc-otd is absent from all type II neuroblasts and intermediate progenitors, whereas Tc-six3 marks an anterior subset of the type II lineages. Tc-six4 specifically marks the territory where anterior-medial type II neuroblasts differentiate. In conclusion, we identified a conserved pattern of gene expression in holometabolan central complex forming type II neuroblast lineages, and conserved head patterning genes emerged as new candidates for conferring spatial identity to individual lineages. The higher number and greater lineage size of the embryonic type II neuroblasts in the beetle correlate with a previously described embryonic phase of central complex formation. These findings stipulate further research on the link between stem cell activity and temporal and structural differences in central complex development.

    1. Cell Biology
    2. Developmental Biology
    Qian Wang, Hongge Li ... Xin Zhang
    Research Article

    Fibroblast growth factor (FGF) signaling elicits multiple downstream pathways, most notably the Ras/MAPK cascade facilitated by the adaptor protein Grb2. However, the mechanism by which Grb2 is recruited to the FGF signaling complex remains unresolved. Here, we showed that genetic ablation of FGF signaling prevented murine lens induction by disrupting transcriptional regulation and actin cytoskeletal arrangements, which could be reproduced by deleting the juxtamembrane region of the FGF receptor and rescued by Kras activation. Conversely, mutations affecting the Frs2-binding site on the FGF receptor or the deletion of Frs2 and Shp2 primarily impact later stages of lens vesicle development involving lens fiber cell differentiation. Our study further revealed that the loss of Grb2 abolished MAPK signaling, resulting in a profound arrest of lens development. However, removing Grb2’s putative Shp2 dephosphorylation site (Y209) neither produced a detectable phenotype nor impaired MAPK signaling during lens development. Furthermore, the catalytically inactive Shp2 mutation (C459S) only modestly impaired FGF signaling, whereas replacing Shp2’s C-terminal phosphorylation sites (Y542/Y580) previously implicated in Grb2 binding only caused placental defects, perinatal lethality, and reduced lacrimal gland branching without impacting lens development, suggesting that Shp2 only partially mediates Grb2 recruitment. In contrast, we observed that FGF signaling is required for the phosphorylation of the Grb2-binding sites on Shc1 and the deletion of Shc1 exacerbates the lens vesicle defect caused by Frs2 and Shp2 deletion. These findings establish Shc1 as a critical collaborator with Frs2 and Shp2 in targeting Grb2 during FGF signaling.