Abstract

Alanine-serine-cysteine transporter 2 (ASCT2, SLC1A5) is the primary transporter of glutamine in cancer cells and regulates the mTORC1 signaling pathway. The SLC1A5 function involves finely tuned orchestration of two domain movements that include the substrate-binding transport domain and the scaffold domain. Here, we present cryo-EM structures of human SLC1A5 and its complex with the substrate, L-glutamine in an outward-facing conformation. These structures reveal insights into the conformation of the critical ECL2a loop which connects the two domains, thus allowing rigid body movement of the transport domain throughout the transport cycle. Furthermore, the structures provide new insights into substrate recognition, which involves conformational changes in the HP2 loop. A putative cholesterol binding site was observed near the domain interface in the outward-facing state. Comparison with the previously determined inward-facing structure of SCL1A5 provides a basis for a more integrated understanding of substrate recognition and transport mechanism in the SLC1 family.

Data availability

All the cryo-EM data were deposited to the Protein Data Bank (PDB ID: 6MP6, 6MPB) and the EMDB (EMD-9187, EMD-9188) for immediate release upon publication.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Xiaodi Yu

    Medicine Design, Pfizer Inc, Groton, United States
    Competing interests
    Xiaodi Yu, is affiliated with Pfizer Inc. The author has no other competing interests to declare..
  2. Olga Plotnikova

    Medicine Design, Pfizer Inc, Groton, United States
    Competing interests
    Olga Plotnikova, is affiliated with Pfizer Inc. The author has no other competing interests to declare..
  3. Paul D Bonin

    Medicine Design, Pfizer Inc, Groton, United States
    Competing interests
    Paul D Bonin, is affiliated with Pfizer Inc. The author has no other competing interests to declare..
  4. Timothy A Subashi

    Medicine Design, Pfizer Inc, Groton, United States
    Competing interests
    Timothy A Subashi, is affiliated with Pfizer Inc. The author has no other competing interests to declare..
  5. Thomas J McLellan

    Medicine Design, Pfizer Inc, Groton, United States
    Competing interests
    Thomas J McLellan, is affiliated with Pfizer Inc. The author has no other competing interests to declare..
  6. Darren Dumlao

    Medicine Design, Pfizer Inc, Groton, United States
    Competing interests
    Darren Dumlao, is affiliated with Pfizer Inc. The author has no other competing interests to declare..
  7. Ye Che

    Medicine Design, Pfizer Inc, Groton, United States
    Competing interests
    Ye Che, is affiliated with Pfizer Inc. The author has no other competing interests to declare..
  8. Yin Yao Dong

    Structural Genomics Consortium, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  9. Elisabeth P Carpenter

    Structural Genomics Consortium, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  10. Graham M West

    Medicine Design, Pfizer Inc, Groton, United States
    Competing interests
    Graham M West, is affiliated with Pfizer Inc. The author has no other competing interests to declare..
  11. Xiayang Qiu

    Medicine Design, Pfizer Inc, Groton, United States
    Competing interests
    Xiayang Qiu, is affiliated with Pfizer Inc. The author has no other competing interests to declare..
  12. Jeffrey S Culp

    Medicine Design, Pfizer Inc, Groton, United States
    Competing interests
    Jeffrey S Culp, is affiliated with Pfizer Inc. The author has no other competing interests to declare..
  13. Seungil Han

    Medicine Design, Pfizer Inc, Groton, United States
    For correspondence
    seungil.han@pfizer.com
    Competing interests
    Seungil Han, is affiliated with Pfizer Inc. The author has no other competing interests to declare..
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1070-3880

Funding

Y.D. and E.P.C. are members of the SGC, (Charity ref: 1097737) funded by AbbVie, Bayer Pharma AG, Boehringer Ingelheim, the Canada Foundation for Innovation, Genome Canada, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lilly Canada, Merck & Co., Novartis, the Ontario Ministry of Economic Development and Innovation, Pfizer, São Paulo Research Foundation-FAPESP and Takeda, as well as the Innovative Medicines Initiative Joint Undertaking ULTRA-DD grant 115766 and the Wellcome Trust106169/Z/14/Z.

Copyright

© 2019, Yu 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

  • 5,958
    views
  • 924
    downloads
  • 57
    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. Xiaodi Yu
  2. Olga Plotnikova
  3. Paul D Bonin
  4. Timothy A Subashi
  5. Thomas J McLellan
  6. Darren Dumlao
  7. Ye Che
  8. Yin Yao Dong
  9. Elisabeth P Carpenter
  10. Graham M West
  11. Xiayang Qiu
  12. Jeffrey S Culp
  13. Seungil Han
(2019)
Cryo-EM structures of the human glutamine transporter SLC1A5 (ASCT2) in the outward-facing conformation
eLife 8:e48120.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.48120

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.48120

Further reading

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Christopher T Schafer, Raymond F Pauszek III ... David P Millar
    Research Article

    The canonical chemokine receptor CXCR4 and atypical receptor ACKR3 both respond to CXCL12 but induce different effector responses to regulate cell migration. While CXCR4 couples to G proteins and directly promotes cell migration, ACKR3 is G-protein-independent and scavenges CXCL12 to regulate extracellular chemokine levels and maintain CXCR4 responsiveness, thereby indirectly influencing migration. The receptors also have distinct activation requirements. CXCR4 only responds to wild-type CXCL12 and is sensitive to mutation of the chemokine. By contrast, ACKR3 recruits GPCR kinases (GRKs) and β-arrestins and promiscuously responds to CXCL12, CXCL12 variants, other peptides and proteins, and is relatively insensitive to mutation. To investigate the role of conformational dynamics in the distinct pharmacological behaviors of CXCR4 and ACKR3, we employed single-molecule FRET to track discrete conformational states of the receptors in real-time. The data revealed that apo-CXCR4 preferentially populates a high-FRET inactive state, while apo-ACKR3 shows little conformational preference and high transition probabilities among multiple inactive, intermediate and active conformations, consistent with its propensity for activation. Multiple active-like ACKR3 conformations are populated in response to agonists, compared to the single CXCR4 active-state. This and the markedly different conformational landscapes of the receptors suggest that activation of ACKR3 may be achieved by a broader distribution of conformational states than CXCR4. Much of the conformational heterogeneity of ACKR3 is linked to a single residue that differs between ACKR3 and CXCR4. The dynamic properties of ACKR3 may underly its inability to form productive interactions with G proteins that would drive canonical GPCR signaling.

    1. Immunology and Inflammation
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Ana Cristina Chang-Gonzalez, Aoi Akitsu ... Wonmuk Hwang
    Research Advance

    Increasing evidence suggests that mechanical load on the αβ T-cell receptor (TCR) is crucial for recognizing the antigenic peptide-bound major histocompatibility complex (pMHC) molecule. Our recent all-atom molecular dynamics (MD) simulations revealed that the inter-domain motion of the TCR is responsible for the load-induced catch bond behavior of the TCR-pMHC complex and peptide discrimination (Chang-Gonzalez et al., 2024). To further examine the generality of the mechanism, we perform all-atom MD simulations of the B7 TCR under different conditions for comparison with our previous simulations of the A6 TCR. The two TCRs recognize the same pMHC and have similar interfaces with pMHC in crystal structures. We find that the B7 TCR-pMHC interface stabilizes under ∼15 pN load using a conserved dynamic allostery mechanism that involves the asymmetric motion of the TCR chassis. However, despite forming comparable contacts with pMHC as A6 in the crystal structure, B7 has fewer high-occupancy contacts with pMHC and exhibits higher mechanical compliance during the simulation. These results indicate that the dynamic allostery common to the TCRαβ chassis can amplify slight differences in interfacial contacts into distinctive mechanical responses and nuanced biological outcomes.