The structure of the yeast Ctf3 complex

  1. Stephen M Hinshaw  Is a corresponding author
  2. Andrew N Dates
  3. Stephen C Harrison  Is a corresponding author
  1. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Harvard Medical School, United States
  2. Harvard University, United States

Abstract

Kinetochores are the chromosomal attachment points for spindle microtubules. They are also signaling hubs that control major cell cycle transitions and coordinate chromosome folding. Most well-studied eukaryotes rely on a conserved set of factors, which are divided among two loosely-defined groups, for these functions. Outer kinetochore proteins contact microtubules or regulate this contact directly. Inner kinetochore proteins designate the kinetochore assembly site by recognizing a specialized nucleosome containing the H3 variant Cse4/CENP-A. We previously determined the structure, resolved by cryo-electron microscopy (cryo-EM), of the yeast Ctf19 complex (Ctf19c, homologous to the vertebrate CCAN), providing a high-resolution view of inner kinetochore architecture (Hinshaw and Harrison, 2019). We now extend these observations by reporting a near-atomic model of the Ctf3 complex, the outermost Ctf19c sub-assembly seen in our original cryo-EM density. The model is sufficiently well-determined by the new data to enable molecular interpretation of Ctf3 recruitment and function.

Data availability

The final Ctf3c cryo-EM map and the soft mask used for three-dimensional refinements of fully unbinned particles have been deposited with accession code EMD-20200. The refined Ctf3c model has been deposited with accession code 6OUA.

The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Stephen M Hinshaw

    Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    For correspondence
    hinshaw@crystal.harvard.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4215-5206
  2. Andrew N Dates

    Program in Chemical Biology, Harvard University, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Stephen C Harrison

    Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Harvard Medical School, Boston, United States
    For correspondence
    harrison@crystal.harvard.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7215-9393

Funding

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

  • Stephen M Hinshaw

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

  • Stephen C Harrison

Helen Hay Whitney Foundation

  • Stephen M Hinshaw

National Institutes of Health (5T32GM095450-08)

  • Andrew N Dates

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Andrea Musacchio, Max Planck Institute of Molecular Physiology, Germany

Version history

  1. Received: May 9, 2019
  2. Accepted: June 12, 2019
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: June 13, 2019 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: July 1, 2019 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2019, Hinshaw 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

  • 1,820
    views
  • 309
    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. Stephen M Hinshaw
  2. Andrew N Dates
  3. Stephen C Harrison
(2019)
The structure of the yeast Ctf3 complex
eLife 8:e48215.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.48215

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.48215

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Claudia D Consalvo, Adedeji M Aderounmu ... Brenda L Bass
    Research Article

    Invertebrates use the endoribonuclease Dicer to cleave viral dsRNA during antiviral defense, while vertebrates use RIG-I-like Receptors (RLRs), which bind viral dsRNA to trigger an interferon response. While some invertebrate Dicers act alone during antiviral defense, Caenorhabditis elegans Dicer acts in a complex with a dsRNA binding protein called RDE-4, and an RLR ortholog called DRH-1. We used biochemical and structural techniques to provide mechanistic insight into how these proteins function together. We found RDE-4 is important for ATP-independent and ATP-dependent cleavage reactions, while helicase domains of both DCR-1 and DRH-1 contribute to ATP-dependent cleavage. DRH-1 plays the dominant role in ATP hydrolysis, and like mammalian RLRs, has an N-terminal domain that functions in autoinhibition. A cryo-EM structure indicates DRH-1 interacts with DCR-1’s helicase domain, suggesting this interaction relieves autoinhibition. Our study unravels the mechanistic basis of the collaboration between two helicases from typically distinct innate immune defense pathways.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Damien M Rasmussen, Manny M Semonis ... Nicholas M Levinson
    Research Article

    The type II class of RAF inhibitors currently in clinical trials paradoxically activate BRAF at subsaturating concentrations. Activation is mediated by induction of BRAF dimers, but why activation rather than inhibition occurs remains unclear. Using biophysical methods tracking BRAF dimerization and conformation, we built an allosteric model of inhibitor-induced dimerization that resolves the allosteric contributions of inhibitor binding to the two active sites of the dimer, revealing key differences between type I and type II RAF inhibitors. For type II inhibitors the allosteric coupling between inhibitor binding and BRAF dimerization is distributed asymmetrically across the two dimer binding sites, with binding to the first site dominating the allostery. This asymmetry results in efficient and selective induction of dimers with one inhibited and one catalytically active subunit. Our allosteric models quantitatively account for paradoxical activation data measured for 11 RAF inhibitors. Unlike type II inhibitors, type I inhibitors lack allosteric asymmetry and do not activate BRAF homodimers. Finally, NMR data reveal that BRAF homodimers are dynamically asymmetric with only one of the subunits locked in the active αC-in state. This provides a structural mechanism for how binding of only a single αC-in inhibitor molecule can induce potent BRAF dimerization and activation.