The kinesin-5 tail domain directly modulates the mechanochemical cycle of the motor domain for anti-parallel microtubule sliding

  1. Tatyana Bodrug
  2. Elizabeth M Wilson-Kubalek
  3. Stanley Nithianantham
  4. Alex F Thompson
  5. April Alfieri
  6. Ignas Gaska
  7. Jennifer Major
  8. Garrett Debs
  9. Sayaka Inagaki
  10. Pedro Gutierrez
  11. Larisa Gheber
  12. Richard J McKenney
  13. Charles Vaughn Sindelar
  14. Ron Milligan
  15. Jason Stumpff
  16. Steven S Rosenfeld
  17. Scott T Forth
  18. Jawdat Al-Bassam  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of California, Davis, United States
  2. The Scripps Research Institute, United States
  3. University of Vermont, United States
  4. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, United States
  5. Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, United States
  6. Yale University, United States
  7. Mayo Clinic, United States
  8. Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Israel

Abstract

Kinesin-5 motors organize mitotic spindles by sliding apart microtubules. They are homotetramers with dimeric motor and tail domains at both ends of a bipolar minifilament. Here, we describe a regulatory mechanism involving direct binding between tail and motor domains and its fundamental role in microtubule sliding. Kinesin-5 tails decrease microtubule-stimulated ATP-hydrolysis by specifically engaging motor domains in the nucleotide-free or ADP states. Cryo-EM reveals that tail binding stabilizes an open motor domain ATP-active site. Full-length motors undergo slow motility and cluster together along microtubules, while tail-deleted motors exhibit rapid motility without clustering. The tail is critical for motors to zipper together two microtubules by generating substantial sliding forces. The tail is essential for mitotic spindle localization, which becomes severely reduced in tail-deleted motors. Our studies suggest a revised microtubule-sliding model, in which kinesin-5 tails stabilize motor domains microtubule-bound states by slowing ATP-binding resulting in high-force production at both homotetramer ends.

Data availability

Two atomic coordinate files for Dm-KLP61F motor ATP-like MT(alpha-beta-tubulin) model is available at Protein Data Bank (PDB-ID: #XXXX. The Dm-KLP61F motor nucleotide-free MT(alpha-beta-tubulin) asymmetric unit Protein Data BankPDB-ID: #XXXXThe refined Dm-KLP61F motor AMPPNP MT cryo-EM map is available at the Electron microscopy Data bank (EMBD) EMDB ID:#XXXXand the Dm-KLP61F motor-tail nucleotide free MT cryo-EM map is available at Electron microscopy Data bank (EMBD) EMDB-iD:#XXXXDm-KLP61F motor-tail nucleotide free MT cryo-EM map (focused 3D-classification map) is available at the Electron microscopy Data bank (EMBD)EMDB-ID:#XXXX

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Tatyana Bodrug

    Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology, University of California, Davis, Davis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Elizabeth M Wilson-Kubalek

    Department of Integrative Structural and Computational Biology, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Stanley Nithianantham

    Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology, University of California, Davis, Davis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6238-647X
  4. Alex F Thompson

    Department of Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, University of Vermont, Burlington, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. April Alfieri

    Department of Biological Sciences, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Ignas Gaska

    Department of Biological Sciences, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Jennifer Major

    Department of Cancer Biology, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Garrett Debs

    Department of Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry, Yale University, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Sayaka Inagaki

    Department of Pharmacology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Pedro Gutierrez

    Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology, University of California, Davis, Davis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Larisa Gheber

    Department of Chemistry, Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3759-4001
  12. Richard J McKenney

    Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology, University of California, Davis, Davis, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Charles Vaughn Sindelar

    Department of Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry, Yale University, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6646-7776
  14. Ron Milligan

    Department of Integrative Structural and Computational Biology, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Jason Stumpff

    Department of Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, University of Vermont, Burlington, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Steven S Rosenfeld

    Department of Cancer Biology, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Scott T Forth

    Department of Biological Sciences, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  18. Jawdat Al-Bassam

    Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology, University of California, Davis, Davis, United States
    For correspondence
    jmalbassam@ucdavis.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6625-2102

Funding

National Science Foundation (1615991)

  • Jawdat Al-Bassam

National Institutes of Health (GM110283)

  • Jawdat Al-Bassam

National Institutes of Health (GM121491)

  • Jason Stumpff

National Institutes of Health (GM130556)

  • Jason Stumpff

Israel Science Foundation (ISF 386/18)

  • Larisa Gheber

United States-Israel Binational Science Foundation (BSF-2015851)

  • Larisa Gheber

National Institutes of Health (GM130556)

  • Richard J McKenney

National Institutes of Health (GM052468)

  • Ron Milligan

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

Copyright

© 2020, Bodrug 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

  • 3,811
    views
  • 488
    downloads
  • 44
    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. Tatyana Bodrug
  2. Elizabeth M Wilson-Kubalek
  3. Stanley Nithianantham
  4. Alex F Thompson
  5. April Alfieri
  6. Ignas Gaska
  7. Jennifer Major
  8. Garrett Debs
  9. Sayaka Inagaki
  10. Pedro Gutierrez
  11. Larisa Gheber
  12. Richard J McKenney
  13. Charles Vaughn Sindelar
  14. Ron Milligan
  15. Jason Stumpff
  16. Steven S Rosenfeld
  17. Scott T Forth
  18. Jawdat Al-Bassam
(2020)
The kinesin-5 tail domain directly modulates the mechanochemical cycle of the motor domain for anti-parallel microtubule sliding
eLife 9:e51131.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.51131

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.51131

Further reading

    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.

    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.