Regulation of BMP4/Dpp retrotranslocation and signaling by deglycosylation

  1. Antonio Galeone
  2. Joshua M Adams
  3. Shinya Matsuda
  4. Maximiliano F Presa
  5. Ashutosh Pandey
  6. Seung Yeop Han
  7. Yuriko Tachida
  8. Hiroto Hirayama
  9. Thomas Vaccari
  10. Tadashi Suzuki
  11. Cathleen M Lutz
  12. Markus Affolter
  13. Aamir Zuberi
  14. Hamed Jafar-Nejad  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Milan, Italy
  2. Baylor College of Medicine, United States
  3. Biozentrum der Universität Basel, Switzerland
  4. The Jackson Laboratory, United States
  5. RIKEN Cluster for Pioneering Research, Japan
  6. RIKEN Global Research Cluster, Japan

Abstract

During endoplasmic reticulum-associated degradation (ERAD), the cytoplasmic enzyme N-glycanase 1 (NGLY1) is proposed to remove N-glycans from misfolded N-glycoproteins after their retrotranslocation from the ER to the cytosol. We previously reported that NGLY1 regulates Drosophila BMP signaling in a tissue-specific manner (Galeone et al. 2017). Here, we establish the Drosophila Dpp and its mouse ortholog BMP4 as biologically relevant targets of NGLY1 and find, unexpectedly, that NGLY1-mediated deglycosylation of misfolded BMP4 is required for its retrotranslocation. Accumulation of misfolded BMP4 in the ER results in ER stress and prompts the ER recruitment of NGLY1. The ER-associated NGLY1 then deglycosylates misfolded BMP4 molecules to promote their retrotranslocation and proteasomal degradation, thereby allowing properly-folded BMP4 molecules to proceed through the secretory pathway and activate signaling in other cells. Our study redefines the role of NGLY1 during ERAD and suggests that impaired BMP4 signaling might underlie some of the NGLY1 deficiency patient phenotypes.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Antonio Galeone

    Department of Biosciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Joshua M Adams

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Shinya Matsuda

    Biozentrum der Universität Basel, Basel, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7541-7914
  4. Maximiliano F Presa

    The Jackson Laboratory, The Jackson Laboratory, Bar Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Ashutosh Pandey

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Seung Yeop Han

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Yuriko Tachida

    Glycometabolome Biochemistry Laboratory, RIKEN Cluster for Pioneering Research, Saitama, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Hiroto Hirayama

    Glycometabolome Biochemistry Laboratory, RIKEN Cluster for Pioneering Research, Saitama, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Thomas Vaccari

    Department of Biosciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Tadashi Suzuki

    Glycometabolome Team, RIKEN Global Research Cluster, Saitama, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Cathleen M Lutz

    The Jackson Laboratory, The Jackson Laboratory, Bar Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Markus Affolter

    Biozentrum der Universität Basel, Basel, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-5171-0016
  13. Aamir Zuberi

    The Jackson Laboratory, The Jackson Laboratory, Bar Harbor, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Hamed Jafar-Nejad

    Department of Molecular and Human Genetics, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, United States
    For correspondence
    hamedj@bcm.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6403-3379

Funding

Grace Science Foundation (Research grant)

  • Tadashi Suzuki
  • Aamir Zuberi
  • Hamed Jafar-Nejad

National Institutes of Health (R35GM130317)

  • Hamed Jafar-Nejad

European Union (H2020-MSCA individual fellowship #844147)

  • Antonio Galeone

Private Foundation in Italy (Buzzati-Traverso fellowship)

  • Antonio Galeone

Fondazione AIRC per la Ricerca sul Cancro (grant # 20661)

  • Thomas Vaccari

Worldwide Cancer Research (grant #18-0399)

  • Thomas Vaccari

SNSF Ambizione (PZ00P3_180019)

  • Shinya Matsuda

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

Ethics

Animal experimentation: This study was performed in strict accordance with the recommendations in the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals of the National Institutes of Health. The mice were maintained in the pathogen-free barrier facilities at Jackson Laboratory (Bar Harbor, ME) and at Baylor College of Medicine (Houston, TX). The studies were conducted in accordance with approved institutional animal care and use committee (IACUC) protocols 99066 (Jackson Laboratory) and AN-6012 (Baylor College of Medicine).

Copyright

© 2020, Galeone 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

  • 2,020
    views
  • 338
    downloads
  • 32
    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. Antonio Galeone
  2. Joshua M Adams
  3. Shinya Matsuda
  4. Maximiliano F Presa
  5. Ashutosh Pandey
  6. Seung Yeop Han
  7. Yuriko Tachida
  8. Hiroto Hirayama
  9. Thomas Vaccari
  10. Tadashi Suzuki
  11. Cathleen M Lutz
  12. Markus Affolter
  13. Aamir Zuberi
  14. Hamed Jafar-Nejad
(2020)
Regulation of BMP4/Dpp retrotranslocation and signaling by deglycosylation
eLife 9:e55596.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.55596

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.55596

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    Fatima Tleiss, Martina Montanari ... C Leopold Kurz
    Research Article

    Multiple gut antimicrobial mechanisms are coordinated in space and time to efficiently fight foodborne pathogens. In Drosophila melanogaster, production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) together with intestinal cell renewal play a key role in eliminating gut microbes. A complementary mechanism would be to isolate and treat pathogenic bacteria while allowing colonization by commensals. Using real-time imaging to follow the fate of ingested bacteria, we demonstrate that while commensal Lactiplantibacillus plantarum freely circulate within the intestinal lumen, pathogenic strains such as Erwinia carotovora or Bacillus thuringiensis, are blocked in the anterior midgut where they are rapidly eliminated by antimicrobial peptides. This sequestration of pathogenic bacteria in the anterior midgut requires the Duox enzyme in enterocytes, and both TrpA1 and Dh31 in enteroendocrine cells. Supplementing larval food with hCGRP, the human homolog of Dh31, is sufficient to block the bacteria, suggesting the existence of a conserved mechanism. While the immune deficiency (IMD) pathway is essential for eliminating the trapped bacteria, it is dispensable for the blockage. Genetic manipulations impairing bacterial compartmentalization result in abnormal colonization of posterior midgut regions by pathogenic bacteria. Despite a functional IMD pathway, this ectopic colonization leads to bacterial proliferation and larval death, demonstrating the critical role of bacteria anterior sequestration in larval defense. Our study reveals a temporal orchestration during which pathogenic bacteria, but not innocuous, are confined in the anterior part of the midgut in which they are eliminated in an IMD-pathway-dependent manner.

    1. Cancer Biology
    2. Cell Biology
    Kourosh Hayatigolkhatmi, Chiara Soriani ... Simona Rodighiero
    Tools and Resources

    Understanding the cell cycle at the single-cell level is crucial for cellular biology and cancer research. While current methods using fluorescent markers have improved the study of adherent cells, non-adherent cells remain challenging. In this study, we addressed this gap by combining a specialized surface to enhance cell attachment, the FUCCI(CA)2 sensor, an automated image analysis pipeline, and a custom machine learning algorithm. This approach enabled precise measurement of cell cycle phase durations in non-adherent cells. This method was validated in acute myeloid leukemia cell lines NB4 and Kasumi-1, which have unique cell cycle characteristics, and we tested the impact of cell cycle-modulating drugs on NB4 cells. Our cell cycle analysis system, which is also compatible with adherent cells, is fully automated and freely available, providing detailed insights from hundreds of cells under various conditions. This report presents a valuable tool for advancing cancer research and drug development by enabling comprehensive, automated cell cycle analysis in both adherent and non-adherent cells.