The mechanism of kinesin inhibition by kinesin binding protein

  1. Joseph Atherton  Is a corresponding author
  2. Jessica JA Hummel
  3. Natacha Olieric
  4. Julia Locke
  5. Alejandro Peña
  6. Steven S Rosenfeld
  7. Michel O Steinmetz
  8. Casper C Hoogenraad
  9. Carolyn A Moores
  1. King's College London, United Kingdom
  2. Utrecht University, Netherlands
  3. Paul Scherrer Institute, Switzerland
  4. The Francis Crick Institute, United Kingdom
  5. Pharmidex 19 Pharmaceuticals, United Kingdom
  6. Mayo Clinic, United States
  7. Institute of Structural and Molecular Biology, Birkbeck College, United Kingdom

Abstract

Subcellular compartmentalisation is necessary for eukaryotic cell function. Spatial and temporal regulation of kinesin activity is essential for building these local environments via control of intracellular cargo distribution. Kinesin binding protein (KBP) interacts with a subset of kinesins via their motor domains, inhibits their microtubule (MT) attachment and blocks their cellular function. However, its mechanisms of inhibition and selectivity have been unclear. Here we use cryo-electron microscopy to reveal the structure of KBP and of a KBP-kinesin motor domain complex. KBP is a TPR-containing, right-handed α-solenoid that sequesters the kinesin motor domain’s tubulin-binding surface, structurally distorting the motor domain and sterically blocking its MT attachment. KBP uses its α-solenoid concave face and edge loops to bind the kinesin motor domain, and selected structure-guided mutations disrupt KBP inhibition of kinesin transport in cells. The KBP-interacting motor domain surface contains motifs exclusively conserved in KBP-interacting kinesins, suggesting a basis for kinesin selectivity.

Data availability

Cryo-EM electron density maps and models have been deposited in the electron microscopy data bank (EMDB) and protein data bank (PDB) respectively. The relevant deposition codes are provided in Table 1.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Joseph Atherton

    Randall Centre for Cell & Molecular Biophysics, King's College London, London, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    joseph.atherton@kcl.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6362-2347
  2. Jessica JA Hummel

    Cell Biology, Neurobiology and Biophysics, Department of Biology, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Natacha Olieric

    Laboratory of Biomolecular Research, Division of Biology and Chemistry, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Julia Locke

    Macromolecular Machines Laboratory, The Francis Crick Institute, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Alejandro Peña

    Department of In Silico Drug Discovery, Pharmidex 19 Pharmaceuticals, Hatfield, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Steven S Rosenfeld

    Department of Cancer Biology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Michel O Steinmetz

    Laboratory of Biomolecular Research, Division of Biology and Chemistry, Paul Scherrer Institute, Villigen, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Casper C Hoogenraad

    Cell Biology, Neurobiology and Biophysics, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2666-0758
  9. Carolyn A Moores

    Biological Sciences, Institute of Structural and Molecular Biology, Birkbeck College, London, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5686-6290

Funding

Medical Research Council (MR/R000352/1)

  • Joseph Atherton

Worldwide Cancer Research (16-0037)

  • Julia Locke
  • Alejandro Peña

Wellcome Trust (202679/Z/16/Z,206166/Z/17/Z and 079605/Z/06/Z)

  • Joseph Atherton
  • Julia Locke
  • Alejandro Peña

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BB/L014211/1)

  • Joseph Atherton
  • Julia Locke
  • Alejandro Peña

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM130556)

  • Steven S Rosenfeld

Swiss National Science Foundation (31003A_166608)

  • Natacha Olieric
  • Michel O Steinmetz

Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO-ALW-VICI,CCH)

  • Jessica JA Hummel
  • Casper C Hoogenraad

European Research Council (ERC-consolidator,CCH)

  • Jessica JA Hummel
  • Casper C Hoogenraad

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

Copyright

© 2020, Atherton 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

  • 3,521
    views
  • 430
    downloads
  • 19
    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. Joseph Atherton
  2. Jessica JA Hummel
  3. Natacha Olieric
  4. Julia Locke
  5. Alejandro Peña
  6. Steven S Rosenfeld
  7. Michel O Steinmetz
  8. Casper C Hoogenraad
  9. Carolyn A Moores
(2020)
The mechanism of kinesin inhibition by kinesin binding protein
eLife 9:e61481.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.61481

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.61481

Further reading

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Bradley P Clarke, Alexia E Angelos ... Yi Ren
    Research Article

    In eukaryotes, RNAs transcribed by RNA Pol II are modified at the 5′ end with a 7-methylguanosine (m7G) cap, which is recognized by the nuclear cap binding complex (CBC). The CBC plays multiple important roles in mRNA metabolism, including transcription, splicing, polyadenylation, and export. It promotes mRNA export through direct interaction with a key mRNA export factor, ALYREF, which in turn links the TRanscription and EXport (TREX) complex to the 5′ end of mRNA. However, the molecular mechanism for CBC-mediated recruitment of the mRNA export machinery is not well understood. Here, we present the first structure of the CBC in complex with an mRNA export factor, ALYREF. The cryo-EM structure of CBC-ALYREF reveals that the RRM domain of ALYREF makes direct contact with both the NCBP1 and NCBP2 subunits of the CBC. Comparing CBC-ALYREF with other cellular complexes containing CBC and/or ALYREF components provides insights into the coordinated events during mRNA transcription, splicing, and export.

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Julia Belyaeva, Matthias Elgeti
    Review Article

    Under physiological conditions, proteins continuously undergo structural fluctuations on different timescales. Some conformations are only sparsely populated, but still play a key role in protein function. Thus, meaningful structure–function frameworks must include structural ensembles rather than only the most populated protein conformations. To detail protein plasticity, modern structural biology combines complementary experimental and computational approaches. In this review, we survey available computational approaches that integrate sparse experimental data from electron paramagnetic resonance spectroscopy with molecular modeling techniques to derive all-atom structural models of rare protein conformations. We also propose strategies to increase the reliability and improve efficiency using deep learning approaches, thus advancing the field of integrative structural biology.