The structural basis for SARM1 inhibition and activation under energetic stress

  1. Michael Sporny
  2. Julia Guez-Haddad
  3. Tami Khazma
  4. Avraham Yaron
  5. Moshe Dessau
  6. Yoel Shkolnisky
  7. Carsten Mim
  8. Michail N Isupov
  9. Ran Zalk
  10. Michael Hons
  11. Yarden Opatowsky  Is a corresponding author
  1. Bar Ilan University, Israel
  2. The Weizmann Institute of Science, Israel
  3. Tel-Aviv University, Israel
  4. Royal Technical Institute (KTH), Sweden
  5. University of Exeter, United Kingdom
  6. Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Israel
  7. European Molecular Biology Laboratory, France

Abstract

SARM1 an executor of axonal degeneration, displays NADase activity that depletes the key cellular metabolite, NAD+, in response to nerve injury. The basis of SARM1 inhibition, and its activation under stress conditions are still unknown. Here, we present cryo-EM maps of SARM1 at 2.9 and 2.7 Å resolution. These indicate that SARM1 homo-octamer avoids premature activation by assuming a packed conformation, with ordered inner and peripheral rings, that prevents dimerization and activation of the catalytic domains. This inactive conformation is stabilized by binding of SARM1's own substrate NAD+ in an allosteric location, away from the catalytic sites. This model was validated by mutagenesis of the allosteric site, which led to constitutively active SARM1. We propose that the reduction of cellular NAD+ concentration contributes to the disassembly of SARM1's peripheral ring, which allows formation of active NADase domain dimers, thereby further depleting NAD+ to cause an energetic catastrophe and cell death.

Data availability

Coordinates and structure factors have been deposited in the Protein Data Bank with accession numbers 6ZFX, 7ANW, 6ZG0, 6ZG1, and in the EMDB with accession numbers 11187, 11834, 11190, 11191 for the GraFix-ed, NAD+ supplemented, not treated, and SAM1-2 models and maps, respectively.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Michael Sporny

    Life Sciences, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Julia Guez-Haddad

    Life Sciences, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Tami Khazma

    Life Sciences, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Avraham Yaron

    Department of Biomolecular Sciences, The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-9340-7245
  5. Moshe Dessau

    Azrieli Faculty of Medicine, Bar Ilan University, Safed, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1954-3625
  6. Yoel Shkolnisky

    Department of Applied Mathematics, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Carsten Mim

    Dept. For Biomedical Engineering and Health Systems, Royal Technical Institute (KTH), Stockholm, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6402-8270
  8. Michail N Isupov

    Biosciences, University of Exeter, Exeter, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Ran Zalk

    National Institute for Biotechnology in the Negev, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer-Sheva, Israel
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Michael Hons

    Grenoble Outstation, European Molecular Biology Laboratory, Grenoble, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Yarden Opatowsky

    Life Sciences, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel
    For correspondence
    yarden.opatowsky@biu.ac.il
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9609-1204

Funding

Israel Science Foundation (1425/15)

  • Yarden Opatowsky

Israel Science Foundation (909/19)

  • Yarden Opatowsky

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

Copyright

© 2020, Sporny 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

  • 6,054
    views
  • 1,012
    downloads
  • 85
    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. Michael Sporny
  2. Julia Guez-Haddad
  3. Tami Khazma
  4. Avraham Yaron
  5. Moshe Dessau
  6. Yoel Shkolnisky
  7. Carsten Mim
  8. Michail N Isupov
  9. Ran Zalk
  10. Michael Hons
  11. Yarden Opatowsky
(2020)
The structural basis for SARM1 inhibition and activation under energetic stress
eLife 9:e62021.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.62021

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.62021

Further reading

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Hitendra Negi, Aravind Ravichandran ... Ranabir Das
    Research Article Updated

    The proteasome controls levels of most cellular proteins, and its activity is regulated under stress, quiescence, and inflammation. However, factors determining the proteasomal degradation rate remain poorly understood. Proteasome substrates are conjugated with small proteins (tags) like ubiquitin and Fat10 to target them to the proteasome. It is unclear if the structural plasticity of proteasome-targeting tags can influence substrate degradation. Fat10 is upregulated during inflammation, and its substrates undergo rapid proteasomal degradation. We report that the degradation rate of Fat10 substrates critically depends on the structural plasticity of Fat10. While the ubiquitin tag is recycled at the proteasome, Fat10 is degraded with the substrate. Our results suggest significantly lower thermodynamic stability and faster mechanical unfolding in Fat10 compared to ubiquitin. Long-range salt bridges are absent in the Fat10 structure, creating a plastic protein with partially unstructured regions suitable for proteasome engagement. Fat10 plasticity destabilizes substrates significantly and creates partially unstructured regions in the substrate to enhance degradation. NMR-relaxation-derived order parameters and temperature dependence of chemical shifts identify the Fat10-induced partially unstructured regions in the substrate, which correlated excellently to Fat10-substrate contacts, suggesting that the tag-substrate collision destabilizes the substrate. These results highlight a strong dependence of proteasomal degradation on the structural plasticity and thermodynamic properties of the proteasome-targeting tags.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Kien Xuan Ngo, Huong T Vu ... Taro Uyeda
    Research Article

    The mechanism underlying the preferential and cooperative binding of cofilin and the expansion of clusters toward the pointed-end side of actin filaments remains poorly understood. To address this, we conducted a principal component analysis based on available filamentous actin (F-actin) and C-actin (cofilins were excluded from cofilactin) structures and compared to monomeric G-actin. The results strongly suggest that C-actin, rather than F-ADP-actin, represented the favourable structure for binding preference of cofilin. High-speed atomic force microscopy explored that the shortened bare half helix adjacent to the cofilin clusters on the pointed end side included fewer actin protomers than normal helices. The mean axial distance (MAD) between two adjacent actin protomers along the same long-pitch strand within shortened bare half helices was longer (5.0–6.3 nm) than the MAD within typical helices (4.3–5.6 nm). The inhibition of torsional motion during helical twisting, achieved through stronger attachment to the lipid membrane, led to more pronounced inhibition of cofilin binding and cluster formation than the presence of inorganic phosphate (Pi) in solution. F-ADP-actin exhibited more naturally supertwisted half helices than F-ADP.Pi-actin, explaining how Pi inhibits cofilin binding to F-actin with variable helical twists. We propose that protomers within the shorter bare helical twists, either influenced by thermal fluctuation or induced allosterically by cofilin clusters, exhibit characteristics of C-actin-like structures with an elongated MAD, leading to preferential and cooperative binding of cofilin.