PP2A/B55α substrate recruitment as defined by the retinoblastoma-related protein p107

  1. Holly Fowle
  2. Ziran Zhao
  3. Qifang Xu
  4. Jason S Wasserman
  5. Xinru Wang
  6. Mary Adeyemi
  7. Felicity Feiser
  8. Alison N Kurimchak
  9. Diba Atar
  10. Brennan C McEwan
  11. Arminja N Kettenbach
  12. Rebecca Page
  13. Wolfgang Peti
  14. Roland L Dunbrack Jr.
  15. Xavier Graña  Is a corresponding author
  1. Temple University Lewis Katz School of Medicine, United States
  2. Fox Chase Cancer Center, United States
  3. University of Arizona, United States
  4. Hitchcock Medical Center at Dartmouth, United States
  5. UConn Health, United States

Abstract

Protein phosphorylation is a reversible post-translation modification essential in cell signaling. This study addresses a long-standing question as to how the most abundant serine/threonine Protein Phosphatase 2 (PP2A) holoenzyme, PP2A/B55α, specifically recognizes substrates and presents them to the enzyme active site. Here, we show how the PP2A regulatory subunit B55α recruits p107, a pRB-related tumor suppressor and B55α substrate. Using molecular and cellular approaches, we identified a conserved region 1 (R1, residues 615-626) encompassing the strongest p107 binding site. This enabled us to identify an 'HxRVxxV619-625' short linear motif (SLiM) in p107 as necessary for B55α binding and dephosphorylation of the proximal pSer-615 in vitro and in cells. Numerous B55α/PP2A substrates, including TAU, contain a related SLiM C-terminal from a proximal phosphosite, 'p[ST]-P-x(4,10)-[RK]-V-x-x-[VI]-R'. Mutation of conserved SLiM residues in TAU dramatically inhibits dephosphorylation by PP2A/B55α, validating its generality. A data-guided computational model details the interaction of residues from the conserved p107 SLiM, the B55α groove, and phosphosite presentation. Altogether these data provide key insights into PP2A/B55α mechanisms of substrate recruitment and active site engagement, and also facilitate identification and validation of new substrates, a key step towards understanding PP2A/B55α role in multiple cellular processes.

Data availability

Raw MS data for the the data depicted in Figure 6B are available at MassIVEhttps://massive.ucsd.edu/ProteoSAFe/dataset.jsp?task=9c21e08f6a524d7097e8bd45f0d2f375PXD028612.All NMR chemical shifts (Figure 1E-F) have been deposited in the BioMagResBank (BMRB: 28091).Source code folder (PeptideDock_sourceCode) for Figure 7 is a C# project, including retrieval of peptide structures from PDB and other sources such as PISCES, and calculation of distances and data analyses. https://github.com/DunbrackLab/PP2A_PeptideDock.All other data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files. Source Data files have been provided.

The following data sets were generated
The following previously published data sets were used

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Holly Fowle

    Fels Institute for Cancer Research and Molecular Biology, Temple University Lewis Katz School of Medicine, Philadelphia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Ziran Zhao

    Fels Institute for Cancer Research and Molecular Biology, Temple University Lewis Katz School of Medicine, Philadelphia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Qifang Xu

    Institute for Cancer Research, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Jason S Wasserman

    Fels Institute for Cancer Research and Molecular Biology, Temple University Lewis Katz School of Medicine, Philadelphia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Xinru Wang

    Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Arizona, Tucson, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5994-707X
  6. Mary Adeyemi

    Fels Institute for Cancer Research and Molecular Biology, Temple University Lewis Katz School of Medicine, Philadelphia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Felicity Feiser

    Fels Institute for Cancer Research and Molecular Biology, Temple University Lewis Katz School of Medicine, Philadelphia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Alison N Kurimchak

    Fels Institute for Cancer Research and Molecular Biology, Temple University Lewis Katz School of Medicine, Philadelphia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Diba Atar

    Fels Institute for Cancer Research and Molecular Biology, Temple University Lewis Katz School of Medicine, Philadelphia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Brennan C McEwan

    Department of Biochemistry and Cell Biology, Hitchcock Medical Center at Dartmouth, Lebanon, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Arminja N Kettenbach

    Department of Biochemistry and Cell Biology, Hitchcock Medical Center at Dartmouth, Lebanon, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3979-4576
  12. Rebecca Page

    Department Cell Biology,, UConn Health, Farmington, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Wolfgang Peti

    6Department Molecular Biology and Biophysics, UConn Health, Farmington, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Roland L Dunbrack Jr.

    Institute for Cancer Research, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  15. Xavier Graña

    Fels Institute for Cancer Research and Molecular Biology, Temple University Lewis Katz School of Medicine, Philadelphia, United States
    For correspondence
    xgrana@temple.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7134-0473

Funding

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01 GM117437)

  • Xavier Graña

National Cancer Institute (R03 CA216134-01)

  • Xavier Graña

WW Smith charitable Trust Award (no reference number)

  • Xavier Graña

National Cancer Institute (P30 CA006927)

  • Roland L Dunbrack Jr.
  • Xavier Graña

National Cancer Institute (U54 CA221704)

  • Holly Fowle
  • Ziran Zhao

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM134683)

  • Wolfgang Peti

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke (R01NS091336)

  • Wolfgang Peti

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

Copyright

© 2021, Fowle 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

  • 2,102
    views
  • 295
    downloads
  • 21
    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. Holly Fowle
  2. Ziran Zhao
  3. Qifang Xu
  4. Jason S Wasserman
  5. Xinru Wang
  6. Mary Adeyemi
  7. Felicity Feiser
  8. Alison N Kurimchak
  9. Diba Atar
  10. Brennan C McEwan
  11. Arminja N Kettenbach
  12. Rebecca Page
  13. Wolfgang Peti
  14. Roland L Dunbrack Jr.
  15. Xavier Graña
(2021)
PP2A/B55α substrate recruitment as defined by the retinoblastoma-related protein p107
eLife 10:e63181.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.63181

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.63181

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Cell Biology
    Birol Cabukusta, Shalom Borst Pauwels ... Jacques Neefjes
    Research Article

    Numerous lipids are heterogeneously distributed among organelles. Most lipid trafficking between organelles is achieved by a group of lipid transfer proteins (LTPs) that carry lipids using their hydrophobic cavities. The human genome encodes many intracellular LTPs responsible for lipid trafficking and the function of many LTPs in defining cellular lipid levels and distributions is unclear. Here, we created a gene knockout library targeting 90 intracellular LTPs and performed whole-cell lipidomics analysis. This analysis confirmed known lipid disturbances and identified new ones caused by the loss of LTPs. Among these, we found major sphingolipid imbalances in ORP9 and ORP11 knockout cells, two proteins of previously unknown function in sphingolipid metabolism. ORP9 and ORP11 form a heterodimer to localize at the ER-trans-Golgi membrane contact sites, where the dimer exchanges phosphatidylserine (PS) for phosphatidylinositol-4-phosphate (PI(4)P) between the two organelles. Consequently, loss of either protein causes phospholipid imbalances in the Golgi apparatus that result in lowered sphingomyelin synthesis at this organelle. Overall, our LTP knockout library toolbox identifies various proteins in control of cellular lipid levels, including the ORP9-ORP11 heterodimer, which exchanges PS and PI(4)P at the ER-Golgi membrane contact site as a critical step in sphingomyelin synthesis in the Golgi apparatus.

    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.