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

  • 2,239
    views
  • 305
    downloads
  • 22
    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
    Yingjie Sun, Changheng Li ... Youngnam N Jin
    Research Article

    Identifying target proteins for bioactive molecules is essential for understanding their mechanisms, developing improved derivatives, and minimizing off-target effects. Despite advances in target identification (target-ID) technologies, significant challenges remain, impeding drug development. Most target-ID methods use cell lysates, but maintaining an intact cellular context is vital for capturing specific drug–protein interactions, such as those with transient protein complexes and membrane-associated proteins. To address these limitations, we developed POST-IT (Pup-On-target for Small molecule Target Identification Technology), a non-diffusive proximity tagging system for live cells, orthogonal to the eukaryotic system. POST-IT utilizes an engineered fusion of proteasomal accessory factor A and HaloTag to transfer Pup to proximal proteins upon directly binding to the small molecule. After significant optimization to eliminate self-pupylation and polypupylation, minimize depupylation, and optimize chemical linkers, POST-IT successfully identified known targets and discovered a new binder, SEPHS2, for dasatinib, and VPS37C as a new target for hydroxychloroquine, enhancing our understanding these drugs’ mechanisms of action. Furthermore, we demonstrated the application of POST-IT in live zebrafish embryos, highlighting its potential for broad biological research and drug development.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Raji E Joseph, Thomas E Wales ... Amy H Andreotti
    Research Advance

    Inhibition of Bruton’s tyrosine kinase (BTK) has proven to be highly effective in the treatment of B-cell malignancies such as chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), autoimmune disorders, and multiple sclerosis. Since the approval of the first BTK inhibitor (BTKi), Ibrutinib, several other inhibitors including Acalabrutinib, Zanubrutinib, Tirabrutinib, and Pirtobrutinib have been clinically approved. All are covalent active site inhibitors, with the exception of the reversible active site inhibitor Pirtobrutinib. The large number of available inhibitors for the BTK target creates challenges in choosing the most appropriate BTKi for treatment. Side-by-side comparisons in CLL have shown that different inhibitors may differ in their treatment efficacy. Moreover, the nature of the resistance mutations that arise in patients appears to depend on the specific BTKi administered. We have previously shown that Ibrutinib binding to the kinase active site causes unanticipated long-range effects on the global conformation of BTK (Joseph et al., 2020). Here, we show that binding of each of the five approved BTKi to the kinase active site brings about distinct allosteric changes that alter the conformational equilibrium of full-length BTK. Additionally, we provide an explanation for the resistance mutation bias observed in CLL patients treated with different BTKi and characterize the mechanism of action of two common resistance mutations: BTK T474I and L528W.