Molecular determinants of phase separation for Drosophila DNA replication licensing factors

  1. Matthew W Parker  Is a corresponding author
  2. Jonchee A Kao
  3. Alvin Huang
  4. James M Berger
  5. Michael R Botchan
  1. The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, United States
  2. University of California, Berkeley, United States
  3. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, United States

Abstract

Liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS) of intrinsically disordered regions (IDRs) in proteins can drive the formation of membraneless compartments in cells. Phase-separated structures enrich for specific partner proteins and exclude others. Previously, we showed that the IDRs of metazoan DNA replication initiators drive DNA-dependent phase separation in vitro and chromosome binding in vivo, and that initiator condensates selectively recruit replication-specific partner proteins (Parker et al., 2019). How initiator IDRs facilitate LLPS and maintain compositional specificity is unknown. Here, using D. melanogaster (Dm) Cdt1 as a model initiation factor, we show that phase separation results from a synergy between electrostatic DNA-bridging interactions and hydrophobic inter-IDR contacts. Both sets of interactions depend on sequence composition (but not sequence order), are resistant to 1,6-hexanediol, and do not depend on aromaticity. These findings demonstrate that distinct sets of interactions drive condensate formation and specificity across different phase-separating systems and advance efforts to predict IDR LLPS propensity and partner selection a priori.

Data availability

All data generated during this study is included in the manuscript and supporting files.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Matthew W Parker

    Department of Biophysics, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    For correspondence
    matthew.parker@utsouthwestern.edu
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-7571-0010
  2. Jonchee A Kao

    Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1701-3265
  3. Alvin Huang

    Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    No competing interests declared.
  4. James M Berger

    Department of Biophysics and Biophysical Chemistry, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, United States
    Competing interests
    James M Berger, Reviewing editor, eLife.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0666-1240
  5. Michael R Botchan

    Department of Molecular and Cell Biology, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, United States
    Competing interests
    Michael R Botchan, Reviewing editor, eLife.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-0459-5518

Funding

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R01GM141045-01)

  • James M Berger
  • Michael R Botchan

National Cancer Institute (R01CA030490)

  • James M Berger
  • Michael R Botchan

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (F32GM116393)

  • Matthew W Parker

UC Berkeley Jessie Rabinowitz Award

  • Jonchee A Kao

Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (RR200070)

  • Matthew W Parker

Welch Foundation (I-2074-20210327)

  • Matthew W Parker

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

Copyright

© 2021, Parker 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

  • 2,215
    views
  • 325
    downloads
  • 12
    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. Matthew W Parker
  2. Jonchee A Kao
  3. Alvin Huang
  4. James M Berger
  5. Michael R Botchan
(2021)
Molecular determinants of phase separation for Drosophila DNA replication licensing factors
eLife 10:e70535.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.70535

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.70535

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    Shraddha KC, Kenny H Nguyen ... Thomas C Boothby
    Research Article

    The conformational ensemble and function of intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs) are sensitive to their solution environment. The inherent malleability of disordered proteins, combined with the exposure of their residues, accounts for this sensitivity. One context in which IDPs play important roles that are concomitant with massive changes to the intracellular environment is during desiccation (extreme drying). The ability of organisms to survive desiccation has long been linked to the accumulation of high levels of cosolutes such as trehalose or sucrose as well as the enrichment of IDPs, such as late embryogenesis abundant (LEA) proteins or cytoplasmic abundant heat-soluble (CAHS) proteins. Despite knowing that IDPs play important roles and are co-enriched alongside endogenous, species-specific cosolutes during desiccation, little is known mechanistically about how IDP-cosolute interactions influence desiccation tolerance. Here, we test the notion that the protective function of desiccation-related IDPs is enhanced through conformational changes induced by endogenous cosolutes. We find that desiccation-related IDPs derived from four different organisms spanning two LEA protein families and the CAHS protein family synergize best with endogenous cosolutes during drying to promote desiccation protection. Yet the structural parameters of protective IDPs do not correlate with synergy for either CAHS or LEA proteins. We further demonstrate that for CAHS, but not LEA proteins, synergy is related to self-assembly and the formation of a gel. Our results suggest that functional synergy between IDPs and endogenous cosolutes is a convergent desiccation protection strategy seen among different IDP families and organisms, yet the mechanisms underlying this synergy differ between IDP families.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Jie Luo, Jeff Ranish
    Tools and Resources

    Dynamic conformational and structural changes in proteins and protein complexes play a central and ubiquitous role in the regulation of protein function, yet it is very challenging to study these changes, especially for large protein complexes, under physiological conditions. Here, we introduce a novel isobaric crosslinker, Qlinker, for studying conformational and structural changes in proteins and protein complexes using quantitative crosslinking mass spectrometry. Qlinkers are small and simple, amine-reactive molecules with an optimal extended distance of ~10 Å, which use MS2 reporter ions for relative quantification of Qlinker-modified peptides derived from different samples. We synthesized the 2-plex Q2linker and showed that the Q2linker can provide quantitative crosslinking data that pinpoints key conformational and structural changes in biosensors, binary and ternary complexes composed of the general transcription factors TBP, TFIIA, and TFIIB, and RNA polymerase II complexes.