Cryo-EM reconstructions of inhibitor-bound SMG1 kinase reveal an autoinhibitory state dependent on SMG8

  1. Lukas M Langer
  2. Fabien Bonneau
  3. Yair Gat
  4. Elena Conti  Is a corresponding author
  1. Max Planck Institute of Biochemistry, Germany

Abstract

The PI3K-related kinase (PIKK) SMG1 monitors progression of metazoan nonsense-mediated mRNA decay (NMD) by phosphorylating the RNA helicase UPF1. Previous work has shown that the activity of SMG1 is impaired by small molecule inhibitors, is reduced by the SMG1 interactors SMG8 and SMG9, and is downregulated by the so-called SMG1 insertion domain. However, the molecular basis for this complex regulatory network has remained elusive. Here, we present cryo-electron microscopy reconstructions of human SMG1-9 and SMG1-8-9 complexes bound to either a SMG1 inhibitor or a non-hydrolyzable ATP analogue at overall resolutions ranging from 2.8 to 3.6 Å. These structures reveal the basis with which a small molecule inhibitor preferentially targets SMG1 over other PIKKs. By comparison with our previously reported substrate-bound structure (Langer et al. 2020), we show that the SMG1 insertion domain can exert an autoinhibitory function by directly blocking the substrate binding path as well as overall access to the SMG1 kinase active site. Together with biochemical analysis, our data indicate that SMG1 autoinhibition is stabilized by the presence of SMG8. Our results explain the specific inhibition of SMG1 by an ATP-competitive small molecule, provide insights into regulation of its kinase activity within the NMD pathway, and expand the understanding of PIKK regulatory mechanisms in general.

Data availability

Models have been deposited in the PDB under the accession codes 7PW4 (SMG1-8-9 bound to SMG1i), 7PW5 (SMG1-8-9 bound to SMG1i, with SMG8 C-terminus), 7PW6 (SMG1 body bound to SMG1i), 7PW7 (SMG1-9 bound to SMG1i), 7PW8 (SMG1-8-9 bound to AMPPNP) and 7PW9 (SMG1-9 bound to AMPPNP). The corresponding EM maps have been deposited in the EMDB under the accession codes EMD-13674, EMD-13675, EMD-13676, EMD-13677, EMD-13678 and EMD-13679.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Lukas M Langer

    Department of Structural Cell Biology, Max Planck Institute of Biochemistry, Munich, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9977-2427
  2. Fabien Bonneau

    Department of Structural Cell Biology, Max Planck Institute of Biochemistry, Munich, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8787-7662
  3. Yair Gat

    Department of Structural Cell Biology, Max Planck Institute of Biochemistry, Munich, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2338-9384
  4. Elena Conti

    Department of Structural Cell Biology, Max Planck Institute of Biochemistry, Munich, Germany
    For correspondence
    conti@biochem.mpg.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1254-5588

Funding

Boehringer Ingelheim Fonds

  • Lukas M Langer

Max-Planck-Gesellschaft

  • Elena Conti

European Commission (ERC Advanced Investigator Grant EXORICO)

  • Elena Conti

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB1035)

  • Elena Conti

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (GRK1721)

  • Elena Conti

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB/TRR 237)

  • Elena Conti

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

Copyright

© 2021, Langer 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

  • 2,850
    views
  • 417
    downloads
  • 23
    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. Lukas M Langer
  2. Fabien Bonneau
  3. Yair Gat
  4. Elena Conti
(2021)
Cryo-EM reconstructions of inhibitor-bound SMG1 kinase reveal an autoinhibitory state dependent on SMG8
eLife 10:e72353.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.72353

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.72353

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Yamato Niitani, Kohei Matsuzaki ... Michio Tomishige
    Research Article

    The two identical motor domains (heads) of dimeric kinesin-1 move in a hand-over-hand process along a microtubule, coordinating their ATPase cycles such that each ATP hydrolysis is tightly coupled to a step and enabling the motor to take many steps without dissociating. The neck linker, a structural element that connects the two heads, has been shown to be essential for head–head coordination; however, which kinetic step(s) in the chemomechanical cycle is ‘gated’ by the neck linker remains unresolved. Here, we employed pre-steady-state kinetics and single-molecule assays to investigate how the neck-linker conformation affects kinesin’s motility cycle. We show that the backward-pointing configuration of the neck linker in the front kinesin head confers higher affinity for microtubule, but does not change ATP binding and dissociation rates. In contrast, the forward-pointing configuration of the neck linker in the rear kinesin head decreases the ATP dissociation rate but has little effect on microtubule dissociation. In combination, these conformation-specific effects of the neck linker favor ATP hydrolysis and dissociation of the rear head prior to microtubule detachment of the front head, thereby providing a kinetic explanation for the coordinated walking mechanism of dimeric kinesin.

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Christopher T Schafer, Raymond F Pauszek III ... David P Millar
    Research Article

    The canonical chemokine receptor CXCR4 and atypical receptor ACKR3 both respond to CXCL12 but induce different effector responses to regulate cell migration. While CXCR4 couples to G proteins and directly promotes cell migration, ACKR3 is G-protein-independent and scavenges CXCL12 to regulate extracellular chemokine levels and maintain CXCR4 responsiveness, thereby indirectly influencing migration. The receptors also have distinct activation requirements. CXCR4 only responds to wild-type CXCL12 and is sensitive to mutation of the chemokine. By contrast, ACKR3 recruits GPCR kinases (GRKs) and β-arrestins and promiscuously responds to CXCL12, CXCL12 variants, other peptides and proteins, and is relatively insensitive to mutation. To investigate the role of conformational dynamics in the distinct pharmacological behaviors of CXCR4 and ACKR3, we employed single-molecule FRET to track discrete conformational states of the receptors in real-time. The data revealed that apo-CXCR4 preferentially populates a high-FRET inactive state, while apo-ACKR3 shows little conformational preference and high transition probabilities among multiple inactive, intermediate and active conformations, consistent with its propensity for activation. Multiple active-like ACKR3 conformations are populated in response to agonists, compared to the single CXCR4 active-state. This and the markedly different conformational landscapes of the receptors suggest that activation of ACKR3 may be achieved by a broader distribution of conformational states than CXCR4. Much of the conformational heterogeneity of ACKR3 is linked to a single residue that differs between ACKR3 and CXCR4. The dynamic properties of ACKR3 may underly its inability to form productive interactions with G proteins that would drive canonical GPCR signaling.