Pathogenic variants of sphingomyelin synthase SMS2 disrupt lipid landscapes in the secretory pathway

  1. Tolulope Sokoya
  2. Jan Parolek
  3. Mads Møller Foged
  4. Dmytro I Danylchuk
  5. Manuel Bozan
  6. Bingshati Sarkar
  7. Angelika Hilderink
  8. Michael Philippi
  9. Lorenzo D Botto
  10. Paulien A Terhal
  11. Outi Mäkitie
  12. Jacob Piehler
  13. Yeongho Kim
  14. Christopher G Burd
  15. Andrey S Klymchenko
  16. Kenji Maeda
  17. Joost CM Holthuis  Is a corresponding author
  1. Osnabrück University, Germany
  2. Danish Cancer Society, Denmark
  3. Université de Strasbourg, UMR 7021, CNRS, France
  4. University of Utah, United States
  5. Utrecht University, Netherlands
  6. University of Helsinki, Finland
  7. Yale University, United States

Abstract

Sphingomyelin is a dominant sphingolipid in mammalian cells. Its production in the trans-Golgi traps cholesterol synthesized in the ER to promote formation of a sphingomyelin/sterol gradient along the secretory pathway. This gradient marks a fundamental transition in physical membrane properties that help specify organelle identify and function. We previously identified mutations in sphingomyelin synthase SMS2 that cause osteoporosis and skeletal dysplasia. Here we show that SMS2 variants linked to the most severe bone phenotypes retain full enzymatic activity but fail to leave the ER owing to a defective autonomous ER export signal. Cells harboring pathogenic SMS2 variants accumulate sphingomyelin in the ER and display a disrupted transbilayer sphingomyelin asymmetry. These aberrant sphingomyelin distributions also occur in patient-derived fibroblasts and are accompanied by imbalances in cholesterol organization, glycerophospholipid profiles and lipid order in the secretory pathway. We postulate that pathogenic SMS2 variants undermine the capacity of osteogenic cells to uphold nonrandom lipid distributions that are critical for their bone forming activity.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting file. Source Data files have been provided for Figures 2-4, 7-9 and Appendix 1 - figure 3.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Tolulope Sokoya

    Department of Biology and Center of Cellular Nanoanalytics, Osnabrück University, Osnabrück, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Jan Parolek

    Department of Biology and Center of Cellular Nanoanalytics, Osnabrück University, Osnabrück, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Mads Møller Foged

    Center for Autophagy, Recycling and Disease, Danish Cancer Society, Copenhagen, Denmark
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Dmytro I Danylchuk

    Laboratoire de Bioimagerie et Pathologies, Université de Strasbourg, UMR 7021, CNRS, Strasbourg, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Manuel Bozan

    Department of Biology and Center of Cellular Nanoanalytics, Osnabrück University, Osnabrück, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8426-369X
  6. Bingshati Sarkar

    Department of Biology and Center of Cellular Nanoanalytics, Osnabrück University, Osnabrück, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Angelika Hilderink

    Department of Biology and Center of Cellular Nanoanalytics, Osnabrück University, Osnabrück, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Michael Philippi

    Department of Biology and Center of Cellular Nanoanalytics, Osnabrück University, Osnabrück, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Lorenzo D Botto

    Department of Pediatrics, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Paulien A Terhal

    Department of Genetics, Utrecht University, Utrecht, Netherlands
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Outi Mäkitie

    Children's Hospital, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-4547-001X
  12. Jacob Piehler

    Department of Biology and Center of Cellular Nanoanalytics, Osnabrück University, Osnabrück, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2143-2270
  13. Yeongho Kim

    Department of Cell Biology, Yale University, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1477-925X
  14. Christopher G Burd

    Department of Cell Biology, Yale University, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1831-8706
  15. Andrey S Klymchenko

    Laboratoire de Bioimagerie et Pathologies, Université de Strasbourg, UMR 7021, CNRS, Strasbourg, France
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  16. Kenji Maeda

    Center for Autophagy, Recycling and Disease, Danish Cancer Society, Copenhagen, Denmark
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  17. Joost CM Holthuis

    Department of Biology and Center of Cellular Nanoanalytics, Osnabrück University, Osnabrück, Germany
    For correspondence
    jholthuis@uni-osnabrueck.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8912-1586

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB944-P14)

  • Joost CM Holthuis

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (HO3539/1-1)

  • Joost CM Holthuis

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB944-P8)

  • Jacob Piehler

National Institutes of Health (R35 GM144096)

  • Christopher G Burd

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Arun Radhakrishnan, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, United States

Version history

  1. Preprint posted: April 3, 2022 (view preprint)
  2. Received: April 6, 2022
  3. Accepted: September 13, 2022
  4. Accepted Manuscript published: September 14, 2022 (version 1)
  5. Version of Record published: October 4, 2022 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2022, Sokoya 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

  • 2,096
    views
  • 493
    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. Tolulope Sokoya
  2. Jan Parolek
  3. Mads Møller Foged
  4. Dmytro I Danylchuk
  5. Manuel Bozan
  6. Bingshati Sarkar
  7. Angelika Hilderink
  8. Michael Philippi
  9. Lorenzo D Botto
  10. Paulien A Terhal
  11. Outi Mäkitie
  12. Jacob Piehler
  13. Yeongho Kim
  14. Christopher G Burd
  15. Andrey S Klymchenko
  16. Kenji Maeda
  17. Joost CM Holthuis
(2022)
Pathogenic variants of sphingomyelin synthase SMS2 disrupt lipid landscapes in the secretory pathway
eLife 11:e79278.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.79278

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.79278

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    Boglarka Zambo, Evelina Edelweiss ... Gergo Gogl
    Research Article

    Truncation of the protein-protein interaction SH3 domain of the membrane remodeling Bridging Integrator 1 (BIN1, Amphiphysin 2) protein leads to centronuclear myopathy. Here, we assessed the impact of a set of naturally observed, previously uncharacterized BIN1 SH3 domain variants using conventional in vitro and cell-based assays monitoring the BIN1 interaction with dynamin 2 (DNM2) and identified potentially harmful ones that can be also tentatively connected to neuromuscular disorders. However, SH3 domains are typically promiscuous and it is expected that other, so far unknown partners of BIN1 exist besides DNM2, that also participate in the development of centronuclear myopathy. In order to shed light on these other relevant interaction partners and to get a holistic picture of the pathomechanism behind BIN1 SH3 domain variants, we used affinity interactomics. We identified hundreds of new BIN1 interaction partners proteome-wide, among which many appear to participate in cell division, suggesting a critical role of BIN1 in the regulation of mitosis. Finally, we show that the identified BIN1 mutations indeed cause proteome-wide affinity perturbation, signifying the importance of employing unbiased affinity interactomic approaches.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Chromosomes and Gene Expression
    Ramona Weber, Chung-Te Chang
    Research Article

    Recent findings indicate that the translation elongation rate influences mRNA stability. One of the factors that has been implicated in this link between mRNA decay and translation speed is the yeast DEAD-box helicase Dhh1p. Here, we demonstrated that the human ortholog of Dhh1p, DDX6, triggers the deadenylation-dependent decay of inefficiently translated mRNAs in human cells. DDX6 interacts with the ribosome through the Phe-Asp-Phe (FDF) motif in its RecA2 domain. Furthermore, RecA2-mediated interactions and ATPase activity are both required for DDX6 to destabilize inefficiently translated mRNAs. Using ribosome profiling and RNA sequencing, we identified two classes of endogenous mRNAs that are regulated in a DDX6-dependent manner. The identified targets are either translationally regulated or regulated at the steady-state-level and either exhibit signatures of poor overall translation or of locally reduced ribosome translocation rates. Transferring the identified sequence stretches into a reporter mRNA caused translation- and DDX6-dependent degradation of the reporter mRNA. In summary, these results identify DDX6 as a crucial regulator of mRNA translation and decay triggered by slow ribosome movement and provide insights into the mechanism by which DDX6 destabilizes inefficiently translated mRNAs.