Abstract

Lysosomes are essential for cellular recycling, nutrient signaling, autophagy, and pathogenic bacteria and viruses invasion. Lysosomal fusion is fundamental to cell survival and requires HOPS, a conserved heterohexameric tethering complex. On the membranes to be fused, HOPS binds small membrane-associated GTPases and assembles SNAREs for fusion, but how the complex fulfills its function remained speculative. Here, we used cryo-electron microscopy to reveal the structure of HOPS. Unlike previously reported, significant flexibility of HOPS is confined to its extremities, where GTPase binding occurs. The SNARE-binding module is firmly attached to the core, therefore, ideally positioned between the membranes to catalyze fusion. Our data suggest a model for how HOPS fulfills its dual functionality of tethering and fusion and indicate why it is an essential part of the membrane fusion machinery.

Data availability

All diffraction data are deposited in the PDB as indicated in the manuscript. PDB files are mentioned there.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Dmitry Shvarev

    Department of Biology/Chemistry, 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:" 0000-0002-9776-268X
  2. Jannis Schoppe

    Department of Biology/Chemistry, Osnabrück University, Osnabrück, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Caroline König

    Department of Biology/Chemistry, Osnabrück University, Osnabrück, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Angela Perz

    Department of Biology/Chemistry, Osnabrück University, Osnabrück, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Nadia Füllbrunn

    Department of Biology/Chemistry, Osnabrück University, Osnabrück, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Stephan Kiontke

    Department of Plant Physiology and Photo Biology, Philipp University of Marburg, Marburg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-5822-913X
  7. Lars Langemeyer

    Department of Biology/Chemistry, 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:" 0000-0002-4309-0910
  8. Dovile Januliene

    Department of Biology/Chemistry, 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:" 0000-0002-3279-7590
  9. Kilian Schnelle

    Department of Biology/Chemistry, 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:" 0000-0001-8808-594X
  10. Daniel Kümmel

    Department of Chemistry and Pharmacy, University of Münster, Münster, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-3950-5914
  11. Florian Fröhlich

    Department of Biology/Chemistry, 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:" 0000-0001-8307-2189
  12. Arne Moeller

    Department of Biology/Chemistry, Osnabrück University, Osnabrück, Germany
    For correspondence
    arne.moeller@uni-osnabrueck.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Christian Ungermann

    Department of Biology/Chemistry, Osnabrück University, Osnabrück, Germany
    For correspondence
    cu@uos.de
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-4331-8695

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB 944,P11)

  • Christian Ungermann

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB 944,P27)

  • Arne Moeller

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB 944,P20)

  • Florian Fröhlich

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (UN111/5-6)

  • Arne Moeller
  • Christian Ungermann

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (INST190/196-1 FUGG)

  • Arne Moeller

Bundesministerium fur Bildung und Forschung (BMBF/DLR 01ED2010)

  • Arne Moeller

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (SFB 944,P16)

  • Daniel Kümmel

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Benjamin S Glick, The University of Chicago, United States

Version history

  1. Preprint posted: May 5, 2022 (view preprint)
  2. Received: June 8, 2022
  3. Accepted: September 12, 2022
  4. Accepted Manuscript published: September 13, 2022 (version 1)
  5. Version of Record published: October 21, 2022 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2022, Shvarev 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

  • 5,432
    views
  • 1,183
    downloads
  • 27
    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. Dmitry Shvarev
  2. Jannis Schoppe
  3. Caroline König
  4. Angela Perz
  5. Nadia Füllbrunn
  6. Stephan Kiontke
  7. Lars Langemeyer
  8. Dovile Januliene
  9. Kilian Schnelle
  10. Daniel Kümmel
  11. Florian Fröhlich
  12. Arne Moeller
  13. Christian Ungermann
(2022)
Structure of the HOPS tethering complex, a lysosomal membrane fusion machinery
eLife 11:e80901.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.80901

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.80901

Further reading

    1. Cell Biology
    Mathieu C Husser, Nhat P Pham ... Alisa Piekny
    Tools and Resources

    Endogenous tags have become invaluable tools to visualize and study native proteins in live cells. However, generating human cell lines carrying endogenous tags is difficult due to the low efficiency of homology-directed repair. Recently, an engineered split mNeonGreen protein was used to generate a large-scale endogenous tag library in HEK293 cells. Using split mNeonGreen for large-scale endogenous tagging in human iPSCs would open the door to studying protein function in healthy cells and across differentiated cell types. We engineered an iPS cell line to express the large fragment of the split mNeonGreen protein (mNG21-10) and showed that it enables fast and efficient endogenous tagging of proteins with the short fragment (mNG211). We also demonstrate that neural network-based image restoration enables live imaging studies of highly dynamic cellular processes such as cytokinesis in iPSCs. This work represents the first step towards a genome-wide endogenous tag library in human stem cells.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Cell Biology
    Natalia Dolgova, Eva-Maria E Uhlemann ... Oleg Y Dmitriev
    Research Article

    Mediator of ERBB2-driven Cell Motility 1 (MEMO1) is an evolutionary conserved protein implicated in many biological processes; however, its primary molecular function remains unknown. Importantly, MEMO1 is overexpressed in many types of cancer and was shown to modulate breast cancer metastasis through altered cell motility. To better understand the function of MEMO1 in cancer cells, we analyzed genetic interactions of MEMO1 using gene essentiality data from 1028 cancer cell lines and found multiple iron-related genes exhibiting genetic relationships with MEMO1. We experimentally confirmed several interactions between MEMO1 and iron-related proteins in living cells, most notably, transferrin receptor 2 (TFR2), mitoferrin-2 (SLC25A28), and the global iron response regulator IRP1 (ACO1). These interactions indicate that cells with high MEMO1 expression levels are hypersensitive to the disruptions in iron distribution. Our data also indicate that MEMO1 is involved in ferroptosis and is linked to iron supply to mitochondria. We have found that purified MEMO1 binds iron with high affinity under redox conditions mimicking intracellular environment and solved MEMO1 structures in complex with iron and copper. Our work reveals that the iron coordination mode in MEMO1 is very similar to that of iron-containing extradiol dioxygenases, which also display a similar structural fold. We conclude that MEMO1 is an iron-binding protein that modulates iron homeostasis in cancer cells.