N-terminal domain on dystroglycan enables LARGE1 to extend matriglycan on α-dystroglycan and prevents muscular dystrophy

  1. Hidehiko Okuma
  2. Jeffrey M Hord
  3. Ishita Chandel
  4. David Venzke
  5. Mary E Anderson
  6. Ameya S Walimbe
  7. Soumya Joseph
  8. Zeita Gastel
  9. Yuji Hara
  10. Fumiaki Saito
  11. Kiichiro Matsumura
  12. Kevin P Campbell  Is a corresponding author
  1. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Iowa, United States
  2. University of Shizuoka, Japan
  3. Teikyo University, Japan

Abstract

Dystroglycan (DG) requires extensive post-translational processing and O-glycosylation to function as a receptor for extracellular matrix (ECM) proteins containing laminin-G-like (LG) domains. Matriglycan is an elongated polysaccharide of alternating xylose (Xyl) and glucuronic acid (GlcA) that binds with high-affinity to ECM proteins with LG-domains and is uniquely synthesized on α-dystroglycan (α-DG) by like-acetylglucosaminyltransferase-1 (LARGE1). Defects in the post-translational processing or O-glycosylation of α-DG that result in a shorter form of matriglycan reduce the size of α-DG and decrease laminin binding, leading to various forms of muscular dystrophy. Previously, we demonstrated that Protein O-Mannose Kinase (POMK) is required for LARGE1 to generate full-length matriglycan on α-DG (~150-250 kDa) (Walimbe et al., 2020). Here, we show that LARGE1 can only synthesize a short, non-elongated form of matriglycan in mouse skeletal muscle that lacks the DG N-terminus (α-DGN), resulting in a ~100-125 kDa α-DG. This smaller form of α-DG binds laminin and maintains specific force but does not prevent muscle pathophysiology, including reduced force production after eccentric contractions or abnormalities in the neuromuscular junctions. Collectively, our study demonstrates that α-DGN, like POMK, is required for LARGE1 to extend matriglycan to its full mature length on α-DG and thus prevent muscle pathophysiology.

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 2C, 5C, 6B, 7B, Figure 2-figure supplement 1, Figure 2-figure supplement 2, Figure 5-figure supplement 1B, and Figure 6-figure supplement 1.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Hidehiko Okuma

    Department of Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Iowa, Iowa City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-2749-9855
  2. Jeffrey M Hord

    Department of Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Iowa, Iowa City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Ishita Chandel

    Department of Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Iowa, Iowa City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. David Venzke

    Department of Department of Molecular Physiology and BiophysicsPhysiology and Biophysics, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Iowa, Iowa City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8180-9562
  5. Mary E Anderson

    Department of Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Iowa, Iowa City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Ameya S Walimbe

    Department of Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Iowa, Iowa City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Soumya Joseph

    Department of Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Iowa, Iowa City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Zeita Gastel

    Department of Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Iowa, Iowa City, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Yuji Hara

    Department Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Shizuoka, Shizuoka, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Fumiaki Saito

    Department of Neurology, Teikyo University, Tokyo, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Kiichiro Matsumura

    Department of Neurology, Teikyo University, Tokyo, Japan
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Kevin P Campbell

    Department of Molecular Physiology and Biophysics, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, University of Iowa, Iowa City, United States
    For correspondence
    kevin-campbell@uiowa.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-2066-5889

Funding

Paul D. Wellstone Muscular Dystrophy Specialized Research Center (1U54NS053672)

  • Kevin P Campbell

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

  • Kevin P Campbell

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Joseph G Gleeson, University of California, San Diego, United States

Ethics

Animal experimentation: Animal experimentation: This study was performed in strict accordance with the recommendations in the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals of the National Institutes of Health. All animal experiments were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) protocols of the University of Iowa (#0081122).

Version history

  1. Preprint posted: August 9, 2022 (view preprint)
  2. Received: August 25, 2022
  3. Accepted: January 31, 2023
  4. Accepted Manuscript published: February 1, 2023 (version 1)
  5. Version of Record published: February 10, 2023 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2023, Okuma 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

  • 1,466
    views
  • 228
    downloads
  • 6
    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. Hidehiko Okuma
  2. Jeffrey M Hord
  3. Ishita Chandel
  4. David Venzke
  5. Mary E Anderson
  6. Ameya S Walimbe
  7. Soumya Joseph
  8. Zeita Gastel
  9. Yuji Hara
  10. Fumiaki Saito
  11. Kiichiro Matsumura
  12. Kevin P Campbell
(2023)
N-terminal domain on dystroglycan enables LARGE1 to extend matriglycan on α-dystroglycan and prevents muscular dystrophy
eLife 12:e82811.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.82811

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.82811

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Plant Biology
    Henning Mühlenbeck, Yuko Tsutsui ... Cyril Zipfel
    Research Article

    Transmembrane signaling by plant receptor kinases (RKs) has long been thought to involve reciprocal trans-phosphorylation of their intracellular kinase domains. The fact that many of these are pseudokinase domains, however, suggests that additional mechanisms must govern RK signaling activation. Non-catalytic signaling mechanisms of protein kinase domains have been described in metazoans, but information is scarce for plants. Recently, a non-catalytic function was reported for the leucine-rich repeat (LRR)-RK subfamily XIIa member EFR (elongation factor Tu receptor) and phosphorylation-dependent conformational changes were proposed to regulate signaling of RKs with non-RD kinase domains. Here, using EFR as a model, we describe a non-catalytic activation mechanism for LRR-RKs with non-RD kinase domains. EFR is an active kinase, but a kinase-dead variant retains the ability to enhance catalytic activity of its co-receptor kinase BAK1/SERK3 (brassinosteroid insensitive 1-associated kinase 1/somatic embryogenesis receptor kinase 3). Applying hydrogen-deuterium exchange mass spectrometry (HDX-MS) analysis and designing homology-based intragenic suppressor mutations, we provide evidence that the EFR kinase domain must adopt its active conformation in order to activate BAK1 allosterically, likely by supporting αC-helix positioning in BAK1. Our results suggest a conformational toggle model for signaling, in which BAK1 first phosphorylates EFR in the activation loop to stabilize its active conformation, allowing EFR in turn to allosterically activate BAK1.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Katarzyna Marta Zoltowska, Utpal Das ... Lucía Chávez-Gutiérrez
    Research Article

    Amyloid β (Aβ) peptides accumulating in the brain are proposed to trigger Alzheimer’s disease (AD). However, molecular cascades underlying their toxicity are poorly defined. Here, we explored a novel hypothesis for Aβ42 toxicity that arises from its proven affinity for γ-secretases. We hypothesized that the reported increases in Aβ42, particularly in the endolysosomal compartment, promote the establishment of a product feedback inhibitory mechanism on γ-secretases, and thereby impair downstream signaling events. We conducted kinetic analyses of γ-secretase activity in cell-free systems in the presence of Aβ, as well as cell-based and ex vivo assays in neuronal cell lines, neurons, and brain synaptosomes to assess the impact of Aβ on γ-secretases. We show that human Aβ42 peptides, but neither murine Aβ42 nor human Aβ17–42 (p3), inhibit γ-secretases and trigger accumulation of unprocessed substrates in neurons, including C-terminal fragments (CTFs) of APP, p75, and pan-cadherin. Moreover, Aβ42 treatment dysregulated cellular homeostasis, as shown by the induction of p75-dependent neuronal death in two distinct cellular systems. Our findings raise the possibility that pathological elevations in Aβ42 contribute to cellular toxicity via the γ-secretase inhibition, and provide a novel conceptual framework to address Aβ toxicity in the context of γ-secretase-dependent homeostatic signaling.