The Rqc2/Tae2 subunit of the Ribosome-Associated Quality Control (RQC) complex marks ribosome-stalled nascent polypeptide chains for aggregation

  1. Ryo Yonashiro
  2. Erich B Tahara
  3. Mario H Bengtson
  4. Maria Khokhrina
  5. Holger Lorenz
  6. Kai-Chun Chen
  7. Yu Kigoshi-Tansho
  8. Jeffrey N Savas
  9. John R Yates
  10. Steve A Kay
  11. Elizabeth A Craig
  12. Axel Mogk
  13. Bernd Bukau
  14. Claudio AP Joazeiro  Is a corresponding author
  1. The Scripps Research Institute, United States
  2. University of São Paulo, Brazil
  3. University of Campinas, Brazil
  4. Zentrum für Molekulare Biologie der Universität Heidelberg, Germany
  5. Northwestern University, United States
  6. University of Wisconsin - Madison, United States

Abstract

Ribosome stalling during translation can be harmful, and is surveyed by a conserved quality control pathway that targets the associated mRNA and nascent polypeptide chain (NC). In this pathway, the ribosome-associated quality control (RQC) complex promotes the ubiquitylation and degradation of NCs remaining stalled in the 60S subunit. NC stalling is recognized by the Rqc2/Tae2 RQC subunit, which also stabilizes binding of the E3 ligase, Listerin/Ltn1. Additionally, Rqc2 modifies stalled NCs with a carboxy-terminal, Ala- and Thr-containing extension-the 'CAT tail.' However, the function of CAT tails and fate of CAT tail-modified ('CATylated') NCs has remained unknown. Here we show that CATylation mediates NC aggregation. NC CATylation and aggregation could be observed by inactivating Ltn1 or by analyzing NCs with limited ubiquitylation potential, suggesting that inefficient targeting by Ltn1 favors the Rqc2-mediated reaction. These findings uncover a translational stalling-dependent protein aggregation mechanism, and provide evidence that proteins can become marked for aggregation.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Ryo Yonashiro

    Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Erich B Tahara

    University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Mario H Bengtson

    University of Campinas, São Paulo, Brazil
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Maria Khokhrina

    Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum, DKFZ-ZMBH Alliance, Zentrum für Molekulare Biologie der Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Holger Lorenz

    Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum, DKFZ-ZMBH Alliance, Zentrum für Molekulare Biologie der Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Kai-Chun Chen

    Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Yu Kigoshi-Tansho

    Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Jeffrey N Savas

    Department of Neurology, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. John R Yates

    Department of Chemical Physiology, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  10. Steve A Kay

    Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Elizabeth A Craig

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Wisconsin - Madison, Wisconsin, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  12. Axel Mogk

    Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum, DKFZ-ZMBH Alliance, Zentrum für Molekulare Biologie der Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  13. Bernd Bukau

    Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum, DKFZ-ZMBH Alliance, Zentrum für Molekulare Biologie der Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  14. Claudio AP Joazeiro

    Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, United States
    For correspondence
    joazeiro@scripps.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Ivan Dikic, Goethe University Medical School, Germany

Version history

  1. Received: September 23, 2015
  2. Accepted: March 3, 2016
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: March 4, 2016 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: March 14, 2016 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2016, Yonashiro 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

  • 5,423
    views
  • 1,527
    downloads
  • 103
    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. Ryo Yonashiro
  2. Erich B Tahara
  3. Mario H Bengtson
  4. Maria Khokhrina
  5. Holger Lorenz
  6. Kai-Chun Chen
  7. Yu Kigoshi-Tansho
  8. Jeffrey N Savas
  9. John R Yates
  10. Steve A Kay
  11. Elizabeth A Craig
  12. Axel Mogk
  13. Bernd Bukau
  14. Claudio AP Joazeiro
(2016)
The Rqc2/Tae2 subunit of the Ribosome-Associated Quality Control (RQC) complex marks ribosome-stalled nascent polypeptide chains for aggregation
eLife 5:e11794.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.11794

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.11794

Further reading

    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.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Isabelle Petit-Hartlein, Annelise Vermot ... Franck Fieschi
    Research Article

    NADPH oxidases (NOX) are transmembrane proteins, widely spread in eukaryotes and prokaryotes, that produce reactive oxygen species (ROS). Eukaryotes use the ROS products for innate immune defense and signaling in critical (patho)physiological processes. Despite the recent structures of human NOX isoforms, the activation of electron transfer remains incompletely understood. SpNOX, a homolog from Streptococcus pneumoniae, can serves as a robust model for exploring electron transfers in the NOX family thanks to its constitutive activity. Crystal structures of SpNOX full-length and dehydrogenase (DH) domain constructs are revealed here. The isolated DH domain acts as a flavin reductase, and both constructs use either NADPH or NADH as substrate. Our findings suggest that hydride transfer from NAD(P)H to FAD is the rate-limiting step in electron transfer. We identify significance of F397 in nicotinamide access to flavin isoalloxazine and confirm flavin binding contributions from both DH and Transmembrane (TM) domains. Comparison with related enzymes suggests that distal access to heme may influence the final electron acceptor, while the relative position of DH and TM does not necessarily correlate with activity, contrary to previous suggestions. It rather suggests requirement of an internal rearrangement, within the DH domain, to switch from a resting to an active state. Thus, SpNOX appears to be a good model of active NOX2, which allows us to propose an explanation for NOX2’s requirement for activation.