Article

The structural basis of Edc3- and Scd6-mediated activation of the Dcp1:Dcp2 mRNA decapping complex.

Max Planck Institute for Developmental Biology, Tübingen, Germany.
The EMBO Journal (Impact Factor: 10.75). 11/2011; 31(2):279-90. DOI: 10.1038/emboj.2011.408
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The Dcp1:Dcp2 decapping complex catalyses the removal of the mRNA 5' cap structure. Activator proteins, including Edc3 (enhancer of decapping 3), modulate its activity. Here, we solved the structure of the yeast Edc3 LSm domain in complex with a short helical leucine-rich motif (HLM) from Dcp2. The motif interacts with the monomeric Edc3 LSm domain in an unprecedented manner and recognizes a noncanonical binding surface. Based on the structure, we identified additional HLMs in the disordered C-terminal extension of Dcp2 that can interact with Edc3. Moreover, the LSm domain of the Edc3-related protein Scd6 competes with Edc3 for the interaction with these HLMs. We show that both Edc3 and Scd6 stimulate decapping in vitro, presumably by preventing the Dcp1:Dcp2 complex from adopting an inactive conformation. In addition, we show that the C-terminal HLMs in Dcp2 are necessary for the localization of the Dcp1:Dcp2 decapping complex to P-bodies in vivo. Unexpectedly, in contrast to yeast, in metazoans the HLM is found in Dcp1, suggesting that details underlying the regulation of mRNA decapping changed throughout evolution.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
116 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In eukaryotic cells, components of the 5' to 3' mRNA degradation machinery can undergo a rapid phase transition. The resulting cytoplasmic foci are referred to as processing bodies (P-bodies). The molecular details of the self-aggregation process are, however, largely undetermined. Herein, we use a bottom-up approach that combines NMR spectroscopy, isothermal titration calorimetry, X-ray crystallography, and fluorescence microscopy to probe if mRNA degradation factors can undergo phase transitions in vitro. We show that the Schizosaccharomyces pombe Dcp2 mRNA decapping enzyme, its prime activator Dcp1, and the scaffolding proteins Edc3 and Pdc1 are sufficient to reconstitute a phase-separation process. Intermolecular interactions between the Edc3 LSm domain and at least 10 helical leucine-rich motifs in Dcp2 and Pdc1 build the core of the interaction network. We show that blocking of these interactions interferes with the clustering behavior, both in vitro and in vivo.
    Angewandte Chemie International Edition in English 07/2014; 53(28). DOI:10.1002/anie.201402885 · 13.45 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Edc3 protein is an enhancer of mRNA decapping and acts as a scaffold protein for the mRNA granules that are known as processing bodies (P-bodies) in yeast. In the pathogenic yeast, Candida albicans, various stresses such as glucose depletion, oxidative stress, or filamentation condition induce the accumulation of P-bodies. Here, we report that the edc3/edc3 deletion strain showed increased resistance to various stresses, including hydrogen peroxide, acetic acid, and high temperature. Oxidative stress is known to induce the intracellular accumulation of reactive oxygen species (ROS) and apoptotic cell death in C. albicans. We found that the ROS level was lower in edc3/edc3 cells than in wild-type following oxidative stress. We further observed that the expression of the metacaspase gene CaMCA1 was decreased in the edc3/edc3 deletion strain. Overexpression of CaMCA1 suppressed the decreased accumulation of ROS and the increased resistance to hydrogen peroxide in edc3/edc3. The catalase, Cat1, and the superoxide dismutase, Sod1, were up-regulated in edc3/edc3 mutant strain compared to wild-type. Based on these findings, we suggest that EDC3 plays a critical role in the expression of CaMCA1 and the oxidative-stress response in C. albicans.This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
    FEBS Journal 08/2014; 281(21). DOI:10.1111/febs.13022 · 3.99 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Many protein-protein interactions (PPIs) are compelling targets for drug discovery, and in a number of cases can be disrupted by small molecules. The main goal of this study is to examine the mechanism of binding site formation in the interface region of proteins that are PPI targets by comparing ligand-free and ligand-bound structures. To avoid any potential bias, we focus on ensembles of ligand-free protein conformations obtained by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) techniques and deposited in the Protein Data Bank, rather than on ensembles specifically generated for this study. The measures used for structure comparison are based on detecting binding hot spots, i.e., protein regions that are major contributors to the binding free energy. The main tool of the analysis is computational solvent mapping, which explores the surface of proteins by docking a large number of small "probe" molecules. Although we consider conformational ensembles obtained by NMR techniques, the analysis is independent of the method used for generating the structures. Finding the energetically most important regions, mapping can identify binding site residues using ligand-free models based on NMR data. In addition, the method selects conformations that are similar to some peptide-bound or ligand-bound structure in terms of the properties of the binding site. This agrees with the conformational selection model of molecular recognition, which assumes such pre-existing conformations. The analysis also shows the maximum level of similarity between unbound and bound states that is achieved without any influence from a ligand. Further shift toward the bound structure assumes protein-peptide or protein-ligand interactions, either selecting higher energy conformations that are not part of the NMR ensemble, or leading to induced fit. Thus, forming the sites in protein-protein interfaces that bind peptides and can be targeted by small ligands always includes conformational selection, although other recognition mechanisms may also be involved.
    PLoS Computational Biology 10/2014; 10(10):e1003872. DOI:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003872 · 4.83 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
15 Downloads
Available from
Jun 2, 2014