Molecular basis of the γ-aminobutyric acid A receptor α3 subunit interaction with the clustering protein gephyrin

The multifunctional scaffolding protein gephyrin is a key player in the formation of the postsynaptic scaffold at inhibitory synapses, clustering both inhibitory glycine receptors (GlyRs) and selected GABA(A) receptor (GABA(A)R) subtypes. We report a direct interaction between the GABA(A)R α3 subunit and gephyrin, mapping reciprocal binding sites using mutagenesis, overlay, and yeast two-hybrid assays. This analysis reveals that critical determinants of this interaction are located in the motif FNIVGTTYPI in the GABA(A)R α3 M3-M4 domain and the motif SMDKAFITVL at the N terminus of the gephyrin E domain. GABA(A)R α3 gephyrin binding-site mutants were unable to co-localize with endogenous gephyrin in transfected hippocampal neurons, despite being able to traffic to the cell membrane and form functional benzodiazepine-responsive GABA(A)Rs in recombinant systems. Interestingly, motifs responsible for interactions with GABA(A)R α2, GABA(A)R α3, and collybistin on gephyrin overlap. Curiously, two key residues (Asp-327 and Phe-330) in the GABA(A)R α2 and α3 binding sites on gephyrin also contribute to GlyR β subunit-E domain interactions. However, isothermal titration calorimetry reveals a 27-fold difference in the interaction strength between GABA(A)R α3 and GlyR β subunits with gephyrin with dissociation constants of 5.3 μm and 0.2 μm, respectively. Taken together, these observations suggest that clustering of GABA(A)R α2, α3, and GlyRs by gephyrin is mediated by distinct mechanisms at mixed glycinergic/GABAergic synapses.     

Interactions between conserved domains within homodimers in the BIG1, BIG2, and GBF1 Arf guanine nucleotide exchange factors

Guanine nucleotide exchange factors carrying a Sec7 domain (ArfGEFs) activate the small GTP-binding protein Arf, a major regulator of membrane remodeling and protein trafficking in eukaryotic cells. Only two of the seven subfamilies of ArfGEFs (GBF and BIG) are found in all eukaryotes. In addition to the Sec7 domain, which catalyzes GDP/GTP exchange on Arf, the GBF and BIG ArfGEFs have five common homology domains. Very little is known about the functions of these noncatalytic domains, but it is likely that they serve to integrate upstream signals that define the conditions of Arf activation. Here we describe interactions between two conserved domains upstream of the Sec7 domain (DCB and HUS) that determine the architecture of the N-terminal regions of the GBF and BIG ArfGEFs using a combination of biochemical, yeast two-hybrid, and cellular assays. Our data demonstrate a strong interaction between DCB domains within GBF1, BIG1, and BIG2 to maintain homodimers and an interaction between DCB and HUS domains within each homodimer. The DCB/HUS interaction is mediated by the HUS box, the most conserved motif in large ArfGEFs after the Sec7 domain. In support of the in vitro data, we show that both the DCB and the HUS domains are necessary for GBF1 dimerization in mammalian cells and that the DCB domain is essential for yeast viability. We propose that the dimeric DCB-HUS structural unit exists in all members of the GBF and BIG ArfGEF groups and in the related Mon2p family and probably serves an important regulatory role in Arf activation.     

A Novel Syntaxin 6‐Interacting Protein,SHIP164, Regulates Syntaxin 6‐Dependent Sorting from Early Endosomes

Membrane fusion is dependent on the function of SNAREs and their α‐helical SNARE motifs that form SNARE complexes. The Habc domains at the N‐termini of some SNAREs can interact with their associated SNARE motif, Sec1/Munc18 (SM) proteins, tethering proteins or adaptor proteins, suggesting that they play an important regulatory function. We screened for proteins that interact with the Habc domain of Syntaxin 6, and isolated an uncharacterized 164‐kDa protein that we named SHIP164. SHIP164 is part of a large (∼700 kDa) complex, and interacts with components of the Golgi‐associated retrograde protein (GARP) tethering complex. Depletion of GARP subunits or overexpression of Syntaxin 6 results in a redistribution of soluble SHIP164 to endosomal structures. Co‐overexpression of Syntaxin 6 and SHIP164 produced excessive tubulation of endosomes, and perturbed the transport of cation‐independent mannose‐6‐phosphate receptor (CI‐MPR) and transferrin receptor. Thus, we propose that SHIP164 functions in trafficking through the early/recycling endosomal system.     

Gephyrin-mediated γ-aminobutyric acid type A and glycine receptor clustering relies on a common binding site

Gephyrin is the major protein determinant for the clustering of inhibitory neurotransmitter receptors. Earlier analyses revealed that gephyrin tightly binds to residues 398-410 of the glycine receptor β subunit (GlyR β) and, as demonstrated only recently, also interacts with GABA(A) receptors (GABA(A)Rs) containing the α1, α2, and α3 subunits. Here, we dissect the molecular basis underlying the interactions between gephyrin and GABA(A)Rs containing these α-subunits and compare them to the crystal structure of the gephyrin-GlyR β complex. Biophysical and biochemical assays revealed that, in contrast to its tight interaction with GlyR β, gephyrin only loosely interacts with GABA(A)R α2, whereas it has an intermediate affinity for the GABA(A)R α1 and α3 subunits. Despite the wide variation in affinities and the low overall sequence homology among the identified receptor subunits, competition assays confirmed the receptor-gephyrin interaction to be a mutually exclusive process. Selected gephyrin point mutants that critically weaken complex formation with GlyR β also abolished the GABA(A)R α1 and α3 interactions. Additionally, we identified a common binding motif with two conserved aromatic residues that are central for gephyrin binding. Consistent with the biochemical data, mutations of the corresponding residues within the cytoplasmic domain of α2 subunit-containing GABA(A)Rs attenuated clustering of these receptors at postsynaptic sites in hippocampal neurons. Taken together, our experiments provide key insights regarding similarities and differences in the complex formation between gephyrin and GABA(A)Rs compared with GlyRs and, hence, the accumulation of these receptors at postsynaptic sites.     

Role of nova‐1 in regulating α2N,a novel glycine receptor splice variant,in developing spinal cord neurons

Inhibitory glycine receptor (GlyR) subunits undergo developmental regulation, but the molecular mechanisms of GlyR regulation in developing neurons are little understood. Using RT‐PCR, we investigated the regulation of GlyR α‐subunit splice forms during the development of the spinal cord of the rat. Experiments to compare the amounts of mRNA for two known splice variants of the GlyR α2 subunit, α2A and α2B, in the developing rat spinal cord revealed the presence of an additional, novel variant that lacked any exon 3, herein named “α2N.” Examination of the RNA from spinal cords of different‐aged rats showed a dramatic down‐regulation of α2N during prenatal development: α2N mRNA formed a significant portion of the α2 subunit pool at E14, but its relative level was reduced by 85% by birth and was undetectable in adults. Two proteins previously implicated in regulating the splicing of GlyR α2 pre‐mRNA, the neurooncological ventral antigen‐1 (Nova‐1) and the brain isoform of the polypyrimidine tract binding protein (brPTB), underwent small changes over the same period that did not correlate directly with the changes in the level of α2N, calling into question their involvement in the developmental regulation of α2N. However, treatment of spinal cord neurons in culture with antisense oligonucleotides designed selectively to knock down one of three Nova‐1 variants significantly altered the relative level of GlyR α2N, showing that Nova‐1 isoforms can regulate GlyR α2 pre‐mRNA splicing in developing neurons. These results provide evidence for a novel splice variant of the GlyR α2 subunit that undergoes dramatic developmental regulation, reveal the expression profiles of Nova‐1 and brPTB in the developing spinal cord, and suggest that Nova‐1 plays a role in regulating GlyR α2N in developing neurons. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Neurobiol 52: 156–165, 2002     

The structure of the large regulatory α subunit of phosphorylase kinase examined by modeling and hydrogen‐deuterium exchange

Phosphorylase kinase (PhK), a 1.3 MDa regulatory enzyme complex in the glycogenolysis cascade, has four copies each of four subunits, (αβγδ)₄, and 325 kDa of unique sequence (the mass of an αβγδ protomer). The α, β and δ subunits are regulatory, and contain allosteric activation sites that stimulate the activity of the catalytic γ subunit in response to diverse signaling molecules. Due to its size and complexity, no high resolution structures have been solved for the intact complex or its regulatory α and β subunits. Of PhK's four subunits, the least is known about the structure and function of its largest subunit, α. Here, we have modeled the full‐length α subunit, compared that structure against previously predicted domains within this subunit, and performed hydrogen‐deuterium exchange on the intact subunit within the PhK complex. Our modeling results show α to comprise two major domains: an N‐terminal glycoside hydrolase domain and a large C‐terminal importin α/β‐like domain. This structure is similar to our previously published model for the homologous β subunit, although clear structural differences are present. The overall highly helical structure with several intervening hinge regions is consistent with our hydrogen‐deuterium exchange results obtained for this subunit as part of the (αβγδ)₄ PhK complex. Several low exchanging regions predicted to lack ordered secondary structure are consistent with inter‐subunit contact sites for α in the quaternary structure of PhK; of particular interest is a low‐exchanging region in the C‐terminus of α that is known to bind the regulatory domain of the catalytic γ subunit.     

Distinct roles for β‐arrestin2 and arrestin‐domain‐containing proteins in β2 adrenergic receptor trafficking

β‐arrestin 1 and 2 (also known as arrestin 2 and 3) are homologous adaptor proteins that regulate seven‐transmembrane receptor trafficking and signalling. Other proteins with predicted ‘arrestin‐like’ structural domains but lacking sequence homology have been indicated to function like β‐arrestin in receptor regulation. We demonstrate that β‐arrestin2 is the primary adaptor that rapidly binds agonist‐activated β₂ adrenergic receptors (β₂ARs) and promotes clathrin‐dependent internalization, E3 ligase Nedd4 recruitment and ubiquitin‐dependent lysosomal degradation of the receptor. The arrestin‐domain‐containing (ARRDC) proteins 2, 3 and 4 are secondary adaptors recruited to internalized β₂AR–Nedd4 complexes on endosomes and do not affect the adaptor roles of β‐arrestin2. Rather, the role of ARRDC proteins is to traffic Nedd4–β₂AR complexes to a subpopulation of early endosomes.     

Cooperative interactions at the SLP‐76 complex are critical for actin polymerization

T‐cell antigen receptor (TCR) engagement induces formation of multi‐protein signalling complexes essential for regulating T‐cell functions. Generation of a complex of SLP‐76, Nck and VAV1 is crucial for regulation of the actin machinery. We define the composition, stoichiometry and specificity of interactions in the SLP‐76, Nck and VAV1 complex. Our data reveal that this complex can contain one SLP‐76 molecule, two Nck and two VAV1 molecules. A direct interaction between Nck and VAV1 is mediated by binding between the C‐terminal SH3 domain of Nck and the VAV1 N‐terminal SH3 domain. Disruption of the VAV1:Nck interaction deleteriously affected actin polymerization. These novel findings shed new light on the mechanism of actin polymerization after T‐cell activation.     

Phosphorylation of PPP(S/T)P motif of the free LRP6 intracellular domain is not required to activate the Wnt/β‐catenin pathway and attenuate GSK3β activity

The canonical Wnt/β‐catenin signaling pathway plays a critical role in numerous physiological and pathological processes. LRP6 is an essential co‐receptor for Wnt/β‐catenin signaling; as transduction of the Wnt signal is strongly dependent upon GSK3β‐mediated phosphorylation of multiple PPP(S/T)P motifs within the membrane‐anchored LRP6 intracellular domain. Previously, we showed that the free LRP6 intracellular domain (LRP6‐ICD) can activate the Wnt/β‐catenin pathway in a β‐catenin and TCF/LEF‐1 dependent manner, as well as interact with and attenuate GSK3β activity. However, it is unknown if the ability of LRP6‐ICD to attenuate GSK3β activity and modulate activation of the Wnt/β‐catenin pathway requires phosphorylation of the LRP6‐ICD PPP(S/T)P motifs, in a manner similar to the membrane‐anchored LRP6 intracellular domain. Here we provide evidence that the LRP6‐ICD does not have to be phosphorylated at its PPP(S/T)P motif by GSK3β to stabilize endogenous cytosolic β‐catenin resulting in activation of TCF/LEF‐1 and the Wnt/β‐catenin pathway. LRP6‐ICD and a mutant in which all 5 PPP(S/T)P motifs were changed to PPP(A)P motifs equivalently interacted with and attenuated GSK3β activity in vitro, and both constructs inhibited the in situ GSK3β‐mediated phosphorylation of β‐catenin and tau to the same extent. These data indicate that the LRP6‐ICD attenuates GSK3β activity similar to other GSK3β binding proteins, and is not a result of it being a GSK3β substrate. Our findings suggest the functional and regulatory mechanisms governing the free LRP6‐ICD may be distinct from membrane‐anchored LRP6, and that release of the LRP6‐ICD may provide a complimentary signaling cascade capable of modulating Wnt‐dependent gene expression. J. Cell. Biochem. 108: 886–895, 2009. © 2009 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

The M4 transmembrane segment contributes to agonist efficacy differences between α1 and α3 glycine receptors

To date there are few compounds known to pharmacologically discriminate between α1 and α3 subunit-containing glycine receptors (GlyRs). The present study stemmed from an observation that the glycinergic agonists, taurine and β-alanine, act with much lower agonist efficacy at α3 GlyRs than at α1 GlyRs. We sought to understand the structural basis of this difference to provide insights relevant to the development of α3-specific modulators as leads for the development of new anti-inflammatory analgesics. Using chimeras of α1 and α3 subunits, we identified the structurally divergent M4 transmembrane segment and C-terminal tail as a specific determinant of the efficacy difference. Because mutation of individual non-conserved M4 residues had little influence on agonist efficacies, the reduced agonist efficacy at α3 GlyRs is most likely a distributed effect of all non-conserved M4 residues. Given the lack of contact between M4 and other transmembrane segments, the efficacy differences are probably mediated by differential interactions with the surrounding lipid environment. This may explain why GlyR agonist efficacies differ among expression systems where membrane lipid composition is not conserved. It may also explain why GlyR agonist efficacy increases at high expression densities, as this would increase the propensity of receptors to cluster thereby inducing M4 segments of neighboring receptors to interact. This strong influence of M4 primary structure on partial agonist efficacy suggests that the relatively poorly conserved α3 GlyR M4 segment may be a promising domain to target in the search for α3 GlyR-specific modulators.     

Phosphatidic Acid Sequesters Sec18p from cis‐SNARE Complexes to Inhibit Priming

Yeast vacuole fusion requires the activation of cis‐SNARE complexes through priming carried out by Sec18p/N‐ethylmaleimide sensitive factor and Sec17p/α‐SNAP. The association of Sec18p with vacuolar cis‐SNAREs is regulated in part by phosphatidic acid (PA) phosphatase production of diacylglycerol (DAG). Inhibition of PA phosphatase activity blocks the transfer of membrane‐associated Sec18p to SNAREs. Thus, we hypothesized that Sec18p associates with PA‐rich membrane microdomains before transferring to cis‐SNARE complexes upon PA phosphatase activity. Here, we examined the direct binding of Sec18p to liposomes containing PA or DAG. We found that Sec18p preferentially bound to liposomes containing PA compared with those containing DAG by approximately fivefold. Additionally, using a specific PA‐binding domain blocked Sec18p binding to PA‐liposomes and displaced endogenous Sec18p from isolated vacuoles. Moreover, the direct addition of excess PA blocked the priming activity of isolated vacuoles in a manner similar to chemically inhibiting PA phosphatase activity. These data suggest that the conversion of PA to DAG facilitates the recruitment of Sec18p to cis‐SNAREs. Purified vacuoles from yeast lacking the PA phosphatase Pah1p showed reduced Sec18p association with cis‐SNAREs and complementation with plasmid‐encoded PAH1 or recombinant Pah1p restored the interaction. Taken together, this demonstrates that regulating PA concentrations by Pah1p activity controls SNARE priming by Sec18p.      

Disrupted‐in‐schizophrenia‐1 protects synaptic plasticity in a transgenic mouse model of Alzheimer’s disease as a mitophagy receptor

Mitochondrial dysfunction is an early feature of Alzheimer's disease (AD). Accumulated damaged mitochondria, which are associated with impaired mitophagy, contribute to neurodegeneration in AD. We show levels of Disrupted‐in‐schizophrenia‐1 (DISC1), which is genetically associated with psychiatric disorders and AD, decrease in the brains of AD patients and transgenic model mice and in Aβ‐treated cultured cells. Disrupted‐in‐schizophrenia‐1 contains a canonical LC3‐interacting region (LIR) motif (²¹⁰FSFI²¹³), through which DISC1 directly binds to LC3‐I/II. Overexpression of DISC1 enhances mitophagy through its binding to LC3, whereas knocking‐down of DISC1 blocks Aβ‐induced mitophagy. We further observe overexpression of DISC1, but not its mutant (muFSFI) which abolishes the interaction of DISC1 with LC3, rescues Aβ‐induced mitochondrial dysfunction, loss of spines, suppressed long‐term potentiation (LTP). Overexpression of DISC1 via adeno‐associated virus (serotype 8, AAV8) in the hippocampus of 8‐month‐old APP/PS1 transgenic mice for 4 months rescues cognitive deficits, synaptic loss, and Aβ plaque accumulation, in a way dependent on the interaction of DISC1 with LC3. These results indicate that DISC1 is a novel mitophagy receptor, which protects synaptic plasticity from Aβ accumulation‐induced toxicity through promoting mitophagy.     

Mitotic spindle association of TACC3 requires Aurora‐A‐dependent stabilization of a cryptic α‐helix

Aurora‐A regulates the recruitment of TACC3 to the mitotic spindle through a phospho‐dependent interaction with clathrin heavy chain (CHC). Here, we describe the structural basis of these interactions, mediated by three motifs in a disordered region of TACC3. A hydrophobic docking motif binds to a previously uncharacterized pocket on Aurora‐A that is blocked in most kinases. Abrogation of the docking motif causes a delay in late mitosis, consistent with the cellular distribution of Aurora‐A complexes. Phosphorylation of Ser558 engages a conformational switch in a second motif from a disordered state, needed to bind the kinase active site, into a helical conformation. The helix extends into a third, adjacent motif that is recognized by a helical‐repeat region of CHC, not a recognized phospho‐reader domain. This potentially widespread mechanism of phospho‐recognition provides greater flexibility to tune the molecular details of the interaction than canonical recognition motifs that are dominated by phosphate binding.     

Molecular mechanisms of glycine transporter GlyT2 mutations in startle disease

Startle disease affects newborn children and involves an exaggerated startle response and muscle hypertonia in response to acoustic or tactile stimuli. The primary cause of startle disease is defective inhibitory glycinergic transmission due to mutations in the postsynaptic glycine receptor (GlyR) α1 subunit gene (GLRA1). However, mutations have also been discovered in the genes encoding the GlyRβ subunit (GLRB) and the presynaptic glycine transporter GlyT2 (SLC6A5). GlyT2 mutations have also been detected in Belgian Blue cattle and Irish Wolfhounds, where they have significant economic and animal welfare impacts.     

The general anesthetic pentobarbital slows desensitization and deactivation of the glycine receptor in the rat spinal dorsal horn neurons

Although many general anesthetics have been found to produce anesthetic and analgesic effects by augmenting GABA(A) receptor (GABA(A)R) function, the role of the glycine receptor (GlyR) in this process is not fully understood at the neuronal level in the spinal cord. We investigated the effects of a barbiturate general anesthetic, pentobarbital (PB), on the glycinergic miniature inhibitory postsynaptic currents (mIPSCs) and the responses to exogenously applied glycine, or taurine, a low affinity GlyR agonist, by using the whole-cell patch-clamp technique in the rat spinal dorsal horn neurons isolated using a novel mechanical method. Bath application of 30 microm PB significantly prolonged the decay time constant of the spontaneous glycinergic mIPSC without changing its amplitude and frequency. Co-application of 0.3 mm PB reduced the peak amplitude, affected the macroscopic desensitization and deactivation of the response to externally applied Gly in a concentration-dependent manner. In addition, the recovery of Gly response from desensitization was also prolonged by PB. However, PB did not change the desensitization and deactivation kinetics of the taurine-induced response. The GABA(A)R antagonist bicuculline (10 microm) did not affect the effect of PB on the Gly response. Thus, PB prolonged the spinal glycinergic mIPSCs by slowing desensitization and deactivation of GlyR. Two other structurally different intravenous anesthetics, i.e. propofol (10 microm) and etomidate (3 microm), prolonged the duration of the glycinergic mIPSC in the rat spinal dorsal horn neurons. In conclusion, on GlyR-Cl(-) channel complexes there may exist action site(s) of intravenous general anesthetics. GlyR and glycinergic neurotransmission may play an important role in the modulation of general anesthesia in the mammalian spinal cord.     

Sec22p export from the endoplasmic reticulum is independent of SNARE pairing

Molecularly distinct sets of SNARE proteins localize to specific intracellular compartments and catalyze membrane fusion events. Although their central role in membrane fusion is appreciated, little is known about the mechanisms by which individual SNARE proteins are targeted to specific organelles. Here we investigated functional domains in Sec22p that direct this SNARE protein to the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), to Golgi membranes, and into SNARE complexes with Bet1p, Bos1p, and Sed5p. A series of Sec22p deletion mutants were monitored in COPII budding assays, subcellular fractionation gradients, and SNARE complex immunoprecipitations. We found that the N-terminal "profilin-like" domain of Sec22p was required but not sufficient for COPII-dependent export of Sec22p from the ER. Interestingly, versions of Sec22p that lacked the N-terminal domain were assembled into ER/Golgi SNARE complexes. Analyses of Sec22p SNARE domain mutants revealed a second signal within the SNARE motif (between layers -4 and -1) that was required for efficient ER export. Other SNARE domain mutants that contained this signal were efficiently packaged into COPII vesicles but failed to assemble into SNARE complexes. Together these results indicated that SNARE complex formation is neither required nor sufficient for Sec22p packaging into COPII transport vesicles and subsequent targeting to the Golgi complex. We propose that the COPII budding machinery has a preference for unassembled ER/Golgi SNARE proteins.     

HOPS prevents the disassembly of trans‐SNARE complexes by Sec17p/Sec18p during membrane fusion

SNARE‐dependent membrane fusion requires the disassembly of cis‐SNARE complexes (formed by SNAREs anchored to one membrane) followed by the assembly of trans‐SNARE complexes (SNAREs anchored to two apposed membranes). Although SNARE complex disassembly and assembly might be thought to be opposing reactions, the proteins promoting disassembly (Sec17p/Sec18p) and assembly (the HOPS complex) work synergistically to support fusion. We now report that trans‐SNARE complexes formed during vacuole fusion are largely associated with Sec17p. Using a reconstituted proteoliposome fusion system, we show that trans‐SNARE complex, like cis‐SNARE complex, is sensitive to Sec17p/Sec18p mediated disassembly. Strikingly, HOPS inhibits the disassembly of SNARE complexes in the trans‐, but not in the cis‐, configuration. This selective HOPS preservation of trans‐SNARE complexes requires HOPS:SNARE recognition and is lost when the apposed bilayers are dissolved in Triton X‐100; it is also observed during fusion of isolated vacuoles. HOPS thus directs the Sec17p/Sec18p chaperone system to maximize functional trans‐SNARE complex for membrane fusion, a new role of tethering factors during membrane traffic.