Examining kinesin processivity within a general gating framework

  1. Johan O L Andreasson
  2. Bojan Milic
  3. Geng-Yuan Chen
  4. Nicholas R Guydosh
  5. William O Hancock
  6. Steven M Block  Is a corresponding author
  1. Stanford University, United States
  2. Pennsylvania State University, United States
  3. Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Johns Hopkins University, United States

Abstract

Kinesin-1 is a dimeric motor that transports cargo along microtubules, taking 8.2-nm steps in a hand-over-hand fashion. The ATP hydrolysis cycles of its two heads are maintained out of phase by a series of gating mechanisms, which lead to processive runs averaging ~1 μm. A key structural element for inter-head coordination is the neck linker (NL), which connects the heads to the stalk. To examine the role of the NL in regulating stepping, we investigated NL mutants of various lengths using single-molecule optical trapping and bulk fluorescence approaches in the context of a general framework for gating. Our results show that, although inter-head tension enhances motor velocity, it is crucial neither for inter-head coordination nor for rapid rear-head release. Furthermore, cysteine-light mutants do not produce wild-type motility under load. We conclude that kinesin-1 is primarily front-head gated, and that NL length is tuned to enhance unidirectional processivity and velocity.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Johan O L Andreasson

    Department of Genetics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Bojan Milic

    Biophysics Program, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Geng-Yuan Chen

    Department of Biomedical Engineering, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Nicholas R Guydosh

    Department of Molecular Biology and Genetics, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. William O Hancock

    Department of Biomedical Engineering, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Steven M Block

    Department of Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, United States
    For correspondence
    sblock@stanford.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Anna Akhmanova, Utrecht University, Netherlands

Version history

  1. Received: March 10, 2015
  2. Accepted: April 21, 2015
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: April 22, 2015 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: June 3, 2015 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2015, Andreasson 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

  • 3,356
    views
  • 938
    downloads
  • 150
    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. Johan O L Andreasson
  2. Bojan Milic
  3. Geng-Yuan Chen
  4. Nicholas R Guydosh
  5. William O Hancock
  6. Steven M Block
(2015)
Examining kinesin processivity within a general gating framework
eLife 4:e07403.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.07403

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.07403

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Claudia D Consalvo, Adedeji M Aderounmu ... Brenda L Bass
    Research Article

    Invertebrates use the endoribonuclease Dicer to cleave viral dsRNA during antiviral defense, while vertebrates use RIG-I-like Receptors (RLRs), which bind viral dsRNA to trigger an interferon response. While some invertebrate Dicers act alone during antiviral defense, Caenorhabditis elegans Dicer acts in a complex with a dsRNA binding protein called RDE-4, and an RLR ortholog called DRH-1. We used biochemical and structural techniques to provide mechanistic insight into how these proteins function together. We found RDE-4 is important for ATP-independent and ATP-dependent cleavage reactions, while helicase domains of both DCR-1 and DRH-1 contribute to ATP-dependent cleavage. DRH-1 plays the dominant role in ATP hydrolysis, and like mammalian RLRs, has an N-terminal domain that functions in autoinhibition. A cryo-EM structure indicates DRH-1 interacts with DCR-1’s helicase domain, suggesting this interaction relieves autoinhibition. Our study unravels the mechanistic basis of the collaboration between two helicases from typically distinct innate immune defense pathways.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Damien M Rasmussen, Manny M Semonis ... Nicholas M Levinson
    Research Article

    The type II class of RAF inhibitors currently in clinical trials paradoxically activate BRAF at subsaturating concentrations. Activation is mediated by induction of BRAF dimers, but why activation rather than inhibition occurs remains unclear. Using biophysical methods tracking BRAF dimerization and conformation, we built an allosteric model of inhibitor-induced dimerization that resolves the allosteric contributions of inhibitor binding to the two active sites of the dimer, revealing key differences between type I and type II RAF inhibitors. For type II inhibitors the allosteric coupling between inhibitor binding and BRAF dimerization is distributed asymmetrically across the two dimer binding sites, with binding to the first site dominating the allostery. This asymmetry results in efficient and selective induction of dimers with one inhibited and one catalytically active subunit. Our allosteric models quantitatively account for paradoxical activation data measured for 11 RAF inhibitors. Unlike type II inhibitors, type I inhibitors lack allosteric asymmetry and do not activate BRAF homodimers. Finally, NMR data reveal that BRAF homodimers are dynamically asymmetric with only one of the subunits locked in the active αC-in state. This provides a structural mechanism for how binding of only a single αC-in inhibitor molecule can induce potent BRAF dimerization and activation.