The Caenorhabditis elegans protein SAS-5 forms large oligomeric assemblies critical for centriole formation

  1. Kacper B Rogala
  2. Nicola J Dynes
  3. Georgios N Hatzopoulos
  4. Jun Yan
  5. Sheng Kai Pong
  6. Carol V Robinson
  7. Charlotte M Deane
  8. Pierre Gönczy
  9. Ioannis Vakonakis  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Oxford, United Kingdom
  2. Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Switzerland

Abstract

Centrioles are microtubule-based organelles crucial for cell division, sensing and motility. In C. elegans, the onset of centriole formation requires notably the proteins SAS-5 and SAS-6, which have functional homologs across eukaryotic evolution. Whereas the molecular architecture of SAS-6 and its role in initiating centriole formation are well understood, the mechanisms by which SAS-5 and its relatives function is unclear. Here, we combine biophysical and structural analysis to uncover the architecture of SAS-5 and examine its functional implications in vivo. Our work reveals that two distinct self-associating domains are necessary to form higher-order oligomers of SAS-5: a trimeric coiled coil and a novel globular dimeric Implico domain. Disruption of either domain leads to centriole duplication failure in worm embryos, indicating that large SAS-5 assemblies are necessary for function in vivo.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Kacper B Rogala

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Nicola J Dynes

    Swiss Institute for Experimental Cancer Research, School of Life Sciences, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Lausanne, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Georgios N Hatzopoulos

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Jun Yan

    Department of Chemistry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Sheng Kai Pong

    Swiss Institute for Experimental Cancer Research, School of Life Sciences, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Lausanne, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Carol V Robinson

    Department of Chemistry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Charlotte M Deane

    Department of Statistics, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Pierre Gönczy

    Swiss Institute for Experimental Cancer Research, School of Life Sciences, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Lausanne, Switzerland
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Ioannis Vakonakis

    Department of Biochemistry, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    ioannis.vakonakis@bioch.ox.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Anthony A Hyman, Max Planck Institute of Molecular Cell Biology and Genetics, Germany

Version history

  1. Received: March 10, 2015
  2. Accepted: May 28, 2015
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: May 29, 2015 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: June 18, 2015 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2015, Rogala 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

  • 2,205
    views
  • 514
    downloads
  • 36
    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. Kacper B Rogala
  2. Nicola J Dynes
  3. Georgios N Hatzopoulos
  4. Jun Yan
  5. Sheng Kai Pong
  6. Carol V Robinson
  7. Charlotte M Deane
  8. Pierre Gönczy
  9. Ioannis Vakonakis
(2015)
The Caenorhabditis elegans protein SAS-5 forms large oligomeric assemblies critical for centriole formation
eLife 4:e07410.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.07410

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.07410

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.