Comprehensive substrate specificity profiling of the human Nek kinome reveals unexpected signaling outputs

  1. Bert van de Kooij
  2. Pau Creixell
  3. Anne van Vlimmeren
  4. Brian Joughin
  5. Chad J Miller
  6. Nasir Haider
  7. Craig D Simpson
  8. Rune Linding
  9. Vuk Stambolic
  10. Benjamin E Turk
  11. Michael B Yaffe  Is a corresponding author
  1. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, United States
  2. Yale School of Medicine, United States
  3. University of Toronto, Canada
  4. University of Copenhagen, Denmark
  5. Yale University School of Medicine, United States

Abstract

Human NimA-related kinases (Neks) have multiple mitotic and non-mitotic functions, but few substrates are known. We systematically determined the phosphorylation-site motifs for the entire Nek kinase family, except for Nek11. While all Nek kinases strongly select for hydrophobic residues in the -3 position, the family separates into four distinct groups based on specificity for a serine versus threonine phospho-acceptor, and preference for basic or acidic residues in other positions. Unlike Nek1-Nek9, Nek10 is a dual-specificity kinase that efficiently phosphorylates itself and peptide substrates on serine and tyrosine, and its activity is enhanced by tyrosine auto-phosphorylation. Nek10 dual-specificity depends on residues in the HRD+2 and APE-4 positions that are uncommon in either serine/threonine or tyrosine kinases. Finally, we show that the phosphorylation-site motifs for the mitotic kinases Nek6, Nek7 and Nek9 are essentially identical to that of their upstream activator Plk1, suggesting that Nek6/7/9 function as phospho-motif amplifiers of Plk1 signaling.

Data availability

The Position Specific Scoring Matrices (PSSMs) containing the quantitative phosphorylation site motif information for each human Nek kinase have been deposited to the database of Scansite 4.0 (http://scansite.mit.edu). They are publicly available to use in all of the features of Scansite, including but not limited to motif prediction on given substrates, or motif-based database searches, simply by selecting the Nek kinase of interest from the dropdown menu presented upon selection of a specific feature. Please see the Scansite tutorial (https://scansite4.mit.edu/4.0/#tutorial) for details. The raw PSSMs are available in source Data File 1.The data published in Supplementary File 1 was obtained from Phosphositeplus (www.phosphosite.org), and can be accessed directly by performing a substrate search from the Phosphositeplus home page for the Nek kinase of interest. The data presented in Figure 7C was obtained by downloading the complete phosphorylation_site_dataset from Phosphositeplus (https://www.phosphosite.org/staticDownloads), which was analyzed by a custom-built script to score each site for their match to each Nek kinase motif according to the Scansite scoring algorithm.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Bert van de Kooij

    Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Pau Creixell

    Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Anne van Vlimmeren

    Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Brian Joughin

    Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0003-1022-9450
  5. Chad J Miller

    Department of Pharmacology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Nasir Haider

    Department of Medical Biophysics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Craig D Simpson

    Biotech Research and Innovation Centre, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Rune Linding

    Biotech Research and Innovation Centre, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Vuk Stambolic

    Department of Medical Biophysics, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-8853-3239
  10. Benjamin E Turk

    Department of Pharmacology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  11. Michael B Yaffe

    Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, United States
    For correspondence
    myaffe@mit.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-9547-3251

Funding

National Institutes of Health (R01-GM104047)

  • Benjamin E Turk
  • Michael B Yaffe

Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research

  • Bert van de Kooij

Dutch Cancer Society (BUIT 2015-7546)

  • Bert van de Kooij

The Charles and Marjorie Holloway Foundation

  • Michael B Yaffe

National Institutes of Health (R01-ES015339)

  • Michael B Yaffe

National Institutes of Health (R35-ES028374)

  • Michael B Yaffe

National Cancer Institute (P30-CA14051)

  • Michael B Yaffe

National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (P30-ES002109)

  • Michael B Yaffe

National Cancer Institute (K99CA226396)

  • Pau Creixell

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Margaret C Frame, University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom

Version history

  1. Received: December 21, 2018
  2. Accepted: May 13, 2019
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: May 24, 2019 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: June 14, 2019 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2019, van de Kooij 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

  • 3,581
    views
  • 605
    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. Bert van de Kooij
  2. Pau Creixell
  3. Anne van Vlimmeren
  4. Brian Joughin
  5. Chad J Miller
  6. Nasir Haider
  7. Craig D Simpson
  8. Rune Linding
  9. Vuk Stambolic
  10. Benjamin E Turk
  11. Michael B Yaffe
(2019)
Comprehensive substrate specificity profiling of the human Nek kinome reveals unexpected signaling outputs
eLife 8:e44635.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.44635

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.44635

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Neuroscience
    Maximilian Nagel, Marco Niestroj ... Marc Spehr
    Research Article

    In most mammals, conspecific chemosensory communication relies on semiochemical release within complex bodily secretions and subsequent stimulus detection by the vomeronasal organ (VNO). Urine, a rich source of ethologically relevant chemosignals, conveys detailed information about sex, social hierarchy, health, and reproductive state, which becomes accessible to a conspecific via vomeronasal sampling. So far, however, numerous aspects of social chemosignaling along the vomeronasal pathway remain unclear. Moreover, since virtually all research on vomeronasal physiology is based on secretions derived from inbred laboratory mice, it remains uncertain whether such stimuli provide a true representation of potentially more relevant cues found in the wild. Here, we combine a robust low-noise VNO activity assay with comparative molecular profiling of sex- and strain-specific mouse urine samples from two inbred laboratory strains as well as from wild mice. With comprehensive molecular portraits of these secretions, VNO activity analysis now enables us to (i) assess whether and, if so, how much sex/strain-selective ‘raw’ chemical information in urine is accessible via vomeronasal sampling; (ii) identify which chemicals exhibit sufficient discriminatory power to signal an animal’s sex, strain, or both; (iii) determine the extent to which wild mouse secretions are unique; and (iv) analyze whether vomeronasal response profiles differ between strains. We report both sex- and, in particular, strain-selective VNO representations of chemical information. Within the urinary ‘secretome’, both volatile compounds and proteins exhibit sufficient discriminative power to provide sex- and strain-specific molecular fingerprints. While total protein amount is substantially enriched in male urine, females secrete a larger variety at overall comparatively low concentrations. Surprisingly, the molecular spectrum of wild mouse urine does not dramatically exceed that of inbred strains. Finally, vomeronasal response profiles differ between C57BL/6 and BALB/c animals, with particularly disparate representations of female semiochemicals.

    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.