Structural mechanisms of phospholipid activation of the human TPC2 channel

  1. Ji She
  2. Weizhong Zeng
  3. Jiangtao Guo
  4. Qingfeng Chen
  5. Xiaochen Bai  Is a corresponding author
  6. Youxing Jiang  Is a corresponding author
  1. University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, United States
  2. Zhejiang University School of Medicine, China

Abstract

Mammalian two-pore channels (TPCs) regulate the physiological functions of the endolysosome. Here we present cryo-EM structures of human TPC2 (HsTPC2), a phosphatidylinositol 3,5-bisphosphate (PI(3,5)P2)-activated, Na+ selective channel, in the ligand-bound and apo states. The apo structure captures the closed conformation, while the ligand-bound form features the channel in both open and closed conformations. Combined with functional analysis, these structures provide insights into the mechanism of PI(3,5)P2-regulated gating of TPC2, which is distinct from that of TPC1. Specifically, the endolysosome-specific PI(3,5)P2 binds at the first 6-TM and activates the channel - independently of the membrane potential - by inducing a structural change at the pore-lining inner helix (IS6), which forms a continuous helix in the open state but breaks into two segments at Gly317 in the closed state. Additionally, structural comparison to the voltage-dependent TPC1 structure allowed us to identify Ile551 as being responsible for the loss of voltage dependence in TPC2.

Data availability

The cryo-EM density maps of the human TPC2 have been deposited in the Electron Microscopy Data Bank under accession numbers EMD-0478 for the apo state, EMD-0479 for the PI(3,5)P2-bound closed state and EMD-0477 for the PI(3,5)P2-bound open state. Atomic coordinates have been deposited in the Protein Data Bank under accession numbers 6NQ1 for the apo state, 6NQ2 for the PI(3,5)P2-bound closed state and 6NQ0 for the PI(3,5)P2-bound open state.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Ji She

    Department of Physiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-7006-6230
  2. Weizhong Zeng

    Department of Physiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Jiangtao Guo

    Department of Biophysics, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, China
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Qingfeng Chen

    Department of Physiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Xiaochen Bai

    Department of Biophysics, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    For correspondence
    Xiaochen.Bai@UTSouthwestern.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Youxing Jiang

    Department of Physiology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, United States
    For correspondence
    youxing.jiang@utsouthwestern.edu
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-1874-0504

Funding

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

  • Youxing Jiang

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM079179)

  • Youxing Jiang

Welch Foundation (I-1578)

  • Youxing Jiang

Cancer Prevention and Research Initiative of Texas

  • Xiaochen Bai

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

Reviewing Editor

  1. Baron Chanda, University of Wisconsin-Madison, United States

Version history

  1. Received: January 16, 2019
  2. Accepted: March 7, 2019
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: March 12, 2019 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: March 19, 2019 (version 2)
  5. Version of Record updated: July 17, 2019 (version 3)

Copyright

© 2019, She 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

  • 4,536
    views
  • 802
    downloads
  • 98
    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. Ji She
  2. Weizhong Zeng
  3. Jiangtao Guo
  4. Qingfeng Chen
  5. Xiaochen Bai
  6. Youxing Jiang
(2019)
Structural mechanisms of phospholipid activation of the human TPC2 channel
eLife 8:e45222.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.45222

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.45222

Further reading

    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.

    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Nicholas James Ose, Paul Campitelli ... Sefika Banu Ozkan
    Research Article

    We integrate evolutionary predictions based on the neutral theory of molecular evolution with protein dynamics to generate mechanistic insight into the molecular adaptations of the SARS-COV-2 spike (S) protein. With this approach, we first identified candidate adaptive polymorphisms (CAPs) of the SARS-CoV-2 S protein and assessed the impact of these CAPs through dynamics analysis. Not only have we found that CAPs frequently overlap with well-known functional sites, but also, using several different dynamics-based metrics, we reveal the critical allosteric interplay between SARS-CoV-2 CAPs and the S protein binding sites with the human ACE2 (hACE2) protein. CAPs interact far differently with the hACE2 binding site residues in the open conformation of the S protein compared to the closed form. In particular, the CAP sites control the dynamics of binding residues in the open state, suggesting an allosteric control of hACE2 binding. We also explored the characteristic mutations of different SARS-CoV-2 strains to find dynamic hallmarks and potential effects of future mutations. Our analyses reveal that Delta strain-specific variants have non-additive (i.e., epistatic) interactions with CAP sites, whereas the less pathogenic Omicron strains have mostly additive mutations. Finally, our dynamics-based analysis suggests that the novel mutations observed in the Omicron strain epistatically interact with the CAP sites to help escape antibody binding.