Category: Building 68

Sauer & Davis Lab News Brief: structures of molecular woodchippers reveal mechanism for versatility

Rest in pieces: deconstructing polypeptide degradation machinery

Lillian Eden | Department of Biology
November 12, 2024

Research from the Sauer and Davis Labs in the Department of Biology at MIT shows that conformational changes contribute to the specificity of “molecular woodchippers” 

Degradation is a crucial process for maintaining protein homeostasis by culling excess or damaged proteins whose components can then be recycled. It is also a highly regulated process—for good reason. A cell could potentially waste many resources if the degradation machinery destroys proteins it shouldn’t. 

One of the major pathways for protein degradation in bacteria and eukaryotic mitochondria involves a molecular machine called ClpXP. ClpXP is made up of two components: a star-shaped structure made up of six subunits called ClpX that engages and unfolds proteins tagged for degradation, and an associated barrel-shaped enzyme, called ClpP, that chemically breaks up proteins into small pieces called peptides. 

ClpXP is incredibly adaptable and is often compared to a woodchipper — able to take in materials and spit out their broken-down components. Thanks to biochemical experiments, this molecular degradation machine is known to be able to break down hundreds of different proteins in the cell regardless of physical or chemical properties such as size, shape, or charge. ClpX uses energy from ATP hydrolysis to unfold proteins before they are threaded through its central channel, referred to as the axial channel, and into the degradation chamber of ClpP.

In three papers, one in PNAS and two in Nature Communications, researchers from the Department of Biology at MIT have expanded our understanding of how this molecular machinery engages with, unfolds, and degrades proteins — and how that machinery refrains, by design, from unfolding proteins not tagged for degradation. 

Alireza Ghanbarpour, until recently a postdoc in the Sauer Lab and Davis Lab and first author on all three papers, began with a simple question: given the vast repertoire of potential substrates — that is, proteins to be degraded — how is ClpXP so specific?

Ghanbarpour — now an assistant professor in the Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis — found that the answer to this question lies in conformational changes in the molecular machine as it engages with an ill-fated protein. 

Reverse Engineering using Structural Insights

Ghanbarpour approached the question of ClpXP’s versatility by characterizing conformational changes of the molecular machine using a technique called cryogenic electron microscopy. In cryo-EM, sample particles are frozen in solution, and images are collected; algorithms then create 3D renderings from the 2D images.

“It’s really useful to generate different structures in different conditions and then put them together until you know how a machine works,” he says. “I love structural biology, and these molecular machines make fascinating targets for structural work and biochemistry. Their structural plasticity and precise functions offer exciting opportunities to understand how nature leverages enzyme conformations to generate novel functions and tightly regulate protein degradation within the cell.”

Inside the cell, these proteases do not work alone but instead work together with “adaptor” proteins, which can promote — or inhibit — degradation by ClpXP. One of the adaptor proteins that promotes degradation by ClpXP is SspB. 

In E. coli and most other bacteria, ClpXP and SspB interact with a tag called ssrA that is added to incomplete proteins when their biosynthesis on ribosomes stalls. 

The tagging process frees up the ribosome to make more proteins, but creates a problem: incomplete proteins are prone to aggregation, which could be detrimental to cellular health and can lead to disease. By interacting with the degradation tag, ClpXP and SspB help to ensure the degradation of these incomplete proteins. Understanding this process and how it may go awry may open therapeutic avenues in the future.

“It wasn’t clear how certain adapters were interacting with the substrate and the molecular machines during substrate delivery,” Ghanbarpour notes. “My recent structure reveals that the adapter engages with the enzyme, reaching deep into the axial channel to deliver the substrate.” 

Ghanbarpour and colleagues showed that ClpX engages with both the SspB adaptor and the ssrA degradation tag of an ill-fated protein at the same time. Surprisingly, they also found that this interaction occurs while the upper part of the axial channel through ClpX is closed — in fact, the closed channel allows ClpX to contact both the tag and the adaptor simultaneously.

This result was surprising, according to senior author and Salvador E. Luria Professor of Biology Robert Sauer, whose lab has been working on understanding this molecular machine for more than two decades: it was unclear whether the channel through ClpX closes in response to a substrate interaction, or if the channel is always closed until it opens to pass an unfolded protein down to ClpP to be degraded.

Preventing Rogue Degradation

Throughout this project, Ghanbarpour was co-advised by structural biologist and Associate Professor of Biology Joey Davis and collaborated with members of the Davis Lab to better understand the conformational changes that allow these molecular machines to function. Using a cryo-EM analysis approach developed in the Davis lab called CryoDRGN, the researchers showed that there is an equilibrium between ClpXP in the open and closed states: it’s usually closed but is open in about 10% of the particles in their samples. 

The closed state is almost identical to the conformation ClpXP assumes when it is engaged with an ssrA-tagged substrate and the SspB adaptor. 

To better understand the biological significance of this equilibrium, Ghanbarpour created a mutant of ClpXP that is always in the open position. Compared to normal ClpXP, the mutant degraded some proteins lacking obvious degradation tags faster but degraded ssrA-tagged proteins more slowly. 

According to Ghanbarpour, these results indicate that the closed channel improves ClpXP’s ability to efficiently engage tagged proteins meant to be degraded, whereas the open channel allows more “promiscuous” degradation. 

Pausing the Process

The next question Ghanbarpour wanted to answer was what this molecular machine looks like while engaged with a protein it is attempting to unfold. To do that, he created a substrate with a highly stable protein attached to the degradation tag that is initially pulled into ClpX, but then dramatically slows protein unfolding and degradation.

In the structures where the degradation process stalls, Ghanbarpour found that the degradation tag was pulled far into the molecular machine—through ClpX and into ClpP—and the folded protein part of the substrate was pulled tightly against the axial channel of ClpX. 

The opening of the axial channel, called the axial pore, is made up of looping protein structures called RKH loops. These flexible loops were found to play roles both in recognizing the ssrA degradation tag and in how substrates or the SspB adaptor interact with or are pulled against the channel during degradation. 

The flexibility of these RKH loops allows ClpX to interact with a large number of different proteins and adapters, and these results clarify some previous biochemical and mutational studies of interactions between the substrate and ClpXP. 

Although Ghanbarpour’s recent work focused on just one adaptor and degradation tag, he noted there are many more targets — ClpXP is something akin to a Swiss army knife for breaking down polypeptide chains. 

The way those other substrates interact with ClpXP could differ from the structures solved with the SspB adaptor and ssrA tag. It also stands to reason that the way ClpXP reacts to each substrate may be unique. For example, given that ClpX is occasionally in an open state, some substrates may engage with ClpXP only while it’s in an open conformation. 

In his new position at Washington University, Ghanbarpour intends to continue exploring how ClpXP and other molecular machines locate their target substrates and interact with adaptors, shedding light on how cells regulate protein degradation and maintain protein homeostasis.

The structures Ghanbarpour solved involved free-floating protein degradation machinery, but membrane-bound degradation machinery also exists. The membrane-bound version’s structure and conformational adaptions potentially differ from the structures Ghanbarpour found in his previous three papers. Indeed, in a recent preprint, Ghanbarpour worked on the cryo-EM structure of a nautilus shell-shaped protein assembly that seems to control membrane-bound degradation machinery. This assembly plays a critical role in regulating protein degradation within the bacterial inner membrane.

“The function of these proteases goes beyond simply degrading damaged proteins. They also target transcription factors, regulatory proteins, and proteins that don’t exist in normal conditions,” he says. “My new lab is particularly interested in understanding how cells use these proteases and their accessory adaptors, both under normal and stress conditions, to reshape the proteome and support recovery from cellular distress.”

A cell protector collaborates with a killer

New research from the Horvitz Lab reveals what it takes for a protein that is best known for protecting cells against death to take on the opposite role.

Jennifer Michalowski | McGovern Institute
November 1, 2024

From early development to old age, cell death is a part of life. Without enough of a critical type of cell death known as apoptosis, animals wind up with too many cells, which can set the stage for cancer or autoimmune disease. But careful control is essential, because when apoptosis eliminates the wrong cells, the effects can be just as dire, helping to drive many kinds of neurodegenerative disease.

By studying the microscopic roundworm Caenorhabditis elegans—which was honored with its fourth Nobel Prize last month—scientists at MIT’s McGovern Institute have begun to unravel a longstanding mystery about the factors that control apoptosis: how a protein capable of preventing programmed cell death can also promote it. Their study, led by McGovern Investigator Robert Horvitz and reported October 9, 2024, in the journal Science Advances, sheds light on the process of cell death in both health and disease.

“These findings, by graduate student Nolan Tucker and former graduate student, now MIT faculty colleague, Peter Reddien, have revealed that a protein interaction long thought to block apoptosis in C. elegans, likely instead has the opposite effect,” says Horvitz, who shared the 2002 Nobel Prize for discovering and characterizing the genes controlling cell death in C. elegans.

Mechanisms of cell death

Horvitz, Tucker, Reddien and colleagues have provided foundational insights in the field of apoptosis by using C. elegans to analyze the mechanisms that drive apoptosis as well as the mechanisms that determine how cells ensure apoptosis happens when and where it should. Unlike humans and other mammals, which depend on dozens of proteins to control apoptosis, these worms use just a few. And when things go awry, it’s easy to tell: When there’s not enough apoptosis, researchers can see that there are too many cells inside the worms’ translucent bodies. And when there’s too much, the worms lack certain biological functions or, in more extreme cases, can’t reproduce or die during embryonic development.

Work in the Horvitz lab defined the roles of many of the genes and proteins that control apoptosis in worms. These regulators proved to have counterparts in human cells, and for that reason studies of worms have helped reveal how human cells govern cell death and pointed toward potential targets for treating disease.

A protein’s dual role

Three of C. elegans’ primary regulators of apoptosis actively promote cell death, whereas just one, CED-9, reins in the apoptosis-promoting proteins to keep cells alive. As early as the 1990s, however, Horvitz and colleagues recognized that CED-9 was not exclusively a protector of cells. Their experiments indicated that the protector protein also plays a role in promoting cell death. But while researchers thought they knew how CED-9 protected against apoptosis, its pro-apoptotic role was more puzzling.

CED-9’s dual role means that mutations in the gene that encode it can impact apoptosis in multiple ways. Most ced-9 mutations interfere with the protein’s ability to protect against cell death and result in excess cell death. Conversely, mutations that abnormally activate ced-9 cause too little cell death, just like mutations that inactivate any of the three killer genes.

An atypical ced-9 mutation, identified by Reddien when he was a PhD student in Horvitz’s lab, hinted at how CED-9 promotes cell death. That mutation altered the part of the CED-9 protein that interacts with the protein CED-4, which is proapoptotic. Since the mutation specifically leads to a reduction in apoptosis, this suggested that CED-9 might need to interact with CED-4 to promote cell death.

The idea was particularly intriguing because researchers had long thought that CED-9’s interaction with CED-4 had exactly the opposite effect: In the canonical model, CED-9 anchors CED-4 to cells’ mitochondria, sequestering the CED-4 killer protein and preventing it from associating with and activating another key killer, the CED-3 protein —thereby preventing apoptosis.

To test the hypothesis that CED-9’s interactions with the killer CED-4 protein enhance apoptosis, the team needed more evidence. So graduate student Nolan Tucker used CRISPR gene editing tools to create more worms with mutations in CED-9, each one targeting a different spot in the CED-4-binding region. Then he examined the worms. “What I saw with this particular class of mutations was extra cells and viability,” he says—clear signs that the altered CED-9 was still protecting against cell death, but could no longer promote it. “Those observations strongly supported the hypothesis that the ability to bind CED-4 is needed for the pro-apoptotic function of CED-9,” Tucker explains. Their observations also suggested that, contrary to earlier thinking, CED-9 doesn’t need to bind with CED-4 to protect against apoptosis.

When he looked inside the cells of the mutant worms, Tucker found additional evidence that these mutations prevented CED-9’s ability to interact with CED-4. When both CED-9 and CED-4 are intact, CED-4 appears associated with cells’ mitochondria. But in the presence of these mutations, CED-4 was instead at the edge of the cell nucleus. CED-9’s ability to bind CED-4 to mitochondria appeared to be necessary to promote apoptosis, not to protect against it.

Looking ahead

While the team’s findings begin to explain a long-unanswered question about one of the primary regulators of apoptosis, they raise new ones, as well. “I think that this main pathway of apoptosis has been seen by a lot of people as more or less settled science. Our findings should change that view,” Tucker says.

The researchers see important parallels between their findings from this study of worms and what’s known about cell death pathways in mammals. The mammalian counterpart to CED-9 is a protein called BCL-2, mutations in which can lead to cancer.  BCL-2, like CED-9, can both promote and protect against apoptosis. As with CED-9, the pro-apoptotic function of BCL-2 has been mysterious. In mammals, too, mitochondria play a key role in activating apoptosis. The Horvitz lab’s discovery opens opportunities to better understand how apoptosis is regulated not only in worms but also in humans, and how dysregulation of apoptosis in humans can lead to such disorders as cancer, autoimmune disease and neurodegeneration.

Laub Lab News Brief: anti-viral defense system in bacteria modifies mRNA

Killing the messenger

Lillian Eden | Department of Biology
October 23, 2024

Newly characterized anti-viral defense system in bacteria aborts infection through novel mechanism by chemically modifying mRNA.

Like humans and other complex multicellular organisms, single-celled bacteria can fall ill and fight off viral infections. A bacterial virus is known as a bacteriophage, or, more simply, a phage, which is one of the most ubiquitous life forms on Earth. Phages and bacteria are engaged in a constant battle, the virus attempting to circumvent the bacteria’s defenses, and the bacteria racing to find new ways to protect itself.

These anti-phage defense systems are carefully controlled and prudently managed — dormant but always poised to strike. 

New research recently published in Nature from the Laub Lab in the Department of Biology at MIT has characterized an anti-phage defense system in bacteria known as CmdTAC. CmdTAC prevents viral infection by altering mRNA, the single-stranded genetic code used to produce proteins, of both the host and the virus.  

This defense system detects phage infection at a stage when the viral phage has already commandeered the host’s machinery for its own purposes. In the face of annihilation, the ill-fated bacterium activates a defense system that will halt translation, preventing the creation of new proteins and aborting the infection — but dooming itself in the process. 

“When bacteria are in a group, they’re kind of like a multicellular organism that is not connected to one another. It’s an evolutionarily beneficial strategy for one cell to kill itself to save another identical cell,” says Christopher Vassallo, a postdoc and co-author of the study. “You could say it’s like self-sacrifice: one cell dies to protect the other cells.” 

The enzyme responsible for altering the mRNA is called an ADP-ribosyltransferase.  Researchers have characterized hundreds of these enzymes — although only a few are known to target DNA or other types of RNA, all but a handful target proteins. This is the first time these enzymes have been characterized targeting mRNA within cells.

Expanding understanding of anti-phage defense

Co-first author and graduate student Chris Doering noted that it is only within the last decade or so that researchers have begun to appreciate the breadth of diversity and complexity of anti-phage defense systems. For example, CRISPR gene editing, a technique used in everything from medicine to agriculture, is rooted in research on the bacterial CRISPR-Cas9 anti-phage defense system. 

CmdTAC is a subset of a widespread anti-phage defense mechanism called a toxin-antitoxin system. A TA system is just that: a toxin capable of killing or altering the cell’s processes rendered inert by an associated antitoxin. 

Although these TA systems can be identified — if the toxin is expressed by itself, it kills or inhibits the growth of the cell; if the toxin and antitoxin are expressed together, the toxin is neutralized — characterizing the cascade of circumstances that activates these systems requires extensive effort. In recent years, however, many TA systems have been shown to serve as anti-phage defenses. 

Two general questions need to be answered to understand a viral defense system: how do bacteria detect an infection, and how do they respond?

Detecting infection

CmdTAC is a TA system with an additional element, and the three components generally exist in a stable complex: the toxin CmdT, the antitoxin CmdA, and an additional component that mediates the system, the chaperone CmdC. 

If the phage’s protective capsid protein is present, CmdC disassociates from CmdT and CmdA and interacts with the phage capsid protein instead. In the model outlined in the paper, the chaperone CmdC is, therefore, the sensor of the system, responsible for recognizing when an infection is occurring. Structural proteins, such as the capsid that protects the phage genome, are a common trigger because they’re abundant and essential to the phage.

The uncoupling of CmdC leads to the degradation of the neutralizing antitoxin CmdA, which releases the toxin CmdT to do its lethal work.

Toxicity on the loose

Guided by computational tools, the researchers knew that CmdT was likely an ADP-ribosyltransferase due to its similarities to other such enzymes. As the name suggests, the enzyme transfers an ADP ribose onto its target.

To determine how CmdT was altering mRNA, the researchers tested a mix of short sequences of single-stranded RNA to see if the enzyme was drawn to any sequences or positions in particular. RNA has four bases: A, U, G, and C, and the evidence points to the enzyme recognizing GA sequences. 

The CmdT modification of GA sequences in mRNA blocks its translation. The cessation of creating new proteins aborts the infection, preventing the phage from spreading beyond the host to infect other bacteria. 

“Not only is it a new type of bacterial immune system, but the enzyme involved does something that’s never been seen before: the ADP-ribsolyation of mRNA,” Vassallo says. 

Although the paper outlines the broad strokes of the anti-phage defense system, there’s more to learn: it’s unclear how CmdC interacts with the capsid protein, and how the chemical modification of GA sequences prevents translation. 

Beyond Bacteria

While exploring anti-phage defense aligns with the Laub Lab’s overall goal of understanding how bacteria function and evolve, these results may have broader implications beyond bacteria.

Senior author Michael Laub, Salvador E. Luria Professor and HHMI Investigator, says the ADP-ribosyltransferase has homologs in eukaryotes, including human cells. They are not well studied, and not currently among the Laub Lab’s research topics, but they are known to be up-regulated in response to viral infection. 

“There are so many different — and cool — mechanisms by which organisms defend themselves against viral infection,” Laub says. “The notion that there may be some commonality between how bacteria defend themselves and how humans defend themselves is a tantalizing possibility.” 

News Brief: Lamason Lab uncovers seven novel effectors in Rickettsia parkeri infection

The enemy within: new research reveals insights into the arsenal Rickettsia parkeri uses against its host

Lillian Eden | Department of Biology
July 29, 2024

Identifying secreted proteins is critical to understanding how obligately intracellular pathogens hijack host machinery during infection, but identifying them is akin to finding a needle in a haystack.

For then-graduate student Allen Sanderlin, PhD ’24, the first indication that a risky, unlikely project might work was cyan, tic tac-shaped structures seen through a microscope — proof that his bacterial pathogen of interest was labeling its own proteins.  

Sanderlin, a member of the Lamason Lab in the Department of Biology at MIT, studies Rickettsia parkeri, a less virulent relative of the bacterial pathogen that causes Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever, a sometimes severe tickborne illness. No vaccine exists and definitive tests to diagnose an infection by Rickettsia are limited.

Rickettsia species are tricky to work with because they are obligately intracellular pathogens whose entire life cycles occur exclusively inside cells. Many approaches that have advanced our understanding of other bacterial infections and how those pathogens interact with their host aren’t applicable to Rickettsia because they can’t be grown on a plate in a lab setting. 

In a paper recently published in Nature Communications, the Lamason Lab outlines an approach for labeling and isolating R. parkeri proteins released during infection. This research reveals seven previously unknown secreted factors, known as effectors, more than doubling the number of known effectors in R. parkeri. 

Better-studied bacteria are known to hijack the host’s machinery via dozens or hundreds of secreted effectors, whose roles include manipulating the host cell to make it more susceptible to infection. However, finding those effectors in the soup of all other materials within the host cell is akin to looking for a needle in a haystack, with an added twist that researchers aren’t even sure what those needles look like for Rickettsia.  

Approaches that worked to identify the six previously known secreted effectors are limited in their scope. For example, some were found by comparing pathogenic Rickettsia to nonpathogenic strains of the bacteria, or by searching for proteins with domains that overlap with effectors from better-studied bacteria. Predictive modeling, however, relies on proteins being evolutionarily conserved. 

“Time and time again, we keep finding that Rickettsia are just weird — or, at least, weird compared to our understanding of other bacteria,” says Sanderlin, the paper’s first author. “This labeling tool allows us to answer some really exciting questions about rickettsial biology that weren’t possible before.”

The cyan tic tacs

To selectively label R. parkeri proteins, Sanderlin used a method called cell-selective bioorthogonal non-canonical amino acid tagging. BONCAT was first described in research from the Tirrell Lab at Caltech. The Lamason Lab, however, is the first group to use the tool successfully in an obligate intracellular bacterial pathogen; the thrilling moment when Sanderlin saw cyan tic-tac shapes indicated successfully labeling only the pathogen, not the host. 

Sanderlin next used an approach called selective lysis, carefully breaking open the host cell while leaving the pathogen, filled with labeled proteins, intact. This allowed him to extract proteins that R. parkeri had released into its host because the only labeled proteins amid other host cell material were effectors the pathogen had secreted. 

Sanderlin had successfully isolated and identified seven needles in the haystack, effectors never before identified in Rickettsia biology. The novel secreted rickettsial factors are dubbed SrfA, SrfB, SrfC, SrfD, SrfE, SrfF, and SrfG. 

“Every grad student wants to be able to name something,” Sanderlin says. “The most exciting — but frustrating — thing was that these proteins don’t look like anything we’ve seen before.”

Special delivery

Theoretically, Sanderlin says, once the effectors are secreted, they work independently from the bacteria — a driver delivering a pizza does not need to check back in with the store at every merge or turn.

Since SrfA-G didn’t resemble other known effectors or host proteins the pathogen could be mimicking during infection, Sanderlin then tried to answer some basic questions about their behavior. Where the effectors localize, meaning where in the cell they go, could hint at their purpose and what further experiments could be used to investigate it. 

To determine where the effectors were going, Sanderlin added the effectors he’d found to uninfected cells by introducing DNA that caused human cell lines to express those proteins. The experiment succeeded: he discovered that different Srfs went to different places throughout the host cells.  

SrfF and SrfG are found throughout the cytoplasm, whereas SrfB localizes to the mitochondria. That was especially intriguing because its structure is not predicted to interact with or find its way to the mitochondria, and the organelle appears unchanged despite the presence of the effector. 

Further, SrfC and SrfD found their way to the endoplasmic reticulum. The ER would be especially useful for a pathogen to appropriate, given that it is a dynamic organelle present throughout the cell and has many essential roles, including synthesizing proteins and metabolizing lipids. 

Aside from where effectors localize, knowing what they may interact with is critical. Sanderlin showed that SrfD interacts with Sec61, a protein complex that delivers proteins across the ER membrane. In keeping with the theme of the novelty of Sanderlin’s findings, SrfD does not resemble any proteins known to interact with the ER or Sec61. 

With this tool, Sanderlin identified novel proteins whose binding partners and role during infection can now be studied further. 

“These results are exciting but tantalizing,” Sanderlin says. “What Rickettsia secrete — the effectors, what they are, and what they do is, by and large, still a black box.” 

There are very likely other effectors in the proverbial cellular haystack. Sanderlin found that SrfA-G are not found in every species of Rickettsia, and his experiments were solely conducted with Rickettsia at late stages of infection — earlier windows of time may make use of different effectors. This research was also carried out in human cell lines, so there may be an entirely separate repertoire of effectors in ticks, which are responsible for spreading the pathogen.

Expanding Tool Development

Becky Lamason, the senior author of the Nature Communications paper, noted that this tool is one of a few avenues the lab is exploring to investigate R. parkeri, including a paper in the Journal of Bacteriology on conditional genetic manipulation. Characterizing how the pathogen behaves with or without a particular effector is leaps and bounds ahead of where the field was just a few years ago when Sanderlin was Lamason’s first graduate student to join the lab.

“What I always hoped for in the lab is to push the technology, but also get to the biology. These are two of what will hopefully be a suite of ways to attack this problem of understanding how these bacteria rewire and manipulate the host cell,” Lamason says. “We’re excited, but we’ve only scratched the surface.”

News brief: Davis Lab

Exploring the cellular neighborhood

Alison Biester | Department of Biology
March 12, 2024

New software allows scientists to model shapeshifting proteins in native cellular environments

Cells rely on complex molecular machines composed of protein assemblies to perform essential functions such as energy production, gene expression, and protein synthesis. To better understand how these machines work, scientists capture snapshots of them by isolating proteins from cells and using various methods to determine their structures. However, isolating proteins from cells also removes them from the context of their native environment, including protein interaction partners and cellular location.

Recently, cryogenic electron tomography (cryo-ET) has emerged as a way to observe proteins in their native environment by imaging frozen cells at different angles to obtain three-dimensional structural information. This approach is exciting because it allows researchers to directly observe how and where proteins associate with each other, revealing the cellular neighborhood of those interactions within the cell.

With the technology available to image proteins in their native environment, graduate student Barrett Powell wondered if he could take it one step further: what if molecular machines could be observed in action? In a paper published today in Nature Methods, Powell describes the method he developed, called tomoDRGN, for modeling structural differences of proteins in cryo-ET data that arise from protein motions or proteins binding to different interaction partners. These variations are known as structural heterogeneity. 

Although Powell had joined the Davis Lab as an experimental scientist, he recognized the potential impact of computational approaches in understanding structural heterogeneity within a cell. Previously, the Davis Lab developed a related methodology named cryoDRGN to understand structural heterogeneity in purified samples. As Powell and Associate Professor of Biology Joey Davis saw cryo-ET rising in prominence in the field, Powell took on the challenge of reimagining this framework to work in cells. 

When solving structures with purified samples, each particle is imaged only once. By contrast, cryo-ET data is collected by imaging each particle more than 40 times from different angles. That meant tomoDRGN needed to be able to merge the information from more than 40 images, which was where the project hit a roadblock: the amount of data led to an information overload.

To address the information overload, Powell successfully rebuilt the cryoDRGN model to prioritize only the highest-quality data. When imaging the same particle multiple times, radiation damage occurs. The images acquired earlier, therefore, tend to be of higher quality because the particles are less damaged.

“By excluding some of the lower quality data, the results were actually better than using all of the data–and the computational performance was substantially faster,” Powell says.

Just as Powell was beginning work on testing his model, he had a stroke of luck: the authors of a groundbreaking new study that visualized, for the first time, ribosomes inside cells at near-atomic resolution, shared their raw data on the Electric Microscopy Public Image Archive (EMPIAR). This dataset was an exemplary test case for Powell, through which he demonstrated that tomoDRGN could uncover structural heterogeneity within cryo-ET data. 

According to Powell, one exciting result is what tomoDRGN found surrounding a subset of ribosomes in the EMPIAR dataset. Some of the ribosomal particles were associated with a bacterial cell membrane and engaged in a process called cotranslational translocation. This occurs when a protein is being simultaneously synthesized and transported across a membrane. Researchers can use this result to make new hypotheses about how the ribosome functions with other protein machinery integral to transporting proteins outside of the cell, now guided by a structure of the complex in its native environment. 

After seeing that tomoDRGN could resolve structural heterogeneity from a structurally diverse dataset, Powell was curious: how small of a population could tomoDRGN identify? For that test, he chose a protein named apoferritin which is a commonly used benchmark for cryo-ET and is often treated as structurally homogeneous. Ferritin is a protein used for iron storage and is referred to as apoferritin when it lacks iron.

Surprisingly, in addition to the expected particles, tomoDRGN revealed a minor population of ferritin particles–with iron bound–making up just 2% of the dataset that was not previously reported. This result further demonstrated tomoDRGN’s ability to identify structural states that occur so infrequently that they would be averaged out with traditional analysis tools. 

Powell and other members of the Davis Lab are excited to see how tomoDRGN can be applied to further ribosomal studies and to other systems. Davis works on understanding how cells assemble, regulate, and degrade molecular machines, so the next steps include exploring ribosome biogenesis within cells in greater detail using this new tool.

“What are the possible states that we may be losing during purification?” Davis says. “Perhaps more excitingly, we can look at how they localize within the cell and what partners and protein complexes they may be interacting with.” 

News brief: Calo Lab

How do cells respond to disruptions in splicing?

Lillian Eden | Department of Biology
March 4, 2024

New research from the Calo Lab in the Department of Biology has identified the protein Mdm2 generating a form that activates a cascade of cellular stress responses when splicing is disrupted.

To create proteins, DNA is transcribed into RNA, and that RNA is then “translated” into protein. Between the creation of the RNA and the translation to protein is often a step called splicing. During splicing, segments called introns are removed, and the remaining pieces, called exons, are joined together to form the blueprint for translation. By splicing together different exons, the cell can create different proteins from the same section of genetic code. When splicing goes awry, it can lead to diseases and cancers. 

New research recently published in Disease Models & Mechanisms from the Calo Lab in the Department of Biology at MIT has identified the mechanism for how cells respond to disruptions in splicing, which involves activating a cellular stress response. The stress response, once activated, causes widespread effects, including changes to cell metabolism. 

Researchers have discovered cellular stress responses for other core cellular processes, such as ribosome biogenesis. However, this is the first time researchers have identified how cells respond to perturbing the splicing process.

A particular protein acts as a kind of canary in a coal mine: Mdm2, which responds to a broad range of splicing disruptions. Mdm2 does not cause a stress response by itself. Rather, Mdm2 is itself spliced differently in response to splicing disruptions. Downstream, the alternative splicing of Mdm2 leads to the activation of a protein called p53, which is known to orchestrate a cascade of responses to stress.

Researchers have long wondered why some cell types seem more sensitive to splicing disruptions than others. For example, some disorders caused by mutations in proteins that perform RNA splicing, despite affecting the whole organism, induce more noticeable changes in tissues derived from the neural crest—a collection of stem cells that contributes to the formation of the face, jaw, retinas, limbs, and heart during development. Certain splicing inhibitors have also increased the effectiveness of some cancer treatments, but the mechanism is unknown. 

One of the p53-induced stress responses includes changing the metabolism of cells and how they use sugars, which may explain why some cells are more sensitive to splicing disruptions than others. Inhibiting glycolysis, the reactions that extract energy from glucose, can affect how cells divide and migrate. 

The way cells divide and migrate is critical during development; in experiments, zebrafish treated with glycolysis inhibitors exhibited similar changes to craniofacial features as those where splicing was disrupted. Cancerous cells, too, are known to require high levels of sugar metabolism and, therefore, may be especially sensitive to treatments that induce changes in the splicing pathway. 

The researchers knocked down genes to mimic milder splicing disruptions instead of knocking them out entirely. Splicing is so essential that knocking out the splicing machinery can lead to extreme responses like cell death. In organismal models like zebrafish, those severe phenotypes don’t accurately reflect how splicing disruptions present in human diseases.

First author Jade Varineau, a graduate student in the Calo lab, was drawn to the project because it allowed her to explore what was happening at the RNA and cellular level while also observing how splicing perturbations were affecting the whole organism. 

“I think this data can help us reframe the way we think about diseases and cancers that are impacted by splicing—that a treatment that works for one may work for another because all the symptoms may stem from the same cellular response,” Varineau says. 

Although the results indicate how cells broadly respond to splicing perturbations, the mechanism for how disruptions in splicing induce the alternate splicing of Mdm2 remains unclear. Senior author Eliezer Calo says the lab is also exploring how splicing mechanisms may be altered for things like cancer. Their work, he says, opens the door for further exploration of cell-type specificity of genetic disorders and improvements in cancer treatments using splicing inhibitors. 

 “We know that the sensor is encoded in the gene Mdm2—what are the molecules that allow Mdm2 to act as a sensor, and how does the sensor malfunction for things like cancer?” Calo says. “The next step is to find out how the sensor works.”  

News Brief: Vos Lab

Poise or Pause: researchers expand understanding of transcription factor’s role with newly discovered conformation

Lillian Eden | Department of Biology
February 23, 2024

New research from the Vos Lab in the Department of Biology at MIT reveals the dynamic nature of elongation factor protein key for regulating early stages of gene expression.

Transcription, the process of copying RNA from DNA, is a critical first step for cells to create proteins. The enzyme responsible for transcription is a motor protein called RNA polymerase. 

When an RNA polymerase transcribes a gene, it will begin elongating the mRNA and will then, often, pause. 

From there, the RNA polymerase will either return to elongating the mRNA or it will get stuck. For the latter occurrence, the mRNA and subsequent protein will never be made: the polymerase will go somewhere else, or restart transcription on the same gene and get stuck again. 

Pausing is thought to be governed by a protein called Negative Elongation Factor, NELF, and DRB-sensitivity inducing factor, DSIF. Previous research suggested that NELF stably clamps down onto RNA polymerase to stall the elongation process and prevent the polymerase from moving. That model contradicted cell-based experiments, however, which indicated that NELF is somehow still attached to polymerase after transcription resumes. 

New research from the Vos Lab in the Department of Biology at MIT published today in Molecular Cell reveals that NELF isn’t merely an on-off switch for transcription. Instead, NELF can change into a distinct conformation that allows the polymerase to resume transcription. The researchers dubbed this distinct conformation NELF’s “poised” state.

RNA polymerase pausing, sometimes for minutes at a time, is thought to be an important gene expression checkpoint; more than half of genes exhibit pausing, although many questions remain about the role of pausing in gene expression. Understanding both how and why the process is occurring, down to the atomic level, and what components are involved, is key to understanding how cells function, both individually and as part of an organism.

“It’s a very central question to biological research, and we still don’t fully understand it because it’s such a complex process,” says first author Bonnie G. Su, a graduate student in the Vos lab. “The bigger picture is: how does the cell decide what resources to allocate to certain biological processes? This finding might help us answer questions like that.” 

To visualize the two distinct conformations of NELF and polymerase, the researchers used a combination of biochemical and structural approaches. The previous understanding of proximal pausing was based on Cryo-Electron Microscopy images of the static complex. Cryo-EM is a powerful microscopy technique that involves freezing samples and imaging them, and that approach had captured polymerase in its paused state. 

Using the core Cryo-EM facility available at MIT.nano, Su instead added the necessary components for the polymerase to transcribe, and gathered structural data on an actively transcribing complex —allowing, for the first time, a stepwise visualization of how proximal pausing occurs. 

“What we found is that NELF, which we always thought of as static, can actually move around,” Su says. “This has updated our understanding of what pausing is, and how early gene regulation happens.” 

The structural results also provide an explanation for how polymerase may be cycling between the two states—and how one form of NELF may be forcing polymerase to pause, while the newly discovered form allows polymerase to resume transcription. 

It’s still unclear what triggers NELF to transition from the paused state to the poised state, and many questions remain about how polymerase is regulated, according to senior author Seychelle Vos, the Robert A. Swanson (1969) Career Development Professor of Life Sciences and HHMI Freeman Hrabowski Scholar. RNA polymerase can be associated with and is known to be regulated by a large repertoire of proteins. 

“We’re trying to see if we can actually lock the complex in the paused state by adding additional factors,” Vos says. “We’re also pursuing whether sequence context is affecting pausing behavior—how or if the sequence of DNA may be causing polymerase to pause.”

Capsid of HIV-1 behaves like cell’s cargo receptor to enter the nucleus

Biologists demonstrate that HIV-1 capsid acts like a Trojan horse to pass viral cargo across the nuclear pore.

Lillian Eden | Department of Biology
January 24, 2024

Retroviruses cannot replicate on their own — they must insert their genetic code into the DNA of a host and exploit the host cell’s resources to make more copies of themselves, furthering infection. Some retroviruses only infect cells as they divide, when the nuclear envelope that protects the host’s genetic material breaks down, making it easily accessible. HIV-1 is a type of retrovirus, called a lentivirus, that can infect non-dividing cells.

HIV-1 delivers its genome into the nucleus by packaging it into a large, cone-shaped structure called a capsid — but the exact mechanism has remained elusive for decades. Travel through the nuclear envelope occurs through, and is regulated by, nuclear pores, doughnut-shaped protein assemblies. Human cells have about 2,000 nuclear pores perforating the nuclear envelope. Some earlier evidence suggested that the capsid remains intact during its delivery into the nucleus — but this created a dimensional conundrum. The cone-shaped HIV-1 capsid is about 120 nanometers long and 60 nm wide — too large, researchers thought, to fit through the opening of the nuclear pore, measured at only 43 nm wide.

Members of the Schwartz Lab at MIT, in the Department of Biology, became interested in this question when a postdoc in the lab used cryo-electron tomography, slicing up sections of frozen cells to examine structures, to show that nuclear pores in the nuclear envelope are larger than 43nm. They deflate and shrink, it turns out, when removed from their native conditions. In native conditions, the nuclear pore complex is about 60nm wide — wide enough to accommodate the HIV-1 capsid.

Knowing that it could fit, a question remained: How can the capsid navigate the dense mesh of spaghetti-like proteins that act like a sieve in the nuclear pore channel? That spaghetti-like mesh allows small cargo to diffuse through, but prevents large cargo from entering unless it is escorted by proteins called nuclear transport receptors.

In an open-access paper published today in Nature, researchers present evidence that the HIV-1 capsid mimics the cell’s transport receptors to traverse the nuclear pore.

To support that conclusion, the researchers showed three things in vitro: that an HIV-1 capsid can deliver cargo through a nuclear pore analog; that the capsid can interact with the sieve of proteins in the nuclear pore channel; and that the capsid targets the nuclear pore in the absence of native transport proteins.

Nuclear transport receptors escort large cargo through the nuclear pore by “batting away” the spaghetti-like mesh of proteins inside the channel — like someone holding your hand and guiding you across a crowded dance floor. The HIV-1 capsid interacts with the spaghetti-like proteins, but its purpose is more like a Trojan horse — the capsid encapsulates the viral cargo, protecting it from detection in the cytoplasm and as it enters the nuclear pore complex.

“What’s really amazing about cells is that they are incredibly complex. What’s really difficult about studying cells is that they are incredibly complex,” jokes co-first author Erika Weiskopf, a graduate student in the Schwartz lab. “Biochemists are constantly trying to find ways to study their system in a simplified context, but still give it a flavor of cell biology.”

To do that, the Schwartz lab collaborated with Dirk Görlich, the director of cellular logistics at the Max Planck Institute for Multidisciplinary Sciences. Görlich is a co-senior author on the paper with MIT’s Boris Magasanik Professor of Biology Thomas Schwartz. Görlich’s lab has produced concentrated droplets of the spaghetti-like proteins found inside the nuclear pore, and those droplets allow and exclude cargo the same way a nuclear pore will. In experiments, fluorescently-labeled cargo did not enter the droplets, but fluorescently-labeled cargo packaged in an HIV-1 capsid was delivered. This indicated that the capsid could deliver cargo through a nuclear pore.

Using a biophysical binding assay, the researchers also showed that the HIV-1 capsid interacts with the proteins inside the channel. Different spaghetti-like proteins are found in different channel sections, such as at the cytoplasmic side’s entrance or only inside the channel; there are 10 such proteins in human cells. The capsid is a promiscuous binder — it can interact with all the spaghetti-like proteins found in the channel.

The capsid can target the nuclear pore complex even without the cell’s transport receptors, indicating that it is not commandeering native transport receptors to find and enter the nuclear pore. The team used a classic assay in the nucleocytoplasmic transport field to collect this evidence: When cells are treated with digitonin, their membranes become porous. Everything in the cytoplasm will leak out of the cells, but the nuclear envelope will remain intact. Despite the absence of native proteins, the capsid was attracted to the nuclear pore complex, a behavior indicative of a nuclear transport receptor.

Although the capsid behaves like a nuclear transport receptor to penetrate the nuclear pore, it is fundamentally different. A transport receptor doesn’t need to conceal material for delivery the way the capsid does to avoid detection.

These findings open new lines of inquiry for what the nuclear pore complex is capable of accommodating.

“The HIV-1 capsid is one of the largest things that we now know can go through the nuclear pore complex intact,” Weiskopf says. “It raises all kinds of questions — what other things could be going through the pore that we thought was impossible?”

Schwartz said another question is whether all of the 2,000 nuclear pores in human cells are identical or whether there is something that makes certain pores more amenable to allowing the capsid through.

The capsid is also known to be unusually elastic, a property that may be key for passage through the pore. Another interesting question for the field is whether the cone-shaped capsid gains entry into the pore by squeezing through.

Although the team has shown that the capsid can enter the pore, what happens at the other end of the channel is still unknown — whether the capsid fully or partially enters the nucleus or breaks down inside the channel. Weiskopf is working on perturbing parts of the capsid or the spaghetti-like proteins to learn more about which interactions are most important for successful capsid entry.

Although these results have expanded our understanding of the nuclear pore, much remains unknown, both for HIV-1 infection and for the transport process through the nuclear pore complex.

“The nuclear pore is such an important element of cell biology, we thought it would be interesting to understand it better — and that’s how we figured out that the pore is much bigger than we anticipated,” Schwartz says. “We will certainly try to see whether we can understand the mechanism of HIV-1 infection, how the capsid is released on the other side of the channel, and what factors are important there — and to what extent you can manipulate it or influence it for therapeutic applications.”

New research explores intertwined structures of protein Met18

Research from the Drennan Lab in the Department of Biology at MIT explores how a protein called Met18, which is part of a ubiquitous pathway to transfer clusters of iron and sulfur to client proteins in the cytosol and nucleus of cells, can interact with other Met18 units to form intertwined structures

Lillian Eden | Department of Biology
December 18, 2023