letters to the editor
Comment on Phosphorylation adjacent to the nuclear localization signal of human dUTPase abolishes nuclear import: structural and mechanistic insights by Róna et al. (2013)
aDepartment of Molecular Medicine, University of Padua, 35121 Padua, Italy, and bDepartment of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Monash University, Clayton, VIC 3800, Australia
*Correspondence e-mail: gualtiero.alvisi@unipd.it, david.jans@monash.edu.au
The authors comment on the article by Róna et al. [(2013), Acta Cryst. D69, 2495–2505].
et al., 2000; Poon & Jans, 2005). In particular, within or immediately upstream of the NLS can prevent IMP recognition and nuclear import (Jans et al., 1991, 1995), whereas distinct phosphorylation generally up to 30 amino acids upstream of the NLS can promote IMP recognition/nuclear import (Hübner et al., 1997; Rihs & Peters, 1989). This pattern, originally described for the prototypal NLS identified from Simian Virus 40 Large T-antigen (T-ag) (Kalderon et al., 1984; Rihs & Peters, 1989) was subsequently proven to apply to a plethora of proteins of viral and cellular origins that mediate important biological effects, potentially representing a target for therapeutic intervention (Alvisi et al., 2005, 2011, 2008, 2013; Poon & Jans, 2005).
can regulate nuclear targeting of classical nuclear localization signal (NLS)-bearing cargoes by modulating their affinity for the cellular transporters of the importin (IMP) superfamily, which is critical to many important biological processes (JansHowever, the mechanistic details of how cargo-phosphorylation really influences IMP binding remained elusive until now. In the case of α and a phosphorylated peptide from the prototypical NLS of SV40 T-ag was solved, but revealed no direct interaction between the phosphorylated cargo and IMPα (Fontes et al., 2003), suggesting that the effect of in influencing IMP binding in this context might only be observed in the full-length protein (Alvisi et al., 2008, 2013); clearly crystal structures of the full IMPα/β heterodimer complexed with a whole protein, rather than an NLS peptide, is ultimately required to enable understanding of how can indeed promote IMP recognition and nuclear import.
enhancing nuclear transport events, the of a complex of a truncated form of IMPThe study from Róna et al. (Róna et al., 2013) in the August 2013 issue of Acta Crystallographica Section D provides new structural insight into the nature of the phosphorylation-regulated recognition of cargoes by IMPs. In particular, the structure of phosphomimetic and phosphonull-NLS derived from human dUTPase (DUT) complexed with a truncated form of IMPα is correlated with IMP-NLS binding ability. Critically, the phosphomimetic S11E mutation altered the conformation of R15 DUT-NLS, leading to a change in the binding arrangement of the peptide in the IMPα binding site, and to a loss of interaction between the P12 and R15 NLS residues and the IMPα surface. Róna et al. (Róna et al., 2013) conclude that this conformational change explains the ca tenfold lower binding affinity of the phosphomimetic peptide to the IMPα subunit, as observed in their in vitro experiments.
These findings are of great interest in the nuclear transport field because they provide a structural explanation of how phosphorylation might negatively affect the NLS-IMPα interaction. However, a more careful consideration of the biological relevance of the results is justified since the present study seems to ignore the fact that other proteins exist in the cell that can bind NLSs/NLS-like sequences. In short, Róna et al. (2013) do not consider the possibility that of DUT S11 may regulate DUT's interaction with other cellular factors.
In a seminal paper, Hodel et al. (2001) clearly showed that only mutations diminishing the binding affinity of IMPα to its NLS bearing cargo by two orders of magnitude significantly impact on nuclear targeting (Hodel et al., 2001); mutations impairing recognition by up to tenfold in fact, have little effect on nuclear accumulation (Hodel et al., 2001; Harreman et al., 2004). Thus, nuclear exclusion of the S11E-DUT, rather than being explicable solely in terms of reduced binding to IMPα, may in fact indicate that other factors are playing an important role in the the observed cytoplasmic localization in cells.
Cytoplasmic retention factor(s) that contribute to negatively regulate NLS activity upon et al., 1991), and more recently shown to be a key factor limiting nuclear accumulation of both SV40 T-ag (through the T124 site) and Human Cytomegalovirus processivity factor UL44 (through T427) (Fulcher et al., 2010), both of which closely resemble S11 of DUT in terms of position relative to the NLS core of the respective proteins (see Fig. 1). The cytoplasmic involved in this case is BRCA-1 binding protein 2 (BRAP2) (Fulcher et al., 2010).
was postulated over 20 years ago (JansRóna et al. (Róna et al., 2013) should consider the possible contribution of negative regulators of nuclear targeting within eukaryotic cells, which compete with IMPs to finely tune the nuclear levels of certain cargoes. Given the modest (ca tenfold) reduction in IMPα binding of the entirely cytosolic S11R-DUT as compared to entirely nuclear S11A-DUT, and the fact that in light of previous work (Hodel et al., 2001; Harreman et al., 2004) this is unlikely to impact so strongly on nuclear targeting, it seems feasible that S11 may confer interaction with a factor such as BRAP2, and that this may be the mechanism responsible for the strong cytoplasmic localization.
Given the importance of structural information to our understanding of key physiopathological processes such as gene expression, cell growth and transformation, and virus–host interactions, the work of Róna et al. (Róna et al., 2013) is of great importance. We now wait with expectation for new, highly informative crystal structures of IMPs bound to full cargoes, and arguably of even more interest will be crystal structures of negative regulators of nuclear import such as BRAP2 to phosphorylated NLS-containing cargoes.
References
Alvisi, G., Jans, D. A., Camozzi, D., Avanzi, S., Loregian, A., Ripalti, A. & Palù, G. (2013). Viruses, 5, 2210–2234. PubMed Google Scholar
Alvisi, G., Jans, D. A., Guo, J., Pinna, L. A. & Ripalti, A. (2005). Traffic, 6, 1002–1013. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Alvisi, G., Marin, O., Pari, G., Mancini, M., Avanzi, S., Loregian, A., Jans, D. A. & Ripalti, A. (2011). Virology, 417, 259–267. Web of Science CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Alvisi, G., Rawlinson, S. M., Ghildyal, R., Ripalti, A. & Jans, D. A. (2008). Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 1784, 213–227. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Fontes, M. R., Teh, T., Toth, G., John, A., Pavo, I., Jans, D. A. & Kobe, B. (2003). Biochem. J. 375, 339–349. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Fulcher, A. J., Roth, D. M., Fatima, S., Alvisi, G. & Jans, D. A. (2010). FASEB J. 24, 1454–1466. Web of Science CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Harreman, M. T., Kline, T. M., Milford, H. G., Harben, M. B., Hodel, A. E. & Corbett, A. H. (2004). J. Biol. Chem. 279, 20613–20621. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Hodel, M. R., Corbett, A. H. & Hodel, A. E. (2001). J. Biol. Chem. 276, 1317–1325. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Hübner, S., Xiao, C. Y. & Jans, D. A. (1997). J. Biol. Chem. 272, 17191–17195. PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar
Jans, D. A., Ackermann, M. J., Bischoff, J. R., Beach, D. H. & Peters, R. (1991). J. Cell Biol. 115, 1203–1212. CrossRef PubMed CAS Web of Science Google Scholar
Jans, D. A., Moll, T., Nasmyth, K. & Jans, P. (1995). J. Biol. Chem. 270, 17064–17067. CrossRef CAS PubMed Google Scholar
Jans, D. A., Xiao, C. Y. & Lam, M. H. (2000). Bioessays, 22, 532–544. CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Kalderon, D., Roberts, B. L., Richardson, W. D. & Smith, A. E. (1984). Cell, 39, 499–509. CrossRef CAS PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar
Poon, I. K. & Jans, D. A. (2005). Traffic, 6, 173–186. Web of Science CrossRef PubMed CAS Google Scholar
Rihs, H. P. & Peters, R. (1989). EMBO J. 8, 1479–1484. CAS PubMed Web of Science Google Scholar
Róna, G., Marfori, M., Borsos, M., Scheer, I., Takács, E., Tóth, J., Babos, F., Magyar, A., Erdei, A., Bozóky, Z., Buday, L., Kobe, B. & Vértessy, B. G. (2013). Acta Cryst. D69, 2495–2505. Web of Science CrossRef IUCr Journals Google Scholar
© International Union of Crystallography. Prior permission is not required to reproduce short quotations, tables and figures from this article, provided the original authors and source are cited. For more information, click here.