Signal Activation and Inactivation by the G Helical Domain: A Long-Neglected Partner in G Protein Signaling

Heterotrimeric guanine nucleotide–binding proteins (G proteins) are positioned at the top of many signal transduction pathways. The G protein α subunit is composed of two domains, one that resembles Ras and another that is composed entirely of α helices. Historically, most attention has focused on the Ras-like domain, but emerging evidence reveals that the helical domain is an active participant in G protein signaling

Dynamic Ubiquitination of the Mitogen-activated Protein Kinase Kinase (MAPKK) Ste7 Determines Mitogen-activated Protein Kinase (MAPK) Specificity

Ubiquitination is a post-translational modification that tags proteins for proteasomal degradation. In addition, there is a growing appreciation that ubiquitination can influence protein activity and localization. Ste7 is a prototype MAPKK in yeast that participates in both the pheromone signaling and nutrient deprivation/invasive growth pathways. We have shown previously that Ste7 is ubiquitinated upon pheromone stimulation. Here, we show that the Skp1/Cullin/F-box ubiquitin ligase SCFCdc4 and the ubiquitin protease Ubp3 regulate Ste7 ubiquitination and signal specificity. Using purified components, we demonstrate that SCFCdc4 ubiquitinates Ste7 directly. Using gene deletion mutants, we show that SCFCdc4 and Ubp3 have opposing effects on Ste7 ubiquitination. Although SCFCdc4 is necessary for proper activation of the pheromone MAPK Fus3, Ubp3 is needed to limit activation of the invasive growth MAPK Kss1. Finally, we show that Fus3 phosphorylates Ubp3 directly and that phosphorylation of Ubp3 is necessary to limit Kss1 activation. These results reveal a feedback loop wherein one MAPK limits the ubiquitination of an upstream MAPKK and thereby prevents spurious activation of a second competing MAPK

Regulation of Yeast G Protein Signaling by the Kinases That Activate the AMPK Homolog Snf1

Extracellular signals, such as nutrients and hormones, cue intracellular pathways to produce adaptive responses. Often, cells must coordinate their responses to multiple signals to produce an appropriate outcome. We showed that components of a glucose-sensing pathway acted on components of a heterotrimeric guanine nucleotide–binding protein (G protein)–mediated pheromone signaling pathway in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae. We demonstrated that the G protein α subunit Gpa1 was phosphorylated in response to conditions of reduced glucose availability and that this phosphorylation event contributed to reduced pheromone-dependent stimulation of mitogen-activated protein kinases, gene transcription, cell morphogenesis, and mating efficiency. We found that Elm1, Sak1, and Tos3, the kinases that phosphorylate Snf1, the yeast homolog of adenosine monophosphate–activated protein kinase (AMPK), in response to limited glucose availability, also phosphorylated Gpa1 and contributed to the diminished mating response. Reg1, the regulatory subunit of the phosphatase PP1 that acts on Snf1, was likewise required to reverse the phosphorylation of Gpa1 and to maintain the mating response. Thus, the same kinases and phosphatase that regulate Snf1 also regulate Gpa1. More broadly, these results indicate that the pheromone signaling and glucose-sensing pathways communicate directly to coordinate cell behavior

Differences in intradomain and interdomain motion confer distinct activation properties to structurally similar G proteins

Proteins with similar crystal structures can have dissimilar rates of substrate binding and catalysis. Here we used molecular dynamics simulations and biochemical analysis to determine the role of intradomain and interdomain motions in conferring distinct activation rates to two Gα proteins, Gαi1 and GPA1. Despite high structural similarity, GPA1 can activate itself without a receptor, whereas Gαi1 cannot. We found that motions in these proteins vary greatly in type and frequency. Whereas motion is greatest in the Ras domain of Gαi1, it is greatest in helices αA and αB from the helical domain of GPA1. Using protein chimeras, we show that helix αA from GPA1 is sufficient to confer rapid activation to Gαi1. Gαi1 has less intradomain motion than GPA1 and instead displays interdomain displacement resembling that observed in a receptor–heterotrimer crystal complex. Thus, structurally similar proteins can have distinct atomic motions that confer distinct activation mechanisms

MAPK feedback encodes a switch and timer for tunable stress adaptation in yeast

Signaling pathways can behave as switches or rheostats, generating binary or graded responses to a given cell stimulus. We evaluated whether a single signaling pathway can simultaneously encode a switch and a rheostat. We found that the kinase Hog1 mediated a bifurcated cellular response: Activation and commitment to adaptation to osmotic stress are switch-like, whereas protein induction and the resolution of this commitment are graded. Through experimentation, bioinformatics analysis, and computational modeling, we determined that graded recovery is encoded through feedback phosphorylation and a gene induction program that is both temporally staggered and variable across the population. This switch-to-rheostat signaling mechanism represents a versatile stress adaptation system, wherein a broad range of inputs generate an “all-in” response that is later tuned to allow graded recovery of individual cells over time

Yeast Dynamically Modify Their Environment to Achieve Better Mating Efficiency

The maintenance and detection of signaling gradients are critical for proper development and cell migration. In single-cell organisms, gradient detection allows cells to orient toward a distant mating partner or nutrient source. Budding yeast expand their growth toward mating pheromone gradients through a process known as chemotropic growth. MATα cells secrete α-factor pheromone that stimulates chemotropism and mating differentiation in MATa cells and vice versa. Paradoxically, MATa cells secrete Bar1, a protease that degrades α-factor and that attenuates the mating response, yet is also required for efficient mating. We observed that MATa cells avoid each other during chemotropic growth. To explore this behavior, we developed a computational platform to simulate chemotropic growth. Our simulations indicated that the release of Bar1 enabled individual MATa cells to act as α-factor sinks. The simulations suggested that the resultant local reshaping of pheromone concentration created gradients that were directed away from neighboring MATa cells (self-avoidance) and that were increasingly amplified toward partners of the opposite sex during elongation. The behavior of Bar1-deficient cells in gradient chambers and mating assays supported these predictions from the simulations. Thus, budding yeast dynamically remodel their environment to ensure productive responses to an external stimulus and avoid nonproductive cell-cell interactions

The Crystal Structure of a Self-Activating G Protein Subunit Reveals Its Distinct Mechanism of Signal Initiation

In animals, heterotrimeric guanine nucleotide–binding protein (G protein) signaling is initiated by G protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs), which activate G protein α subunits; however, the plant Arabidopsis thaliana lacks canonical GPCRs, and its G protein α subunit (AtGPA1) is self-activating. To investigate how AtGPA1 becomes activated, we determined its crystal structure. AtGPA1 is structurally similar to animal G protein α subunits, but our crystallographic and biophysical studies revealed that it had distinct properties. Notably, the helical domain of AtGPA1 displayed pronounced intrinsic disorder and a tendency to disengage from the Ras domain of the protein. Domain substitution experiments showed that the helical domain of AtGPA1 was necessary for self-activation and sufficient to confer self-activation to an animal G protein α subunit. These findings reveal the structural basis for a mechanism for G protein activation in Arabidopsis that is distinct from the well-established mechanism found in animals

Defining MAP3 kinases required for MDA-MB-231 cell tumor growth and metastasis

Analysis of patient tumors suggests multiple MAP3kinases (MAP3Ks) are critical for growth and metastasis of cancer cells. MAP3Ks selectively control the activation of ERK1/2, JNK, p38 and ERK5 in response to receptor tyrosine kinases and GTPases. We used MDA-MB-231 cells because of their ability to metastasize from the breast fat pad to distant lymph nodes for an orthotopic xenograft model to screen the function of seven MAP3Ks in controlling tumor growth and metastasis. Stable shRNA knockdown was used to inhibit the expression of each of the seven MAP3Ks, which were selected for their differential regulation of the MAPK network. The screen identified two MAP3Ks, MEKK2 and MLK3, whose shRNA knockdown caused significant inhibition of both tumor growth and metastasis. Neither MEKK2 nor MLK3 have been previously shown to regulate tumor growth and metastasis in vivo. These results demonstrated that MAP3Ks, which differentially activate JNK, p38 and ERK5 are necessary for xenograft tumor growth and metastasis of MDA-MB-231 tumors. The requirement for MAP3Ks signaling through multiple MAPK pathways explains why several members of the MAPK network are activated in cancer. MEKK2 was required for EGF receptor and Her2/Neu activation of ERK5, with ERK5 being required for metastasis. Loss of MLK3 expression increased mitotic infidelity and apoptosis in vitro. Knockdown of MEKK2 and MLK3 resulted in increased apoptosis in orthotopic xenografts relative to control tumors in mice, inhibiting both tumor growth and metastasis; MEKK2 and MLK3 represent untargeted kinases in tumor biology for potential therapeutic development

Regulation of Cell Signaling Dynamics by the Protein Kinase-Scaffold Ste5

Cell differentiation requires the ability to detect and respond appropriately to a variety of extracellular signals. Here we investigate a differentiation switch induced by changes in the concentration of a single stimulus. Yeast cells exposed to high doses of mating pheromone undergo cell division arrest. Cells at intermediate doses become elongated and divide in the direction of a pheromone gradient (chemotropic-growth). Either of the pheromone-responsive MAP kinases, Fus3 and Kss1, promotes cell elongation, but only Fus3 promotes chemotropic growth. Whereas Kss1 is activated rapidly and with a graded dose-response profile, Fus3 is activated slowly and exhibits a steeper dose-response relationship (ultrasensitivity). Fus3 activity requires the scaffold protein Ste5; when binding to Ste5 is abrogated Fus3 behaves like Kss1, and the cells no longer respond to a gradient or mate efficiently with distant partners. We propose that scaffold proteins serve to modulate the temporal and dose-response behavior of the MAP kinase

Checkpoints in a Yeast Differentiation Pathway Coordinate Signaling during Hyperosmotic Stress

All eukaryotes have the ability to detect and respond to environmental and hormonal signals. In many cases these signals evoke cellular changes that are incompatible and must therefore be orchestrated by the responding cell. In the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, hyperosmotic stress and mating pheromones initiate signaling cascades that each terminate with a MAP kinase, Hog1 and Fus3, respectively. Despite sharing components, these pathways are initiated by distinct inputs and produce distinct cellular behaviors. To understand how these responses are coordinated, we monitored the pheromone response during hyperosmotic conditions. We show that hyperosmotic stress limits pheromone signaling in at least three ways. First, stress delays the expression of pheromone-induced genes. Second, stress promotes the phosphorylation of a protein kinase, Rck2, and thereby inhibits pheromone-induced protein translation. Third, stress promotes the phosphorylation of a shared pathway component, Ste50, and thereby dampens pheromone-induced MAPK activation. Whereas all three mechanisms are dependent on an increase in osmolarity, only the phosphorylation events require Hog1. These findings reveal how an environmental stress signal is able to postpone responsiveness to a competing differentiation signal, by acting on multiple pathway components, in a coordinated manner