Laura Ciapponi

Two distinct and independent sites on IL-6 trigger gp 130 dimer formation and signalling.

The helical cytokine interleukin (IL) 6 and its specific binding subunit IL‐6R alpha form a 1:1 complex which, by promoting homodimerization of the signalling subunit gp130 on the surface of target cells, triggers intracellular responses. We expressed differently tagged forms of gp130 and used them in solution‐phase binding assays to show that the soluble extracellular domains of gp130 undergo dimerization in the absence of membranes. In vitro receptor assembly reactions were also performed in the presence of two sets of IL‐6 variants carrying amino acid substitutions in two distinct areas of the cytokine surface (site 2, comprising exposed residues in the A and C helices, and site 3, in the terminal part of the CD loop). The binding affinity to IL‐6R alpha of these variants is normal but their biological activity is poor or absent. We demonstrate here that both the site 2 and site 3 IL‐6 variants complexed with IL‐6R alpha bind a single gp130 molecule but are unable to dimerize it, whereas the combined site 2/3 variants lose the ability to interact with gp130. The binding properties of these variants in vitro, and the result of using a neutralizing monoclonal antibody directed against site 3, lead to the conclusion that gp130 dimer is formed through direct binding at two independent and differently oriented sites on IL‐6. Immunoprecipitation experiments further reveal that the fully assembled receptor complex is composed of two IL‐6, two IL‐6R alpha and two gp130 molecules. We propose here a model representing the IL‐6 receptor complex as hexameric, which might be common to other helical cytokines.

Generation of interleukin-6 receptor antagonists by molecular-modeling guided mutagenesis of residues important for gp130 activation

Interleukin‐6 (IL‐6) drives the sequential assembly of a receptor complex formed by the IL‐6 receptor (IL‐6R alpha) and the signal transducing subunit, gp130. A model of human IL‐6 (hIL‐6) was constructed by homology using the structure of bovine granulocyte colony stimulating factor. The modeled cytokine was predicted to interact sequentially with the cytokine binding domains of IL‐6R alpha and gp130 bridging them in a way similar to that of the interaction between growth hormone and its homodimeric receptor. Several residues on helices A and C which were predicted as contact points between IL‐6 and gp130 and therefore essential for IL‐6 signal transduction, were subjected to site‐directed mutagenesis individually or in combined form. Interestingly, while single amino acid changes never produced major alterations in IL‐6 bioactivity, a subset of double mutants of Y31 and G35 showed a considerable reduction of biological activity and were selectively impaired from associating with gp130 in binding assays in vitro, while they maintained wild‐type affinity towards hIL‐6‐R alpha. More importantly, we demonstrated the antagonistic effect of mutant Y31D/G35F versus wild‐type IL‐6.

Rational design of a receptor super-antagonist of human interleukin-6.

Interleukin‐6 (IL‐6) is a differentiation and growth factor for a variety of cell types and its excessive production plays a major role in the pathogenesis of multiple myeloma and post‐menopausal osteoporosis. IL‐6, a four‐helix bundle cytokine, is believed to interact sequentially with two transmembrane receptors, the low‐affinity IL‐6 receptor (IL‐6R alpha) and the signal transducer gp130, via distinct binding sites. In this paper we show that combined mutations in the predicted A and C helices, previously suggested to establish contacts with gp130, give rise to variants with no bioactivity but unimpaired binding to IL‐6R alpha. These mutants behave as full and selective IL‐6 receptor antagonists on a variety of human cell lines. Furthermore, a bifacial mutant was generated (called IL‐6 super‐antagonist) in which the antagonist mutations were combined with amino acid substitutions in the predicted D helix that increase binding for IL‐6R alpha. The IL‐6 super‐antagonist has no bioactivity, but improved first receptor occupancy and, therefore, fully inhibits the wild‐type cytokine at low dosage. The demonstration of functionally independent receptor binding sites on IL‐6 suggests that it could be possible to design super‐antagonists of other helical cytokines which drive the assembly of structurally related multisubunit receptor complexes.

The Drosophila Mre11/Rad50 Complex Is Required to Prevent Both Telomeric Fusion and Chromosome Breakage

The MRN complex consists of the two evolutionarily conserved components Mre11 and Rad50 and the third less-conserved component Nbs1/Xrs2. This complex mediates telomere maintenance in addition to a variety of functions in response to DNA double-strand breaks, including homologous recombination, nonhomologous end joining (NHEJ), and activation of DNA damage checkpoints. Mutations in the Mre11 gene cause the human ataxia-telangiectasia-like disorder (ATDL). Here, we show that null mutations in the Drosophila mre11 and rad50 genes cause both telomeric fusion and chromosome breakage. Moreover, we demonstrate that these mutations are in the same epistasis group required for telomere capping and mitotic chromosome integrity. Using an antibody against Rad50, we show that this protein is uniformly distributed along mitotic chromosomes, and that Rad50 is unstable in the absence of its binding partner Mre11. To define the roles of rad50 and mre11 in telomere protection, mutant chromosome preparations were immunostained for both HP1 and HOAP, two proteins that protect Drosophila telomeres from fusion. Cytological analysis revealed that mutations in rad50 and mre11 drastically reduce accumulation of HOAP and HP1 at telomeres. This suggests that the MRN complex protects Drosophila telomeres by facilitating recruitment of HOAP and HP1 at chromosome ends.

Identification of Drosophila Mitotic Genes by Combining Co-Expression Analysis and RNA Interference

RNAi screens have, to date, identified many genes required for mitotic divisions of Drosophila tissue culture cells. However, the inventory of such genes remains incomplete. We have combined the powers of bioinformatics and RNAi technology to detect novel mitotic genes. We found that Drosophila genes involved in mitosis tend to be transcriptionally co-expressed. We thus constructed a co-expression–based list of 1,000 genes that are highly enriched in mitotic functions, and we performed RNAi for each of these genes. By limiting the number of genes to be examined, we were able to perform a very detailed phenotypic analysis of RNAi cells. We examined dsRNA-treated cells for possible abnormalities in both chromosome structure and spindle organization. This analysis allowed the identification of 142 mitotic genes, which were subdivided into 18 phenoclusters. Seventy of these genes have not previously been associated with mitotic defects; 30 of them are required for spindle assembly and/or chromosome segregation, and 40 are required to prevent spontaneous chromosome breakage. We note that the latter type of genes has never been detected in previous RNAi screens in any system. Finally, we found that RNAi against genes encoding kinetochore components or highly conserved splicing factors results in identical defects in chromosome segregation, highlighting an unanticipated role of splicing factors in centromere function. These findings indicate that our co-expression–based method for the detection of mitotic functions works remarkably well. We can foresee that elaboration of co-expression lists using genes in the same phenocluster will provide many candidate genes for small-scale RNAi screens aimed at completing the inventory of mitotic proteins.

The mechanism of telomere protection: a comparison between Drosophila and humans

Drosophila telomeres are maintained by transposition of specialized retrotransposons rather than by telomerase activity, and their stability is independent of the sequence of DNA termini. Recent studies have identified several proteins that protect Drosophila telomeres from fusion events. These proteins include the telomere capping factors HP1/ORC-associated protein (HOAP) and heterochromatin protein 1 (HP1), the Rad50 and Mre11 DNA repair proteins that are required for HOAP and HP1 localization at telomeres, and the ATM kinase. Another telomere-protecting factor identified in Drosophila is UbcD1, a polypeptide highly homologous to class I ubiquitin-conjugating E2 enzymes. In addition, it has been shown that HP1 and both components of the Drosophila Ku70/80 heterodimer act as negative regulators of telomere length. Except for HOAP, all these proteins are conserved in humans and are associated with human telomeres. Collectively, these results indicate that Drosophila is an excellent model system for the analysis of the mechanisms of telomere maintenance. In past and current studies, 15 Drosophila genes have been identified that prevent telomeric fusion, and it has been estimated that the Drosophila genome contains at least 40 genes required for telomere protection. We believe that the molecular characterization of these genes will lead to identification of many novel human genes with roles in telomere maintenance.

Verrocchio, a Drosophila OB fold-containing protein, is a component of the terminin telomere-capping complex

Drosophila telomeres are elongated by transposition of specialized retroelements rather than telomerase activity, and are assembled independently of the terminal DNA sequence. Drosophila telomeres are protected by terminin, a complex that includes the HOAP (Heterochromatin Protein 1/origin recognition complex-associated protein) and Moi (Modigliani) proteins and shares the properties of human shelterin. Here we show that Verrocchio (Ver), an oligonucleotide/oligosaccharide-binding (OB) fold-containing protein related to Rpa2/Stn1, interacts physically with HOAP and Moi, is enriched only at telomeres, and prevents telomere fusion. These results indicate that Ver is a new terminin component; we speculate that, concomitant with telomerase loss, Drosophila evolved terminin to bind chromosome ends independently of the DNA sequence.

The Drosophila Nbs Protein Functions in Multiple Pathways for the Maintenance of Genome Stability

The Mre11/Rad50/Nbs (MRN) complex and the two protein kinases ATM and ATR play critical roles in the response to DNA damage and telomere maintenance in mammalian systems. It has been previously shown that mutations in the Drosophila mre11 and rad50 genes cause both telomere fusion and chromosome breakage. Here, we have analyzed the role of the Drosophila nbs gene in telomere protection and the maintenance of chromosome integrity. Larval brain cells of nbs mutants display telomeric associations (TAs) but the frequency of these TAs is lower than in either mre11 or rad50 mutants. Consistently, Rad50 accumulates in the nuclei of wild-type cells but not in those of nbs cells, indicating that Nbs mediates transport of the Mre11/Rad50 complex in the nucleus. Moreover, epistasis analysis revealed that rad50 nbs, tefu (ATM) nbs, and mei-41 (ATR) nbs double mutants have significantly higher frequencies of TAs than either of the corresponding single mutants. This suggests that Nbs and the Mre11/Rad50 complex play partially independent roles in telomere protection and that Nbs functions in both ATR- and ATM-controlled telomere protection pathways. In contrast, analysis of chromosome breakage indicated that the three components of the MRN complex function in a single pathway for the repair of the DNA damage leading to chromosome aberrations.

The Drosophila modigliani (moi) gene encodes a HOAP-interacting protein required for telomere protection

Several proteins have been identified that protect Drosophila telomeres from fusion events. They include UbcD1, HP1, HOAP, the components of the Mre11-Rad50-Nbs (MRN) complex, the ATM kinase, and the putative transcription factor Woc. Of these proteins, only HOAP has been shown to localize specifically at telomeres. Here we show that the modigliani gene encodes a protein (Moi) that is enriched only at telomeres, colocalizes and physically interacts with HOAP, and is required to prevent telomeric fusions. Moi is encoded by the bicistronic CG31241 locus. This locus produces a single transcript that contains 2 ORFs that specify different essential functions. One of these ORFs encodes the 20-kDa Moi protein. The other encodes a 60-kDa protein homologous to RNA methyltransferases that is not required for telomere protection (Drosophila Tat-like). Moi and HOAP share several properties with the components of shelterin, the protein complex that protects human telomeres. HOAP and Moi are not evolutionarily conserved unlike the other proteins implicated in Drosophila telomere protection. Similarly, none of the shelterin subunits is conserved in Drosophila, while most human nonshelterin proteins have Drosophila homologues. This suggests that the HOAP-Moi complex, we name “terminin,” plays a specific role in the DNA sequence-independent assembly of Drosophila telomeres. We speculate that this complex is functionally analogous to shelterin, which binds chromosome ends in a sequence-dependent manner.

Terminin: a protein complex that mediates epigenetic maintenance of Drosophila telomeres.

In most organisms, telomeres are extended by telomerase and contain GC-rich repeats. Drosophila telomeres are elongated by occasional transposition of specialized retroelements rather than telomerase activity, and are assembled independently of the sequence of the DNA termini. Recent work has shown that Drosophila telomeres are capped by a complex, we call terminin, which includes HOAP, HipHop, Moi and Ver; these are fast-evolving proteins that prevent telomere fusion, directly interact with each other, and appear to localize and function only at telomeres. With the possible exception of Ver that contains an OB fold domain structurally similar to the Stn1 OB fold, none of the terminin proteins is evolutionarily conserved outside the Drosophila species. Human telomeres are protected by the shelterin complex, which comprises six proteins that bind chromosome ends in a sequence-dependent manner. Shelterin subunits are not fast-evolving proteins and are not conserved in flies, but localize and function only at telomeres like the terminin components. Based on these findings, we propose that concomitant with telomerase loss Drosophila rapidly evolved terminin to bind chromosome ends in a sequence-independent fashion, and that terminin is functionally analogous to shelterin.