Generalizable Compositional Features Influencing the Proteostatic Fates of Polar Low-Complexity Domains

Protein aggregation is associated with a growing list of human diseases. A substantial fraction of proteins in eukaryotic proteomes constitutes a proteostasis network—a collection of proteins that work together to maintain properly folded proteins. One of the overarching functions of the proteostasis network is the prevention or reversal of protein aggregation. How proteins aggregate in spite of the anti-aggregation activity of the proteostasis machinery is incompletely understood. Exposed hydrophobic patches can trigger degradation by the ubiquitin-proteasome system, a key branch of the proteostasis network. However, in a recent study, we found that model glycine (G)-rich or glutamine/asparagine (Q/N)-rich prion-like domains differ in their susceptibility to detection and degradation by this system. Here, we expand upon this work by examining whether the features controlling the degradation of our model prion-like domains generalize broadly to G-rich and Q/N-rich domains. Experimentally, native yeast G-rich domains in isolation are sensitive to the degradation-promoting effects of hydrophobic residues, whereas native Q/N-rich domains completely resist these effects and tend to aggregate instead. Bioinformatic analyses indicate that native G-rich domains from yeast and humans tend to avoid degradation-promoting features, suggesting that the proteostasis network may act as a form of selection at the molecular level that constrains the sequence space accessible to G-rich domains. However, the sensitivity or resistance of G-rich and Q/N-rich domains, respectively, was not always preserved in their native protein contexts, highlighting that proteins can evolve other sequence features to overcome the intrinsic sensitivity of some LCDs to degradation.

Is mRNA decapping by ApaH like phosphatases present in eukaryotes beyond the Kinetoplastida?

Background ApaH like phosphatases (ALPHs) originate from the bacterial ApaH protein and have been identified in all eukaryotic super-groups. Only two of these proteins have been functionally characterised. We have shown that the ApaH like phosphatase ALPH1 from the Kinetoplastid Trypanosoma brucei is the mRNA decapping enzyme of the parasite. In eukaryotes, Dcp2 is the major mRNA decapping enzyme and mRNA decapping by ALPHs is unprecedented, but the bacterial ApaH protein was recently found decapping non-conventional caps of bacterial mRNAs. These findings prompted us to explore whether mRNA decapping by ALPHs is restricted to Kinetoplastida or could be more widespread among eukaryotes. Results We screened 827 eukaryotic proteomes with a newly developed Python-based algorithm for the presence of ALPHs and used the data to characterize the phylogenetic distribution, conserved features, additional domains and predicted intracellular localisation of this protein family. For most organisms, we found ALPH proteins to be either absent (495/827 organisms) or to have non-cytoplasmic localisation predictions (73% of all ALPHs), excluding a function in mRNA decapping. Although, non-cytoplasmic ALPH proteins had in vitro mRNA decapping activity. Only 71 non-Kinetoplastida have ALPH proteins with predicted cytoplasmic localisations. However, in contrast to Kinetoplastida, these organisms also possess a homologue of Dcp2 and in contrast to ALPH1 of Kinetoplastida, these ALPH proteins are very short and consist of the catalytic domain only. Conclusions ALPH was present in the last common ancestor of eukaryotes, but most eukaryotes have either lost the enzyme, or use it exclusively outside the cytoplasm. The acceptance of mRNA as a substrate indicates that ALPHs, like bacterial ApaH, have a wide substrate range: the need to protect mRNAs from unregulated degradation is one possible explanation for the selection against the presence of cytoplasmic ALPH proteins in most eukaryotes. Kinetoplastida succeeded to exploit ALPH as their only or major mRNA decapping enzyme. 71 eukaryotic organisms outside the Kinetoplastid lineage have short ALPH proteins with cytoplasmic localisation predictions: whether these proteins are used as decapping enzymes in addition to Dcp2 or else have adapted to not accept mRNAs as a substrate, remains to be explored.

Accurate contact-based modelling of repeat proteins predicts the structure of new repeats protein families

Repeat proteins are abundant in eukaryotic proteomes. They are involved in many eukaryotic specific functions, including signalling. For many of these proteins, the structure is not known, as they are difficult to crystallise. Today, using direct coupling analysis and deep learning it is often possible to predict a protein’s structure. However, the unique sequence features present in repeat proteins have been a challenge to use direct coupling analysis for predicting contacts. Here, we show that deep learning-based methods (trRosetta, DeepMetaPsicov (DMP) and PconsC4) overcomes this problem and can predict intra- and inter-unit contacts in repeat proteins. In a benchmark dataset of 815 repeat proteins, about 90% can be correctly modelled. Further, among 48 PFAM families lacking a protein structure, we produce models of forty-one families with estimated high accuracy.

Is mRNA decapping activity of ApaH like phosphatases (ALPH’s) the reason for the loss of cytoplasmic ALPH’s in all eukaryotes but Kinetoplastida?

Background: ApaH like phosphatases (ALPHs) originate from the bacterial ApaH protein and are present in eukaryotes of all eukaryotic super-groups; still, only two proteins have been functionally characterised. One is ALPH1 from the Kinetoplastid Trypanosoma brucei that we recently found to be the mRNA decapping enzyme of the parasite . mRNA decapping by ALPHs is unprecedented in eukaryotes, which usually use nudix hydrolases, but the bacterial ancestor protein ApaH was recently found to decap non-conventional caps of bacterial mRNAs. These findings prompted us to explore whether mRNA decapping by ALPHs is restricted to Kinetoplastida or more widespread among eukaryotes. Results: We screened 824 eukaryotic proteomes with a newly developed Python-based algorithm for the presence of ALPHs and used the data to refine phylogenetic distribution, conserved features, additional domains and predicted intracellular localisation of ALPHs. We found that most eukaryotes have either no ALPH (500/824) or very short ALPHs, consisting almost exclusively of the catalytic domain. These ALPHs had mostly predicted non-cytoplasmic localisations, often supported by the presence of transmembrane helices and signal peptides and in two cases (one in this study) by experimental data. The only exceptions were ALPH1 homologues from Kinetoplastida, that all have unique C-terminal and mostly unique N-terminal extension, and at least the T. brucei enzyme localises to the cytoplasm. Surprisingly, despite of these non-cytoplasmic localisations, ALPHs from all eukaryotic super-groups had in vitro mRNA decapping activity. Conclusions: ALPH was present in the last common ancestor of eukaryotes, but most eukaryotes have either lost the enzyme since, or use it exclusively outside the cytoplasm in organelles in a version consisting of the catalytic domain only. While our data provide no evidence for the presence of further mRNA decapping enzymes among eukaryotic ALPHs, the broad substrate range of ALPHs that includes mRNA caps provides an explanation for the selection against the presence of a cytoplasmic ALPH protein as a mean to protect mRNAs from unregulated degradation. Kinetoplastida succeeded to exploit ALPH as their mRNA decapping enzyme, likely using the Kinetoplastida-unique N- and C-terminal extensions for regulation.

Is mRNA decapping activity of ApaH like phosphatases (ALPH’s) the reason for the loss of cytoplasmic ALPH’s in all eukaryotes but Kinetoplastida?

ABSTRACTBackgroundApaH like phosphatases (ALPHs) originate from the bacterial ApaH protein and are present in eukaryotes of all eukaryotic super-groups; still, only two proteins have been functionally characterised. One is ALPH1 from the Kinetoplastid Trypanosoma brucei that we recently found to be the mRNA decapping enzyme of the parasite. mRNA decapping by ALPHs is unprecedented in eukaryotes, which usually use nudix hydrolases, but the bacterial ancestor protein ApaH was recently found to decap non-conventional caps of bacterial mRNAs. These findings prompted us to explore whether mRNA decapping by ALPHs is restricted to Kinetoplastida or more widespread among eukaryotes.ResultsWe screened 824 eukaryotic proteomes with a newly developed Python-based algorithm for the presence of ALPHs and used the data to refine phylogenetic distribution, conserved features, additional domains and predicted intracellular localisation of ALPHs. We found that most eukaryotes have either no ALPH (500/824) or very short ALPHs, consisting almost exclusively of the catalytic domain. These ALPHs had mostly predicted non-cytoplasmic localisations, often supported by the presence of transmembrane helices and signal peptides and in two cases (one in this study) by experimental data. The only exceptions were ALPH1 homologues from Kinetoplastida, that all have unique C-terminal and mostly unique N-terminal extension, and at least the T. brucei enzyme localises to the cytoplasm. Surprisingly, despite of these non-cytoplasmic localisations, ALPHs from all eukaryotic super-groups had in vitro mRNA decapping activity.ConclusionsALPH was present in the last common ancestor of eukaryotes, but most eukaryotes have either lost the enzyme since, or use it exclusively outside the cytoplasm in organelles in a version consisting of the catalytic domain only. While our data provide no evidence for the presence of further mRNA decapping enzymes among eukaryotic ALPHs, the broad substrate range of ALPHs that includes mRNA caps provides an explanation for the selection against the presence of a cytoplasmic ALPH protein as a mean to protect mRNAs from unregulated degradation. Kinetoplastida succeeded to exploit ALPH as their mRNA decapping enzyme, likely using the Kinetoplastida-unique N- and C-terminal extensions for regulation.

The protein domains of vertebrate species in which selection is more effective have greater intrinsic structural disorder

The effectiveness of selection varies among species. It is often estimated by means of an “effective population size” based on neutral polymorphism, but this is confounded in complex ways with demography. The strength of codon bias more directly pertains to how well adaptation at many sites can be maintained in the face of deleterious mutations, but past metrics that compare codon bias across species are confounded by among-species variation in %GC content and/or amino acid composition. Here we propose a new Codon Adaptation Index of Species (CAIS) that corrects for both confounders. Unlike previous metrics, CAIS yields the expected relationship with adult vertebrate body mass. As an example of the use of CAIS, we ask whether protein domains evolve lower intrinsic structural disorder (ISD) when present in more exquisitely adapted species, as expected given that ISD is higher in eukaryotic proteomes than prokaryotic proteomes. Using phylogenetically corrected linear models, we find, contrary to expectations, that the ISD of a given protein domain evolves to be higher when in well-adapted species. This effect is stronger in young protein domains but is also present in ancient domains.

Eukaryotic cell biology is temporally coordinated to support the energetic demands of protein homeostasis

Yeast physiology is temporally regulated, this becomes apparent under nutrient-limited conditions and results in respiratory oscillations (YROs). YROs share features with circadian rhythms and interact with, but are independent of, the cell division cycle. Here, we show that YROs minimise energy expenditure by restricting protein synthesis until sufficient resources are stored, while maintaining osmotic homeostasis and protein quality control. Although nutrient supply is constant, cells sequester and store metabolic resources via increased transport, autophagy and biomolecular condensation. Replete stores trigger increased H+ export which stimulates TORC1 and liberates proteasomes, ribosomes, chaperones and metabolic enzymes from non-membrane bound compartments. This facilitates translational bursting, liquidation of storage carbohydrates, increased ATP turnover, and the export of osmolytes. We propose that dynamic regulation of ion transport and metabolic plasticity are required to maintain osmotic and protein homeostasis during remodelling of eukaryotic proteomes, and that bioenergetic constraints selected for temporal organisation that promotes oscillatory behaviour.

Emerging Roles of USP18: From Biology to Pathophysiology

Eukaryotic proteomes are enormously sophisticated through versatile post-translational modifications (PTMs) of proteins. A large variety of code generated via PTMs of proteins by ubiquitin (ubiquitination) and ubiquitin-like proteins (Ubls), such as interferon (IFN)-stimulated gene 15 (ISG15), small ubiquitin-related modifier (SUMO) and neural precursor cell expressed, developmentally downregulated 8 (NEDD8), not only provides distinct signals but also orchestrates a plethora of biological processes, thereby underscoring the necessity for sophisticated and fine-tuned mechanisms of code regulation. Deubiquitinases (DUBs) play a pivotal role in the disassembly of the complex code and removal of the signal. Ubiquitin-specific protease 18 (USP18), originally referred to as UBP43, is a major DUB that reverses the PTM of target proteins by ISG15 (ISGylation). Intriguingly, USP18 is a multifaceted protein that not only removes ISG15 or ubiquitin from conjugated proteins in a deconjugating activity-dependent manner but also acts as a negative modulator of type I IFN signaling, irrespective of its catalytic activity. The function of USP18 has become gradually clear, but not yet been completely addressed. In this review, we summarize recent advances in our understanding of the multifaceted roles of USP18. We also highlight new insights into how USP18 is implicated not only in physiology but also in pathogenesis of various human diseases, involving infectious diseases, neurological disorders, and cancers. Eventually, we integrate a discussion of the potential of therapeutic interventions for targeting USP18 for disease treatment.

Eukaryotic cell biology is temporally coordinated to support the energetic demands of protein homeostasis

Every aspect of yeast physiology is subject to robust temporal regulation, this becomes apparent under nutrient-limiting conditions 1-6 and results in biological oscillations whose function and mechanism is poorly resolved7. These yeast metabolic oscillations share features with circadian rhythms and typically interact with, but are independent of, the cell division cycle. Here we show that these cellular rhythms act to minimise energy expenditure by temporally restricting protein synthesis until sufficient cellular resources are present, whilst maintaining osmotic homeostasis and protein quality control. Although nutrient supply is constant, cells initially ‘sequester and store’ metabolic resources such as carbohydrates, amino acids, K+ and other osmolytes; which accumulate via increased synthesis, transport, autophagy and biomolecular condensation that is stimulated by low glucose and cytosolic acidification. Replete stores trigger increased H+ export to elevate cytosolic pH, thereby stimulating TORC1 and liberating proteasomes, ribosomes, chaperones and metabolic enzymes from non-membrane bound compartments. This facilitates a burst of increased protein synthesis, the liquidation of storage carbohydrates to sustain higher respiration rates and increased ATP turnover, and the export of osmolytes to maintain osmotic potential. As the duration of translational bursting is determined by cell-intrinsic factors, the period of oscillation is determined by the time cells take to store sufficient resources to license passage through the pH-dependent metabolic checkpoint that initiates translational bursting. We propose that dynamic regulation of ion transport and metabolic plasticity are required to maintain osmotic and protein homeostasis during remodelling of eukaryotic proteomes, and that bioenergetic constraints have selected for temporal organisation that promotes oscillatory behaviour.

Descent of Bacteria and Eukarya From an Archaeal Root of Life

The 3 biological domains delineated based on small subunit ribosomal RNAs (SSU rRNAs) are confronted by uncertainties regarding the relationship between Archaea and Bacteria, and the origin of Eukarya. The similarities between the paralogous valyl-tRNA and isoleucyl-tRNA synthetases in 5398 species estimated by BLASTP, which decreased from Archaea to Bacteria and further to Eukarya, were consistent with vertical gene transmission from an archaeal root of life close to Methanopyrus kandleri through a Primitive Archaea Cluster to an Ancestral Bacteria Cluster, and to Eukarya. The predominant similarities of the ribosomal proteins (rProts) of eukaryotes toward archaeal rProts relative to bacterial rProts established that an archaeal parent rather than a bacterial parent underwent genome merger with bacteria to generate eukaryotes with mitochondria. Eukaryogenesis benefited from the predominantly archaeal accelerated gene adoption (AGA) phenotype pertaining to horizontally transferred genes from other prokaryotes and expedited genome evolution via both gene-content mutations and nucleotidyl mutations. Archaeons endowed with substantial AGA activity were accordingly favored as candidate archaeal parents. Based on the top similarity bitscores displayed by their proteomes toward the eukaryotic proteomes of Giardia and Trichomonas, and high AGA activity, the Aciduliprofundum archaea were identified as leading candidates of the archaeal parent. The Asgard archaeons and a number of bacterial species were among the foremost potential contributors of eukaryotic-like proteins to Eukarya.