Saccharomyces cerevisiae Kelch proteins and Bud14 protein form a stable 520-kDa formin regulatory complex that controls actin cable assembly and cell morphogenesis

Bud14 function is crucial for spindle pole body size maintenance

Background/aim

Spindle pole bodies (SPB), the functional equivalent of centrosomes in yeast, duplicate through generation of a new SPB next to the old one. However, SPBs are dynamic structures that can grow and exchange, and mechanisms that regulate SPB size remain largely unknown. This study aims to elucidate the role of Bud14 in SPB size maintenance in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

Materials and methods

We employed quantitative fluorescence microscopy to assess the relative and absolute amounts of SPB structural proteins at SPBs of wildtype cells and in cells lacking BUD14 (bud14Δ). Quantifications were performed using asynchronous cell cultures, as well as cultures synchronously progressing through the cell cycle and upon different cell cycle arrests. We also utilized mutants that allow the separation of Bud14 functions.

Results

Our results indicate that higher levels of SPB inner, outer, and central plaque proteins are present at the SPBs of bud14Δ cells compared to wildtype cells during anaphase, as well as during nocodazole-induced M-phase arrest. However, during α-factor mediated G1 arrest, inner and outer plaque proteins responded differently to the absence of BUD14. A Bud14 mutant that cannot interact with the Protein Phosphatase 1 (Glc7) phenocopied bud14Δ in terms of SPB-bound levels of the inner plaque protein Spc110, whereas disruption of Bud14-Kel1-Kel2 complex did not alter Spc110 levels at SPBs. In cells synchronously released from α-factor arrest, lack of Bud14-Glc7 caused increase of Spc110 at the SPBs at early stages of the cell cycle.

Conclusion

We identified Bud14 as a critical protein for SPB size maintenance. The interaction of Bud14 with Glc7, but not with the Kelch proteins, is indispensable for restricting levels of Spc110 incorporated into the SPBs.

Phosphorylation of RGS regulates MAP kinase localization and promotes completion of cytokinesis

Phosphorylation of the RGS Sst2 alters its subcellular distribution, MAPK localization, and interaction with Kel1, which promotes coordination of polarized growth with completion of cytokinesis.

Yeast use the G-protein–coupled receptor signaling pathway to detect and track the mating pheromone. The G-protein–coupled receptor pathway is inhibited by the regulator of G-protein signaling (RGS) Sst2 which induces Gα GTPase activity and inactivation of downstream signaling. G-protein signaling activates the MAPK Fus3, which phosphorylates the RGS; however, the role of this modification is unknown. We found that pheromone-induced RGS phosphorylation peaks early; the phospho-state of RGS controls its localization and influences MAPK spatial distribution. Surprisingly, phosphorylation of the RGS promotes completion of cytokinesis before pheromone-induced growth. Completion of cytokinesis in the presence of pheromone is promoted by the kelch-repeat protein, Kel1 and antagonized by the formin Bni1. We found that RGS complexes with Kel1 and prefers the unphosphorylatable RGS mutant. We also found overexpression of unphosphorylatable RGS exacerbates cytokinetic defects, whereas they are rescued by overexpression of Kel1. These data lead us to a model where Kel1 promotes completion of cytokinesis before pheromone-induced polarity but is inhibited by unphosphorylated RGS binding.

Kel1 is a phosphorylation-regulated noise suppressor of the pheromone signaling pathway

Mechanisms have evolved that allow cells to detect signals and generate an appropriate response. The accuracy of these responses relies on the ability of cells to discriminate between signal and noise. How cells filter noise in signaling pathways is not well understood. Here, we analyze noise suppression in the yeast pheromone signaling pathway and show that the poorly characterized protein Kel1 serves as a major noise suppressor and prevents cell death. At the molecular level, Kel1 prevents spontaneous activation of the pheromone response by inhibiting membrane recruitment of Ste5 and Far1. Only a hypophosphorylated form of Kel1 suppresses signaling, reduces noise, and prevents pheromone-associated cell death, and our data indicate that the MAPK Fus3 contributes to Kel1 phosphorylation. Taken together, Kel1 serves as a phospho-regulated suppressor of the pheromone pathway to reduce noise, inhibit spontaneous activation of the pathway, regulate mating efficiency, and prevent pheromone-associated cell death.

Protein phosphatase 1 in association with Bud14 inhibits mitotic exit in Saccharomyces cerevisiae

Mitotic exit in budding yeast is dependent on correct orientation of the mitotic spindle along the cell polarity axis. When accurate positioning of the spindle fails, a surveillance mechanism named the spindle position checkpoint (SPOC) prevents cells from exiting mitosis. Mutants with a defective SPOC become multinucleated and lose their genomic integrity. Yet, a comprehensive understanding of the SPOC mechanism is missing. In this study, we identified the type 1 protein phosphatase, Glc7, in association with its regulatory protein Bud14 as a novel checkpoint component. We further showed that Glc7-Bud14 promotes dephosphorylation of the SPOC effector protein Bfa1. Our results suggest a model in which two mechanisms act in parallel for a robust checkpoint response: first, the SPOC kinase Kin4 isolates Bfa1 away from the inhibitory kinase Cdc5, and second, Glc7-Bud14 dephosphorylates Bfa1 to fully activate the checkpoint effector.

Bidirectional Genetic Control of Phenotypic Heterogeneity and Its Implication for Cancer Drug Resistance

Negative genetic regulators of phenotypic heterogeneity, or phenotypic capacitors/stabilizers, elevate population average fitness by limiting deviation from the optimal phenotype and increase the efficacy of natural selection by enhancing the phenotypic differences among genotypes. Stabilizers can presumably be switched off to release phenotypic heterogeneity in the face of extreme or fluctuating environments to ensure population survival. This task could, however, also be achieved by positive genetic regulators of phenotypic heterogeneity, or "phenotypic diversifiers," as shown by recently reported evidence that a bacterial divisome factor enhances antibiotic resistance. We hypothesized that such active creation of phenotypic heterogeneity by diversifiers, which is functionally independent of stabilizers, is more common than previously recognized. Using morphological phenotypic data from 4,718 single-gene knockout strains of Saccharomyces cerevisiae, we systematically identified 324 stabilizers and 160 diversifiers and constructed a bipartite network between these genes and the morphological traits they control. Further analyses showed that, compared with stabilizers, diversifiers tended to be weaker and more promiscuous (regulating more traits) regulators targeting traits unrelated to fitness. Moreover, there is a general division of labor between stabilizers and diversifiers. Finally, by incorporating NCI-60 human cancer cell line anticancer drug screening data, we found that human one-to-one orthologs of yeast diversifiers/stabilizers likely regulate the anticancer drug resistance of human cancer cell lines, suggesting that these orthologs are potential targets for auxiliary treatments. Our study therefore highlights stabilizers and diversifiers as the genetic regulators for the bidirectional control of phenotypic heterogeneity as well as their distinct evolutionary roles and functional independence.

UmTea1, a Kelch and BAR domain-containing protein, acts at the cell cortex to regulate cell morphogenesis in the dimorphic fungus Ustilago maydis

The spatial organization of a cell is crucial for distribution of cell components and for cell morphogenesis in all organisms. Ustilago maydis, a basidiomycete fungus, has a yeast-like and a filamentous form. The former buds once per cell cycle at one of the cell poles, and can use the same site repeatedly or choose a new site at the same pole or opposite pole. The filamentous form consists of a long apical cell with short septate basal compartments lacking cytoplasm. It grows at the apex and can reverse growth forming a new growth zone at the basal end. We are interested in understanding how these different morphologies are generated. Here we present identification and characterization of U. maydis Tea1, a homologue of the fission yeast cell end marker Tea1. We demonstrate that UmTea1, a Kelch domain protein, interacts with itself and is an important determinant of the site of polarized growth: tea1 mutants bud simultaneously from both cell poles and form bifurcate buds. UmTea1 also regulates septum positioning, cell wall deposition, cell and neck width, coordination of nuclear division and cell separation, and localization of sterol-rich membrane domains. Some of these functions are shared with UmTea4, another cell end marker. We show that Tea1::GFP localizes to sites of polarized or potential polarized growth and to the septation site in the yeast-like form. Additionally, localization of Tea1::GFP as rings along the filament suggests that the filament undergoes septation. We hypothesize that Tea1 may act as a scaffold for the assembly of proteins that determine the site of polarized growth.

Bioavailability of Nutritional Resources From Cells Killed by Oxidation Supports Expansion of Survivors in Ustilago maydis Populations

After heavy exposure of Ustilago maydis cells to clastogens, a great increase in viability was observed if the treated cells were kept under starvation conditions. This restitution of viability is based on cell multiplication at the expense of the intracellular compounds freed from the damaged cells. Analysis of the effect of the leaked material on the growth of undamaged cells revealed opposing biological activity, indicating that U. maydis must possess cellular mechanisms involved not only in reabsorption of the released compounds from external environment but also in contending with their treatment-induced toxicity. From a screen for mutants defective in the restitution of viability, we identified four genes (adr1, did4, kel1, and tbp1) that contribute to the process. The mutants in did4, kel1, and tbp1 exhibited sensitivity to different genotoxic agents implying that the gene products are in some overlapping fashion involved in the protection of genome integrity. The genetic determinants identified by our analysis have already been known to play roles in growth regulation, protein turnover, cytoskeleton structure, and transcription. We discuss ecological and evolutionary implications of these results.

The final cut: cell polarity meets cytokinesis at the bud neck in S. cerevisiae

Cell division is a fundamental but complex process that gives rise to two daughter cells. It includes an ordered set of events, altogether called "the cell cycle", that culminate with cytokinesis, the final stage of mitosis leading to the physical separation of the two daughter cells. Symmetric cell division equally partitions cellular components between the two daughter cells, which are therefore identical to one another and often share the same fate. In many cases, however, cell division is asymmetrical and generates two daughter cells that differ in specific protein inheritance, cell size, or developmental potential. The budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae has proven to be an excellent system to investigate the molecular mechanisms governing asymmetric cell division and cytokinesis. Budding yeast is highly polarized during the cell cycle and divides asymmetrically, producing two cells with distinct sizes and fates. Many components of the machinery establishing cell polarization during budding are relocalized to the division site (i.e., the bud neck) for cytokinesis. In this review we recapitulate how budding yeast cells undergo polarized processes at the bud neck for cell division.

Control of Formin Distribution and Actin Cable Assembly by the E3 Ubiquitin Ligases Dma1 and Dma2

Formins are widespread actin-polymerizing proteins that play pivotal roles in a number of processes, such as cell polarity, morphogenesis, cytokinesis, and cell migration. In agreement with their crucial function, formins are prone to a variety of regulatory mechanisms that include autoinhibition, post-translational modifications, and interaction with formin modulators. Furthermore, activation and function of formins is intimately linked to their ability to interact with membranes. In the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the two formins Bni1 and Bnr1 play both separate and overlapping functions in the organization of the actin cytoskeleton. In addition, they are controlled by both common and different regulatory mechanisms. Here we show that proper localization of both formins requires the redundant E3 ubiquitin ligases Dma1 and Dma2, which were previously involved in spindle positioning and septin organization. In dma1 dma2 double mutants, formin distribution at polarity sites is impaired, thus causing defects in the organization of the actin cable network and hypersensitivity to the actin depolymerizer latrunculin B. Expression of a hyperactive variant of Bni1 (Bni1-V360D) rescues these defects and partially restores proper spindle positioning in the mutant, suggesting that the failure of dma1 dma2 mutant cells to position the spindle is partly due to faulty formin activity. Strikingly, Dma1/2 interact physically with both formins, while their ubiquitin-ligase activity is required for formin function and polarized localization. Thus, ubiquitylation of formin or a formin interactor(s) could promote formin binding to membrane and its ability to nucleate actin. Altogether, our data highlight a novel level of formin regulation that further expands our knowledge of the complex and multilayered controls of these key cytoskeleton organizers.

Design Principles of Length Control of Cytoskeletal Structures

Cells contain elaborate and interconnected networks of protein polymers, which make up the cytoskeleton. The cytoskeleton governs the internal positioning and movement of vesicles and organelles and controls dynamic changes in cell polarity, shape, and movement. Many of these processes require tight control of the size and shape of cytoskeletal structures, which is achieved despite rapid turnover of their molecular components. Here we review mechanisms by which cells control the size of filamentous cytoskeletal structures, from the point of view of simple quantitative models that take into account stochastic dynamics of their assembly and disassembly. Significantly, these models make experimentally testable predictions that distinguish different mechanisms of length control. Although the primary focus of this review is on cytoskeletal structures, we believe that the broader principles and mechanisms discussed herein will apply to a range of other subcellular structures whose sizes are tightly controlled and are linked to their functions.

Kel1p Mediates Yeast Cell Fusion Through a Fus2p- and Cdc42p-Dependent Mechanism

Cell fusion is ubiquitous among eukaryotes. Although little is known about the molecular mechanism, several proteins required for cell fusion in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae have been identified. Fus2p, a key regulator of cell fusion, localizes to the shmoo tip in a highly regulated manner. C-terminal truncations of Fus2p cause mislocalization and fusion defects, which are suppressed by overexpression of Kel1p, a kelch-domain protein of unknown function previously implicated in cell fusion. We hypothesize that Fus2p mislocalization is caused by auto-inhibition, which is alleviated by Kel1p overexpression. Previous work showed that Fus2p localization is mediated by both Fus1p- and actin-dependent pathways. We show that the C-terminal mutations mainly affect the actin-dependent pathway. Suppression of the Fus2p localization defect by Kel1p is dependent upon Fus1p, showing that suppression does not bypass the normal pathway. Kel1p and a homolog, Kel2p, are required for efficient Fus2p localization, acting through the actin-dependent pathway. Although Kel1p overexpression can weakly suppress the mating defect of a FUS2 deletion, the magnitude of suppression is allele specific. Therefore, Kel1p augments, but does not bypass, Fus2p function. Fus2p mediates cell fusion by binding activated Cdc42p Although Kel1p overexpression suppresses a Cdc42p mutant that is defective for Fus2p binding, cell fusion remains dependent upon Fus2p These data suggest that Fus2p, Cdc42p, and Kel1p form a ternary complex, which is stabilized by Kel1p Supporting this hypothesis, Kel1p interacts with two domains of Fus2p, partially dependent on Cdc42p We conclude that Kel1p enhances the activity of Fus2p/Cdc42p in cell fusion.

Regulators of actin filament barbed ends at a glance

Cells respond to external stimuli by rapidly remodeling their actin cytoskeleton. At the heart of this function lies the intricately controlled regulation of individual filaments. The barbed end of an actin filament is the hotspot for the majority of the biochemical reactions that control filament assembly. Assays performed in bulk solution and with single filaments have enabled characterization of a plethora of barbed-end-regulating proteins. Interestingly, many of these regulators work in tandem with other proteins, which increase or decrease their affinity for the barbed end in a spatially and temporally controlled manner, often through simultaneous binding of two regulators at the barbed ends, in addition to standard mutually exclusive binding schemes. In this Cell Science at a Glance and the accompanying poster, we discuss key barbed-end-interacting proteins and the kinetic mechanisms by which they regulate actin filament assembly. We take F-actin capping protein, gelsolin, profilin and barbed-end-tracking polymerases, including formins and WH2-domain-containing proteins, as examples, and illustrate how their activity and competition for the barbed end regulate filament dynamics.

What We Know and Do Not Know About Actin

Seven decades of research have revealed much about actin structure, assembly, regulatory proteins, and cellular functions. However, some key information is still missing, so we do not understand the mechanisms of most processes that depend on actin. This chapter summarizes our current knowledge and explains some examples of work that will be required to fill these gaps and arrive at a mechanistic understanding of actin biology.

Casein kinase 1γ acts as a molecular switch for cell polarization through phosphorylation of the polarity factor Tea1 in fission yeast

Fission yeast undergoes growth polarity transition from monopolar to bipolar during G2 phase, designated NETO (New End Take Off). It is known that NETO onset involves two prerequisites, the completion of DNA replication and attainment of a certain cell size. However, the molecular mechanism remains unexplored. Here, we show that casein kinase 1γ, Cki3 is a critical determinant of NETO onset. Not only did cki3∆ cells undergo NETO during G1‐ or S‐phase, but they also displayed premature NETO under unperturbed conditions with a smaller cell size, leading to cell integrity defects. Cki3 interacted with the polarity factor Tea1, of which phosphorylation was dependent on Cki3 kinase activity. GFP nanotrap of Tea1 by Cki3 led to Tea1 hyperphosphorylation with monopolar growth, whereas the same entrapment by kinase‐dead Cki3 resulted in converse bipolar growth. Intriguingly, the Tea1 interactor Tea4 was dissociated from Tea1 by Cki3 entrapment. Mass spectrometry identified four phosphoserine residues within Tea1 that were hypophosphorylated in cki3∆ cells. Phosphomimetic Tea1 mutants showed compromised binding to Tea4 and NETO defects, indicating that these serine residues are critical for protein–protein interaction and NETO onset. Our findings provide significant insight into the mechanism by which cell polarization is regulated in a spatiotemporal manner.

Control of polarized assembly of actin filaments in cell motility

Actin cytoskeleton remodeling, which drives changes in cell shape and motility, is orchestrated by a coordinated control of polarized assembly of actin filaments. Signal responsive, membrane-bound protein machineries initiate and regulate polarized growth of actin filaments by mediating transient links with their barbed ends, which elongate from polymerizable actin monomers. The barbed end of an actin filament thus stands out as a hotspot of regulation of filament assembly. It is the target of both soluble and membrane-bound agonists as well as antagonists of filament assembly. Here, we review the molecular mechanisms by which various regulators of actin dynamics bind, synergize or compete at filament barbed ends. Two proteins can compete for the barbed end via a mutually exclusive binding scheme. Alternatively, two regulators acting individually at barbed ends may be bound together transiently to terminal actin subunits at barbed ends, leading to the displacement of one by the other. The kinetics of these reactions is a key in understanding how filament length and membrane-filament linkage are controlled. It is also essential for understanding how force is produced to shape membranes by mechano-sensitive, processive barbed end tracking machineries like formins and by WASP-Arp2/3 branched filament arrays. A combination of biochemical and biophysical approaches, including bulk solution assembly measurements using pyrenyl-actin fluorescence, single filament dynamics, single molecule fluorescence imaging and reconstituted self-organized filament assemblies, have provided mechanistic insight into the role of actin polymerization in motile processes.