Abstract

Aurora B, together with IN-box, the C-terminal part of INCENP, forms an enzymatic complex that ensures faithful cell division. The [Aurora B/IN-box] complex is activated by autophosphorylation in the Aurora B activation loop and in IN-box, but it is not clear how these phosphorylations activate the enzyme. We used a combination of experimental and computational studies to investigate the effects of phosphorylation on the molecular dynamics and structure of [Aurora B/IN-box]. In addition, we generated partially phosphorylated intermediates to analyze the contribution of each phosphorylation independently. We found that the dynamics of Aurora and IN-box are interconnected, and IN-box plays both positive and negative regulatory roles depending on the phosphorylation status of the enzyme complex. Phosphorylation in the activation loop of Aurora B occurs intramolecularly and prepares the enzyme complex for activation, but two phosphorylated sites are synergistically responsible for full enzyme activity.

Data availability

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in the manuscript and supporting files. The mass spectrometry proteomics data are available through the ProteomeXchange Consortium via the PRIDE partner repository with the dataset identifier PXD038935.

The following data sets were generated

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Dario Segura-Peña

    Centre for Molecular Medicine Norway, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
    For correspondence
    dario.segura-pena@ncmm.uio.no
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Oda Hovet

    Centre for Molecular Medicine Norway, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Hemanga Gogoi

    Centre for Molecular Medicine Norway, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Jennine Dawicki-McKenna

    Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Stine Malene Hansen Wøien

    Centre for Molecular Medicine Norway, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Manuel Carrer

    Department of Chemistry, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  7. Ben E Black

    Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, United States
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  8. Michele Cascella

    Department of Chemistry, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
    For correspondence
    michele.cascella@kjemi.uio.no
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  9. Nikolina Sekulic

    Centre for Molecular Medicine Norway, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
    For correspondence
    nikolina.sekulic@ncmm.uio.no
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
    ORCID icon "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-8027-9114

Funding

Norges Forskningsråd (187615)

  • Dario Segura-Peña
  • Oda Hovet
  • Hemanga Gogoi
  • Stine Malene Hansen Wøien
  • Nikolina Sekulic

Norges Forskningsråd (262695)

  • Oda Hovet
  • Manuel Carrer
  • Michele Cascella

Norwegian Supercomputing Program (NN4654K)

  • Oda Hovet
  • Manuel Carrer
  • Michele Cascella

Norges Forskningsråd (325528)

  • Nikolina Sekulic

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (R35-GM130302)

  • Jennine Dawicki-McKenna
  • Ben E Black

National Institute of General Medical Sciences (GM108360)

  • Jennine Dawicki-McKenna

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Copyright

© 2023, Segura-Peña et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,365
    views
  • 346
    downloads
  • 2
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Dario Segura-Peña
  2. Oda Hovet
  3. Hemanga Gogoi
  4. Jennine Dawicki-McKenna
  5. Stine Malene Hansen Wøien
  6. Manuel Carrer
  7. Ben E Black
  8. Michele Cascella
  9. Nikolina Sekulic
(2023)
The structural basis of the multi-step allosteric activation of Aurora B kinase
eLife 12:e85328.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.85328

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.85328

Further reading

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    Bernd K Gilsbach, Franz Y Ho ... Christian Johannes Gloeckner
    Research Article

    The Parkinson’s disease (PD)-linked protein Leucine-Rich Repeat Kinase 2 (LRRK2) consists of seven domains, including a kinase and a Roc G domain. Despite the availability of several high-resolution structures, the dynamic regulation of its unique intramolecular domain stack is nevertheless still not well understood. By in-depth biochemical analysis, assessing the Michaelis–Menten kinetics of the Roc G domain, we have confirmed that LRRK2 has, similar to other Roco protein family members, a KM value of LRRK2 that lies within the range of the physiological GTP concentrations within the cell. Furthermore, the R1441G PD variant located within a mutational hotspot in the Roc domain showed an increased catalytic efficiency. In contrast, the most common PD variant G2019S, located in the kinase domain, showed an increased KM and reduced catalytic efficiency, suggesting a negative feedback mechanism from the kinase domain to the G domain. Autophosphorylation of the G1+2 residue (T1343) in the Roc P-loop motif is critical for this phosphoregulation of both the KM and the kcat values of the Roc-catalyzed GTP hydrolysis, most likely by changing the monomer–dimer equilibrium. The LRRK2 T1343A variant has a similar increased kinase activity in cells compared to G2019S and the double mutant T1343A/G2019S has no further increased activity, suggesting that T1343 is crucial for the negative feedback in the LRRK2 signaling cascade. Together, our data reveal a novel intramolecular feedback regulation of the LRRK2 Roc G domain by a LRRK2 kinase-dependent mechanism. Interestingly, PD mutants differently change the kinetics of the GTPase cycle, which might in part explain the difference in penetrance of these mutations in PD patients.

    1. Biochemistry and Chemical Biology
    2. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics
    Katherine A Senn, Karli A Lipinski ... Aaron A Hoskins
    Research Article

    Pre-mRNA splicing is catalyzed in two steps: 5ʹ splice site (SS) cleavage and exon ligation. A number of proteins transiently associate with spliceosomes to specifically impact these steps (first and second step factors). We recently identified Fyv6 (FAM192A in humans) as a second step factor in Saccharomyces cerevisiae; however, we did not determine how widespread Fyv6’s impact is on the transcriptome. To answer this question, we have used RNA sequencing (RNA-seq) to analyze changes in splicing. These results show that loss of Fyv6 results in activation of non-consensus, branch point (BP) proximal 3ʹ SS transcriptome-wide. To identify the molecular basis of these observations, we determined a high-resolution cryo-electron microscopy (cryo-EM) structure of a yeast product complex spliceosome containing Fyv6 at 2.3 Å. The structure reveals that Fyv6 is the only second step factor that contacts the Prp22 ATPase and that Fyv6 binding is mutually exclusive with that of the first step factor Yju2. We then use this structure to dissect Fyv6 functional domains and interpret results of a genetic screen for fyv6Δ suppressor mutations. The combined transcriptomic, structural, and genetic studies allow us to propose a model in which Yju2/Fyv6 exchange facilitates exon ligation and Fyv6 promotes usage of consensus, BP distal 3ʹ SS.