The kleisin subunit controls the function of C. elegans meiotic cohesins by determining the mode of DNA binding and differential regulation by SCC-2 and WAPL-1.

The cohesin complex plays essential roles in chromosome segregation, 3D genome organisation, and DNA damage repair through its ability to modify DNA topology. In higher eukaryotes, meiotic chromosome function, and therefore fertility, requires cohesin complexes containing meiosis-specific kleisin subunits: REC8 and RAD21L in mammals and REC-8 and COH-3/4 in Caenorhabditis elegans. How these complexes perform the multiple functions of cohesin during meiosis and whether this involves different modes of DNA binding or dynamic association with chromosomes is poorly understood. Combining time-resolved methods of protein removal with live imaging and exploiting the temporospatial organisation of the C. elegans germline, we show that REC-8 complexes provide sister chromatid cohesion (SCC) and DNA repair, while COH-3/4 complexes control higher-order chromosome structure. High-abundance COH-3/4 complexes associate dynamically with individual chromatids in a manner dependent on cohesin loading (SCC-2) and removal (WAPL-1) factors. In contrast, low-abundance REC-8 complexes associate stably with chromosomes, tethering sister chromatids from S-phase until the meiotic divisions. Our results reveal that kleisin identity determines the function of meiotic cohesin by controlling the mode and regulation of cohesin-DNA association, and are consistent with a model in which SCC and DNA looping are performed by variant cohesin complexes that coexist on chromosomes.

Functions and Regulation of Meiotic HORMA-Domain Proteins.

During meiosis, homologous chromosomes must recognize, pair, and recombine with one another to ensure the formation of inter-homologue crossover events, which, together with sister chromatid cohesion, promote correct chromosome orientation on the first meiotic spindle. Crossover formation requires the assembly of axial elements, proteinaceous structures that assemble along the length of each chromosome during early meiosis, as well as checkpoint mechanisms that control meiotic progression by monitoring pairing and recombination intermediates. A conserved family of proteins defined by the presence of a HORMA (HOp1, Rev7, MAd2) domain, referred to as HORMADs, associate with axial elements to control key events of meiotic prophase. The highly conserved HORMA domain comprises a flexible safety belt sequence, enabling it to adopt at least two of the following protein conformations: one closed, where the safety belt encircles a small peptide motif present within an interacting protein, causing its topological entrapment, and the other open, where the safety belt is reorganized and no interactor is trapped. Although functional studies in multiple organisms have revealed that HORMADs are crucial regulators of meiosis, the mechanisms by which HORMADs implement key meiotic events remain poorly understood. In this review, we summarize protein complexes formed by HORMADs, discuss their roles during meiosis in different organisms, draw comparisons to better characterize non-meiotic HORMADs (MAD2 and REV7), and highlight possible areas for future research.

Acyl carrier protein promotes MukBEF action in Escherichia coli chromosome organization-segregation.

Structural Maintenance of Chromosomes (SMC) complexes act ubiquitously to compact DNA linearly, thereby facilitating chromosome organization-segregation. SMC proteins have a conserved architecture, with a dimerization hinge and an ATPase head domain separated by a long antiparallel intramolecular coiled-coil. Dimeric SMC proteins interact with essential accessory proteins, kleisins that bridge the two subunits of an SMC dimer, and HAWK/KITE proteins that interact with kleisins. The ATPase activity of the Escherichia coli SMC protein, MukB, which is essential for its in vivo function, requires its interaction with the dimeric kleisin, MukF that in turn interacts with the KITE protein, MukE. Here we demonstrate that, in addition, MukB interacts specifically with Acyl Carrier Protein (AcpP) that has essential functions in fatty acid synthesis. We characterize the AcpP interaction at the joint of the MukB coiled-coil and show that the interaction is necessary for MukB ATPase and for MukBEF function in vivo.

Competitive binding of MatP and topoisomerase IV to the MukB hinge domain.

Structural Maintenance of Chromosomes (SMC) complexes have ubiquitous roles in compacting DNA linearly, thereby promoting chromosome organization-segregation. Interaction between the Escherichia coli SMC complex, MukBEF, and matS-bound MatP in the chromosome replication termination region, ter, results in depletion of MukBEF from ter, a process essential for efficient daughter chromosome individualization and for preferential association of MukBEF with the replication origin region. Chromosome-associated MukBEF complexes also interact with topoisomerase IV (ParC2E2), so that their chromosome distribution mirrors that of MukBEF. We demonstrate that MatP and ParC have an overlapping binding interface on the MukB hinge, leading to their mutually exclusive binding, which occurs with the same dimer to dimer stoichiometry. Furthermore, we show that matS DNA competes with the MukB hinge for MatP binding. Cells expressing MukBEF complexes that are mutated at the ParC/MatP binding interface are impaired in ParC binding and have a mild defect in MukBEF function. These data highlight competitive binding as a means of globally regulating MukBEF-topoisomerase IV activity in space and time.

Substrate recognition and mechanism revealed by ligand-bound polyphosphate kinase 2 structures.

Inorganic polyphosphate is a ubiquitous, linear biopolymer built of up to thousands of phosphate residues that are linked by energy-rich phosphoanhydride bonds. Polyphosphate kinases of the family 2 (PPK2) use polyphosphate to catalyze the reversible phosphorylation of nucleotide phosphates and are highly relevant as targets for new pharmaceutical compounds and as biocatalysts for cofactor regeneration. PPK2s can be classified based on their preference for nucleoside mono- or diphosphates or both. The detailed mechanism of PPK2s and the molecular basis for their substrate preference is unclear, which is mainly due to the lack of high-resolution structures with substrates or substrate analogs. Here, we report the structural analysis and comparison of a class I PPK2 (ADP-phosphorylating) and a class III PPK2 (AMP- and ADP-phosphorylating), both complexed with polyphosphate and/or nucleotide substrates. Together with complementary biochemical analyses, these define the molecular basis of nucleotide specificity and are consistent with a Mg2+ catalyzed in-line phosphoryl transfer mechanism. This mechanistic insight will guide the development of PPK2 inhibitors as potential antibacterials or genetically modified PPK2s that phosphorylate alternative substrates.