Search

Copyright © 2020 Chong et al. Subdistal appendages (sDAPs) are centriolar elements that are observed proximal to the distal appendages (DAPs) in vertebrates. Despite the obvious presence of sDAPs, structural and functional understanding of them remains elusive. Here, by combining super-resolved localization analysis and CRISPR-Cas9 genetic perturbation, we find that although DAPs and sDAPs are primarily responsible for distinct functions in ciliogenesis and microtubule anchoring, respectively, the presence of one element actually affects the positioning of the other. Specifically, we find dual layers of both ODF2 and CEP89, where their localizations are differentially regulated by DAP and sDAP integrity. DAP depletion relaxes longitudinal occupancy of sDAP protein ninein to cover the DAP region, implying a role of DAPs in sDAP positioning. Removing sDAPs alter the distal border of centrosomal g-tubulins, illustrating a new role of sDAPs. Together, our results provide an architectural framework for sDAPs that sheds light on functional understanding, surprisingly revealing coupling between DAPs and sDAPs. Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan (107-2112-M-001-037, 107-2313-B-001-009, 108-2313-B-010-001, 108-2628-B-010-007, 108-2638-B-010-001 -MY2); Academia Sinica (2317-1040300); National Institutes of Health (GM088253).

Centriole-to-centrosome conversion (CCC) safeguards centriole homeostasis by coupling centriole duplication with segregation, and is essential for stabilization of mature vertebrate centrioles naturally devoid of the geometric scaffold or the cartwheel. Here we identified PPP1R35, a putative regulator of the protein phosphatase PP1, as a novel centriolar protein required for CCC. We found that PPP1R35 is enriched at newborn daughter centrioles in S or G2 phase. In the absence of PPP1R35, centriole assembly initiates normally in S phase, but none of the nascent centrioles can form active centrosomes or recruit CEP295, an essential factor for CCC. Instead, all PPP1R35-null centrioles, although stable during their birth in interphase, become disintegrated after mitosis upon cartwheel removal. Surprisingly, we found that neither the centriolar localization nor the function of PPP1R35 in CCC requires the putative PP1-interacting motif. PPP1R35 is thus acting upstream of CEP295 to induce CCC for proper centriole maintenance.

SUMMARY PLK4 is the major kinase driving centriole duplication. Duplication occurs only once per cell cycle, forming one new (or daughter) centriole that is tightly engaged to the preexisting (or mother) centriole. Centriole engagement is known to block the reduplication of mother centrioles, but the molecular identity responsible for the block remains unclear. Here, we show that the centriolar cartwheel, the geometric scaffold for centriole assembly, forms the identity of daughter centrioles essential for the block, ceasing further duplication of the mother centriole to which it is engaged. To ensure a steady block, we found that the cartwheel requires constant maintenance by PLK4 through phosphorylation of the same substrate that drives centriole assembly, revealing a parsimonious control in which “assembly” and “block for new assembly” are linked through the same catalytic reaction to achieve homeostasis. Our results support a recently deduced model that the cartwheel-bound PLK4 directly suppresses centriole reduplication., Graphical Abstract

Distal appendages (DAPs) are nanoscale, pinwheel-like structures protruding from the distal end of the centriole that mediate membrane docking during ciliogenesis, marking the cilia base around the ciliary gate. Here, we determined a superresolved multiplex of 16 centriole-distal-end components. Surprisingly, rather than pinwheels, intact DAPs exhibit a cone-shaped architecture with components filling the space between each pinwheel blade, a new structural element we termed the distal appendage matrix (DAM). Specifically, CEP83, CEP89, SCLT1, and CEP164 form the backbone of pinwheel blades, with CEP83 confined at the root and CEP164 extending to the tip near the membrane-docking site. By contrast, FBF1 marks the distal end of the DAM near the ciliary membrane. Strikingly, unlike CEP164 which is essential for ciliogenesis, FBF1 is required for ciliary gating of transmembrane proteins, revealing DAPs as an essential component of the ciliary gate. Our findings redefine both the structure and function of DAPs.

SummaryVertebrate centrioles lose their geometric scaffold, the cartwheel, during mitosis, concurrently with gaining the ability to recruit the pericentriolar material (PCM) and thereby function as the centrosome. Cartwheel removal has recently been implicated in centriole duplication, but whether “cartwheel-less” centrioles are intrinsically stable or must be maintained through other modifications remains unclear. Here, we identify a newborn centriole-enriched protein, KIAA1731/CEP295, specifically mediating centriole-to-centrosome conversion but dispensable for cartwheel removal. In the absence of CEP295, centrioles form in the S/G2 phase and lose their associated cartwheel in mitosis but cannot be converted to centrosomes, uncoupling the two events. Strikingly, centrioles devoid of both the PCM and the cartwheel progressively lose centriolar components, whereas centrioles associating with either the cartwheel or PCM alone can exist stably. Thus, cartwheel removal can have grave repercussions to centriole stability, and centriole-to-centrosome conversion mediated by CEP295 must occur in parallel to maintain cartwheel-less centrioles for duplication.

Centrioles are 9-fold symmetric structures duplicating once per cell cycle. Duplication involves self-oligomerization of the centriolar protein SAS-6, but how the 9-fold symmetry is invariantly established remains unclear. Here, we found that SAS-6 assembly can be shaped by preexisting (or mother) centrioles. During S phase, SAS-6 molecules are first recruited to the proximal lumen of the mother centriole, adopting a cartwheel-like organization through interactions with the luminal wall, rather than via their self-oligomerization activity. The removal or release of luminal SAS-6 requires Plk4 and the cartwheel protein STIL. Abolishing either the recruitment or the removal of luminal SAS-6 hinders SAS-6 (or centriole) assembly at the outside wall of mother centrioles. After duplication, the lumen of engaged mother centrioles becomes inaccessible to SAS-6, correlating with a block for reduplication. These results lead to a proposed model that centrioles may duplicate via a template-based process to preserve their geometry and copy number.

The transition zone is a specialized compartment found at the base of cilia, adjacent to the centriole distal end, where axonemal microtubules are heavily crosslinked to the surrounding membrane to form a barrier that gates the ciliary compartment. A number of ciliopathy molecules have been found to associate with the transition zone, but factors that directly recognize axonemal microtubules to specify transition zone assembly at the cilia base remain unclear. Here, through quantitative centrosome proteomics, we identify an axoneme-associated protein, CEP162 (KIAA1009), tethered specifically at centriole distal ends to promote transition zone assembly. CEP162 interacts with core transition zone components, and mediates their association with microtubules. Loss of CEP162 arrests ciliogenesis at the stage of transition zone assembly. Abolishing its centriolar tethering, however, allows CEP162 to stay on the growing end of the axoneme and ectopically assemble transition zone components at cilia tips. This generates extra-long cilia with strikingly swollen tips that actively release ciliary contents into the extracellular environment. CEP162 is thus an axoneme-recognition protein pre-tethered at centriole distal ends before ciliogenesis to promote and restrict transition zone formation specifically at the cilia base.

The distal appendages (DAPs) of centrioles have been proposed to anchor cilia to the plasma membrane, but their molecular composition, assembly, and exact function in ciliogenesis remain poorly understood. Using quantitative centrosome proteomics and superresolution microscopy, we identified five DAP components, including one previously described (CEP164), one partially characterized (CEP89 [ccdc123]), and three novel (CEP83 [ccdc41], SCLT1, and FBF1) DAP proteins. Analyses of DAP assembly revealed a hierarchy. CEP83 recruits both SCLT1 and CEP89 to centrioles. Subsequent recruitment of FBF1 and CEP164 is independent of CEP89 but mediated by SCLT1. All five DAP components are essential for ciliogenesis; loss of CEP83 specifically blocks centriole-to-membrane docking. Undocked centrioles fail to recruit TTBK2 or release CP110, the two earliest modifications found on centrioles prior to cilia assembly, revealing centriole-to-membrane docking as a temporal and spatial cue promoting cilia initiation.

Vertebrate cells can initiate ciliogenesis from centrioles at the cell center, near the Golgi, forming primary cilia confined or submerged in a deep narrow pit created by membrane invagination. How or why cells maintain submerged cilia is unclear. Here, by characterizing centriole sub-distal appendages (sDAP) in cells exclusively growing submerged cilia, we found that a group of sDAP components localize to the centriole proximal end through the cohesion factor C-Nap1, and that sDAP functions redundantly with C-Nap1 for submerged cilia maintenance. Loss of sDAP and C-Nap1 has no effect on cilia assembly, but disrupts stable Golgi-cilia association, and allows normally submerged cilia to fully surface, losing the deep membrane invagination. Intriguingly, unlike submerged cilia (stationary), surfaced cilia actively respond to mechanical stimuli with motions, and can ectopically recruit hedgehog signaling components in the absence of agonist. We propose that spatial control of ciliogenesis uncouples or specifies sensory properties of cilia.

Centriole or centrosome number in cycling cells is strictly maintained through coordinated duplication and segregation. Duplication is limited to once only per cell cycle by separating the assembly event that occurs in S/G2 phase from the two licensing events, centriole disengagement and centriole-to-centrosome conversion, both of which occurs in mitosis. In addition to duplication licensing, centriole-to-centrosome conversion also enables centrioles to associate with spindle poles and thereby to segregate equally during cell division. Centriole disengagement and centriole-to-centrosome conversion thus constitute the major regulatory module ensuring centrosome homeostasis in cycling cells. Using Xenopus egg extracts and purified engaged centrioles, we here describe an in vitro assay allowing us to synchronously induce the initiation of centriole disengagement and centrosome formation, pause the reaction anytime during the process, and more importantly, preserve "reaction intermediates" for further analyses.

Plk1-dependent modification of centrioles early in mitosis is necessary for accurate centriole duplication and segregation., Centrioles are self-reproducing organelles that form the core structure of centrosomes or microtubule-organizing centers (MTOCs). However, whether duplication and MTOC organization reflect innate activities of centrioles or activities acquired conditionally is unclear. In this paper, we show that newly formed full-length centrioles had no inherent capacity to duplicate or to organize pericentriolar material (PCM) but acquired both after mitosis through a Plk1-dependent modification that occurred in early mitosis. Modified centrioles initiated PCM recruitment in G1 and segregated equally in mitosis through association with spindle poles. Conversely, unmodified centrioles segregated randomly unless passively tethered to modified centrioles. Strikingly, duplication occurred only in centrioles that were both modified and disengaged, whereas unmodified centrioles, engaged or not, were “infertile,” indicating that engagement specifically blocks modified centrioles from reduplication. These two requirements, centriole modification and disengagement, fully exclude unlimited duplication in one cell cycle. We thus uncovered a Plk1-dependent mechanism whereby duplication and segregation are coupled to maintain centriole homeostasis.

SummaryIt has been proposed that separase-dependent centriole disengagement at anaphase licenses centrosomes for duplication in the next cell cycle. Here we test whether such a mechanism exists in intact human cells. Loss of separase blocked centriole disengagement during mitotic exit and delayed assembly of new centrioles during the following S phase; however, most engagements were eventually dissolved. We identified Polo-like kinase 1 (Plk1) as a parallel activator of centriole disengagement. Timed inhibition of Plk1 mapped its critical period of action to late G2 or early M phase, i.e., prior to securin destruction and separase activation at anaphase onset. Crucially, when cells exited mitosis after downregulation of both separase and Plk1, centriole disengagement failed completely, and subsequent centriole duplication in interphase was also blocked. Our results indicate that Plk1 and separase act at different times during M phase to license centrosome duplication, reminiscent of their roles in removing cohesin from chromosomes.

Vertebrate centrioles normally propagate through duplication, but in the absence of preexisting centrioles, de novo synthesis can occur. Consistently, centriole formation is thought to strictly rely on self-assembly, involving self-oligomerization of the centriolar protein SAS-6. Here, through reconstitution of de novo synthesis in human cells, we surprisingly found that normal looking centrioles capable of duplication and ciliation can arise in the absence of SAS-6 self-oligomerization. Moreover, whereas canonically duplicated centrioles always form correctly, de novo centrioles are prone to structural errors, even in the presence of SAS-6 self-oligomerization. These results indicate that centriole biogenesis does not strictly depend on SAS-6 self-assembly, and may require preexisting centrioles to ensure structural accuracy, fundamentally deviating from the current paradigm. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.10586.001, eLife digest Cells pass on their characteristics or “traits” to new generations in the form of DNA molecules. DNA provides the instructions to make proteins, which may then assemble into larger structures without using any external templates in a process called self-assembly. However, when a cell divides, DNA is not the only element that is passed on to the daughter cells; many large protein structures that have assembled in mother cells are also divided between the daughter cells. The daughter cells may then produce extra copies of these protein structures, but it is not known whether the pre-existing structures are involved in this process. Centrioles are complex structures made of proteins and play a crucial role in cell division. One of the main components of centrioles is a protein called SAS-6. Recent studies have shown that SAS-6 molecules can bind to each other to form “oligomers”. This process, which is called self-oligomerization, has been proposed to drive the formation of centrioles. Now, Wang et al. examine whether centrioles can form properly in cells when no other centrioles are present. The experiments show that centrioles can indeed form, but they are prone to structural errors. In contrast, centrioles that form in the presence of older centrioles are essentially free of errors. The experiments used human eye cells that were missing the gene that encodes SAS-6. These cells could not make centrioles, but when SAS-6 was re-introduced into these cells, new centrioles formed. Unexpectedly, re-introducing a mutant form of SAS-6 that cannot form oligomers into the cells still allowed new centrioles to form, which shows that self-oligomerization of SAS-6 is not essential for the assembly of centrioles. Together, Wang et al.’s findings challenge the idea that SAS-6 self-oligomerization is involved in the formation of centrioles, and suggest that preexisting centrioles may help to minimize errors in the formation of new centrioles. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.10586.002

The centrosome is duplicated just once per cell cycle so that there is one centrosome at the beginning of the cell cycle and two in mitosis. Defects in this process can cause genome instability and even cancer. An in vitro study points to a strikingly similarity between the way cells control centrosome duplication and chromosome segregation. The pair of centrioles in the centrosome disengage at the end of mitosis, a process requiring separase, a protease involved in sister chromatid separation at mitosis. The separated centrioles are a substrate for duplication in the next cell cycle. Newly duplicated centrioles are paired, so they cannot duplicate again until passage through mitosis, when they are freed to duplicate by separase-mediated disengagement. This work reveals a common mechanism behind the two cellular processes that result in exact duplication once per cycle. Centrosome duplication needs to be tightly controlled to occur once and only once per cell cycle. The regulated timing of centriole disengagement in late mitosis is shown to allow one round of centrosome duplication in the next cycle. The centrosome organizes the microtubule cytoskeleton and consists of a pair of centrioles surrounded by pericentriolar material. Cells begin the cell cycle with a single centrosome, which duplicates once before mitosis. During duplication, new centrioles grow orthogonally to existing ones and remain engaged (tightly opposed) with those centrioles until late mitosis or early G1 phase, when they become disengaged1. The relationship between centriole engagement/disengagement and centriole duplication potential is not understood, and the mechanisms that control these processes are not known. Here we show that centriole disengagement requires the protease separase2 at anaphase, and that this disengagement licences centriole duplication in the next cell cycle. We describe an in vitro system using Xenopus egg extract and purified centrioles in which both centriole disengagement and centriole growth occur. Centriole disengagement at anaphase is independent of mitotic exit and Cdk2/cyclin E activity, but requires the anaphase-promoting complex and separase. In contrast to disengagement, new centriole growth occurs in interphase, is dependent on Cdk2/cyclin E, and requires previously disengaged centrioles. This suggests that re-duplication of centrioles within a cell cycle is prevented by centriole engagement itself. We propose that the ‘once-only’ control of centrosome duplication is achieved by temporally separating licensing in anaphase from growth of new centrioles during S phase. The involvement of separase in both centriole disengagement and sister chromatid separation would prevent premature centriole disengagement before anaphase onset, which can lead to multipolar spindles and genomic instability3,4.

Centrosomes organize microtubule structures in animal cells. The centrosome duplicates once per cell cycle in most dividing cells via a pathway that relies on a pre-existing centrosome. The molecular mechanism of this 'once and only once' control is not understood, and recent results show that centrosomes can also be assembled by a de novo pathway that bypasses this control. These results require a rethinking of how proper centrosome number is maintained. We propose that the engagement of centrioles with each other normally blocks centrosome re-duplication, and that disengagement of centrioles from each other at the end of mitosis licenses them for duplication in the subsequent cell cycle.

Recent studies have identified important regulating elements for transition zone (TZ) gating in cilia. However, the architecture of the TZ region and its arrangement relative to intraflagellar transport (IFT) proteins remain largely unknown, hindering the mechanistic understanding of the regulation mechanisms. One of the major challenges comes from the tiny volume at the ciliary base packed with numerous proteins, with the diameter of the TZ close to the diffraction limit of conventional microscopes. Using a custom-built stimulated emission depletion (STED) superresolution microscope, we revealed relative localizations of TZ proteins, IFT proteins, transition fiber (TF) proteins, and centriole proteins. We found TCTN2 at the outmost periphery of the TZ close to the ciliary membrane, with a 227±18 nm diameter. TMEM67 was adjacent to TCTN2, with a 205±20 nm diameter. RPGRIP1L was localized toward the axoneme at the same axial level as TCTN2 and TMEM67, with a 165±8 nm diameter. Surprisingly, CEP290 (antibody against C-terminal amino acids) was localized at the proximal side of the TZ close to the distal end of the centrin-labeled basal body. The lateral width was unexpectedly close to the width of the basal body, distant from the potential Y-links region of the TZ. IFT88 was also surprisingly distributed in two distinct patterns, forming three puncta or a Y shape at the ciliary base. We hypothesize that the two distribution states of IFT88 correspond to the open and closed gating states of the TZ, where IFT particles aggregate to form three puncta when the gate is closed, and move to form the branches of the Y-shape pattern when the gate is open.