Search

Mitotic kinase Aurora A (AURKA) diverges from other kinases in its multiple active conformations that may explain its interphase roles and association with cancer, and the limited efficacy of drugs targeting the kinase pocket. Regulation of AURKA activity by the cell is critically dependent on destruction mediated by the Anaphase-Promoting Complex (APC/CFZR1) during mitotic exit and G1 phase and requires an atypical N-terminal degron in AURKA called the ‘A-box’ in addition to a reported canonical D-box degron in the C-terminus. Here we find that the proposed C-terminal D-box of AURKA does not act as a degron and instead mediates essential structural features of the protein. In living cells, as previously reported in vitro, the N-terminal intrinsically disordered region (IDR) of AURKA containing the A-box is sufficient to confer FZR1-dependent mitotic degradation. Both in silico and in cellulo assays predict the QRVL Short Linear Interacting Motif (SLiM) of the A-box to be a phospho-regulated D-box. We propose that degradation of full-length AURKA additionally depends on an intact C-terminal domain because of critical conformational parameters permissive for both activity and mitotic degradation of AURKA.Summary blurbAURKA degron motifs are redefined to show that the so-called N-terminal ‘A-box’ is in fact a D-box, and the so-called ‘D-box’ in the C-terminus is not a degron but a motif critical for the active, degradable conformation of AURKA

Mitotic kinase Aurora A (AURKA) diverges from other kinases in its multiple active conformations that may explain its interphase roles and the limited efficacy of drugs targeting the kinase pocket. Regulation of AURKA activity by the cell is critically dependent on destruction mediated by the anaphase-promoting complex (APC/C

Activity of AURKA is controlled through multiple mechanisms including phosphorylation, ubiquitin-mediated degradation and allosteric interaction with TPX2. Activity peaks at mitosis, before AURKA is degraded during and after mitotic exit in a process strictly dependent on the APC/C coactivator FZR1. We used FZR1 knockout cells (FZR1KO) and a novel FRET-based AURKA biosensor to investigate how AURKA activity is regulated in the absence of destruction. We found that AURKA activity in FZR1KO cells dropped at mitotic exit as rapidly as in parental cells, despite absence of AURKA destruction. Unexpectedly, TPX2 was degraded normally in FZR1KO cells. Overexpression of an N-terminal TPX2 fragment sufficient for AURKA binding, but that is not degraded at mitotic exit, caused delay in AURKA inactivation. We conclude that inactivation of AURKA at mitotic exit is determined not by AURKA degradation but by degradation of TPX2 and therefore is dependent on CDC20 rather than FZR1. The biosensor revealed that FZR1 instead suppresses AURKA activity in interphase and is critically required for assembly of the interphase mitochondrial network after mitosis. This article has an associated First Person interview with the first authors of the paper., Summary: Destruction of AURKA plays no role in inactivating the kinase at mitotic exit but is required to keep AURKA activity low in interphase so that a mitochondrial network can be reassembled.

Activity of AURKA is controlled through multiple mechanisms including phosphorylation, ubiquitin-mediated degradation, and allosteric interaction with TPX2. Activity peaks at mitosis before AURKA is degraded during mitotic exit in a process strictly dependent on APC/C coactivator FZR1. We used FZR1 knockout cells (FZR1KO) and a novel FRET-based AURKA biosensor to investigate how activity is regulated in absence of destruction. We found that AURKA activity in FZR1KO cells dropped at mitotic exit as rapidly as in parental cells, despite absence of destruction. Unexpectedly, TPX2 was degraded normally in FZR1KO cells. Overexpression of an N-terminal TPX2 fragment sufficient for AURKA binding, but not degraded at mitotic exit, caused delay in AURKA inactivation. We conclude that AURKA inactivation in mitotic exit is determined not by its own degradation but by degradation of TPX2 and therefore dependent on CDC20 rather than FZR1. The biosensor revealed that FZR1 instead suppresses AURKA activity in interphase and is critically required for assembly of the interphase mitochondrial network after mitosis.

Aurora A kinase (AURKA) is a major regulator of mitosis and an important driver of cancer progression. The roles of AURKA outside of mitosis, and how these might contribute to cancer progression, are not well understood. Here, we show that a fraction of cytoplasmic AURKA is associated with mitochondria, co-fractionating in cell extracts and interacting with mitochondrial proteins by reciprocal co-immunoprecipitation. We have also found that the dynamics of the mitochondrial network are sensitive to AURKA inhibition, depletion or overexpression. This can account for the different mitochondrial morphologies observed in RPE-1 and U2OS cell lines, which show very different levels of expression of AURKA. We identify the mitochondrial fraction of AURKA as influencing mitochondrial morphology, because an N-terminally truncated version of the kinase that does not localize to mitochondria does not affect the mitochondrial network. We identify a cryptic mitochondrial targeting sequence in the AURKA N-terminus and discuss how alternative conformations of the protein may influence its cytoplasmic fate.

Aurora A kinase (AURKA) is a major regulator of mitosis and an important driver of cancer progression. The roles of AURKA outside of mitosis, and how these might contribute to cancer progression, are not well understood. Here we show that a fraction of cytoplasmic AURKA is associated with mitochondria, co-fractionating in cell extracts and interacting with mitochondrial proteins by reciprocal co-immunoprecipitation. We have also found that the dynamics of the mitochondrial network are sensitive to AURKA inhibition, depletion or overexpression. This can account for the different mitochondrial morphologies observed in RPE1 and U2OS cell lines, which show very different levels of expression of AURKA. We identify the mitochondrial fraction of AURKA as influencing mitochondrial morphology, since an N-terminally truncated version of the kinase that does not localize to mitochondria does not affect the mitochondrial network. We identify a cryptic mitochondrial targeting sequence in the AURKA N-terminus and discuss how alternative conformations of the protein may influence its cytoplasmic fate.

The Aurora kinases are essential regulators of mitosis in eukaryotes. In somatic cell divisions of higher eukaryotes the paralogues Aurora kinase A (AurA) and Aurora kinase B (AurB) play non-overlapping roles that depend on their distinct spatiotemporal activities. These mitotic roles of Aurora kinases depend on their interactions with different partners that direct them to different mitotic destinations and different substrates: AurB is a component of the Chromosome Passenger Complex (CPC) that orchestrates the tasks of chromosome segregation and cytokinesis, whilst AurA has many known binding partners and mitotic roles, including a well-characterized interaction with TPX2 that mediates its role in mitotic spindle assembly.Beyond the spatial control conferred by different binding partners, Aurora kinases are subject to temporal control of their activation and inactivation. Ubiquitin-mediated proteolysis is a critical route to irreversible inactivation of these kinases, which must occur for ordered transition from mitosis back to interphase. Both AurA and AurB undergo targeted proteolysis after anaphase onset as substrates of the anaphase-promoting complex/cyclosome (APC/C) ubiquitin ligase, even while they continue to regulate steps during mitotic exit. Temporal control of Aurora kinase destruction ensures that AurB remains active at the midbody during cytokinesis long after AurA activity has been largely eliminated from the cell.Differential destruction of Aurora kinases is achieved despite the fact that they are targeted at the same time and by the same ubiquitin ligase, making these substrates an interesting case study for investigating molecular determinants of ubiquitin-mediated proteolysis in higher eukaryotes. The prevalence of Aurora overexpression in cancers, and their potential as therapeutic targets, add importance to the task of understanding the molecular determinants of Aurora kinase stability.Here we review what is known about ubiquitin-mediated targeting of these critical mitotic regulators and discuss the different factors that contribute to proteolytic control of Aurora kinase activity in the cell.

The ability to identify protein interactions is key to elucidating the molecular mechanisms of cellular processes, including mitosis and cell cycle regulation. Drosophila melanogaster, as a model system, provides powerful tools to study cell division using genetics, microscopy, and RNAi. Drosophila early embryos are highly enriched in mitotic protein complexes as their nuclei undergo 13 rounds of rapid, synchronous mitotic nuclear divisions in a syncytium during the first 2 h of development. Here, we describe simple methods for the affinity purification of protein complexes from transgenic fly embryos via protein A- and green fluorescent protein-tags fused to bait proteins of interest. This in vivo proteomics approach has allowed the identification of several known and novel mitotic protein interactions using mass spectrometry, and it expands the use of the Drosophila model in modern molecular biology.

The ability to identify protein interactions is key to elucidating the molecular mechanisms of cellular processes, including mitosis and cell cycle regulation. Drosophila melanogaster, as a model system, provides powerful tools to study cell division using genetics, microscopy, and RNAi. Drosophila early embryos are highly enriched in mitotic protein complexes as their nuclei undergo 13 rounds of rapid, synchronous mitotic nuclear divisions in a syncytium during the first 2 h of development. Here, we describe simple methods for the affinity purification of protein complexes from transgenic fly embryos via protein A- and green fluorescent protein-tags fused to bait proteins of interest. This in vivo proteomics approach has allowed the identification of several known and novel mitotic protein interactions using mass spectrometry, and it expands the use of the Drosophila model in modern molecular biology.protein-tags fused to bait proteins of interest. This in vivo proteomics approach has allowed the identification of several known and novel mitotic protein interactions using mass spectrometry, and it expands the use of the Drosophila model in modern molecular biology.