Protein Aggregation and Disaggregation in Cells and Development.

Inspired by the role of intracellular liquid-liquid phase separation (LLPS) in formation of membraneless organelles, there is great interest in developing dynamic compartments formed by LLPS of intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs) or short peptides. However, the molecular mechanisms underlying the formation of biomolecular condensates have not been fully elucidated, rendering on-demand design of synthetic condensates with tailored physico-chemical functionalities a significant challenge. To address this need, here we design a library of LLPS-promoting peptide building blocks composed of various assembly domains. We show that the LLPS propensity, dynamics, and encapsulation efficiency of compartments can be tuned by changes to the peptide composition. Specifically, with the aid of Raman and NMR spectroscopy, we show that interactions between arginine and aromatic amino acids underlie droplet formation, and that both intra- and intermolecular interactions dictate droplet dynamics. The resulting sequence-structure-function correlation could support the future development of compartments for a variety of applications. 

/pdf/biomolecular-condensates-formed-by-designer-minimalistic-3gu5s9a2.pdf

Biomolecular condensates formed by designer minimalistic peptides

Transcription factors (TFs) are present in all life forms and conserved across great evolutionary distances in eukaryotes. From yeast to complex multicellular organisms, they are pivotal players of cell fate decision by orchestrating gene expression at diverse molecular layers. Notably, TFs fine‐tune gene expression by coordinating RNA fate at both the expression and splicing levels. They regulate alternative splicing, an essential mechanism for cell plasticity, allowing the production of many mRNA and protein isoforms in precise cell and tissue contexts. Despite this apparent role in splicing, how TFs integrate transcription and splicing to ultimately orchestrate diverse cell functions and cell fate decisions remains puzzling. We depict substantial studies in various model organisms underlining the key role of TFs in alternative splicing for promoting tissue‐specific functions and cell fate. Furthermore, we emphasize recent advances describing the molecular link between the transcriptional and splicing activities of TFs. As TFs can bind both DNA and/or RNA to regulate transcription and splicing, we further discuss their flexibility and compatibility for DNA and RNA substrates. Finally, we propose several models integrating transcription and splicing activities of TFs in the coordination and diversification of cell and tissue identities.

Integrating transcription and splicing into cell fate: Transcription factors on the block

Eukaryotic cells are composed of different bio-macromolecules that are divided into compartments called organelles providing optimal microenvironments for many cellular processes. A specific type of organelles is membraneless organelles. They are formed via a process called liquid–liquid phase separation that is driven by weak multivalent interactions between particular bio-macromolecules. In this review, we gather crucial information regarding different classes of transcription regulators with the propensity to undergo liquid–liquid phase separation and stress the role of intrinsically disordered regions in this phenomenon. We also discuss recently developed experimental systems for studying formation and properties of membraneless organelles.

Transcription Regulators and Membraneless Organelles Challenges to Investigate Them

Biomacromolecules often form condensates to function in cells. VRN1 is a transcriptional repressor that plays a key role in plant vernalization. Containing two DNA-binding domains connected by an intrinsically disordered linker (IDL), VRN1 was shown to undergo liquid-like phase separation with DNA, and the length and charge pattern of IDL play major regulatory roles. However, the underlying mechanism remains elusive. Using a polymer chain model and lattice-based Monte-Carlo simulations, we comprehensively investigated how the IDL regulates VRN1 and DNA phase separation. Using a worm-like chain model, we showed that the IDL controls the binding affinity of VRN1 to DNA, by modulating the effective local concentration of the VRN1 DNA-binding domains. The predicted binding affinities, under different IDL lengths, were in good agreement with previously reported experimental results. Our simulation of the phase diagrams of the VRN1 variants with neutral IDLs and DNA revealed that the ability of phase separation first increased and then decreased, along with the increase in the linker length. The strongest phase separation ability was achieved when the linker length was between 40 and 80 residues long. Adding charged patches to the IDL resulted in robust phase separation that changed little with IDL length variations. Our study provides mechanism insights on how IDL regulates VRN1 and DNA phase separation, and why naturally occurring VRN1-like proteins evolve to contain the charge segregated IDL sequences, which may also shed light on the molecular mechanisms of other IDL-regulated phase separation processes in living cells.

https://www.mdpi.com/1422-0067/23/9/4594/pdf?version=1650536426

Hao Jiang

Papers

Nuclear Protein Condensates and Their Properties in Regulation of Gene Expression.