Skip to main content
microPublication Biology logoLink to microPublication Biology
. 2024 Jul 31;2024:10.17912/micropub.biology.001162. doi: 10.17912/micropub.biology.001162

Both Splice Variants of Zebrafish Tmem11 Localize to the Outer Membrane of Mitochondria

Saron S Tadesse 1, Melanie Schille 2, Paula Collado Cordon 3, Susan Walsh 1,§
Reviewed by: Anonymous
PMCID: PMC11325201  PMID: 39149412

Abstract

In mammalian and Drosophila systems, Transmembrane protein 11 (TMEM11) regulates mitochondrial morphology, mitophagy, and mitochondrial function. Here, we begin to expand these studies to the zebrafish model system. We identified two splice variants of tmem11 , which are both expressed during early development. In addition, we determined that both zebrafish Tmem11 proteins localize to the mitochondria using fluorescent tags and expression in cell culture. Consistent with recent data, biochemical fractionation indicates that Tmem11 is embedded in the outer membrane of mitochondria. Overall, these studies will provide new insights into the complex protein network that mediates mitochondrial physiology in the zebrafish.


Figure 1. Zebrafish Tmem11 is an outer membrane mitochondrial protein.

Figure 1. Zebrafish Tmem11 is an outer membrane mitochondrial protein

A) Uniprot protein sequences from human (P17152), mouse (Q8BK08), chicken (Q5ZLD4), zebrafish (201, Q6NWH5), fruit fly (Q8IQ56), and Xenopus laevis (A2BD92) were aligned in MUSCLE using ClustalW (Madeira et al. 2022). Boxed regions are predicted transmembrane domains in the zebrafish sequence. The asterisk marks the starting methionine of the splice variant of tmem11 (202) that is missing the first 18 amino acids. B) MemBrain predicted topology indicating three transmembrane domains is shown (Feng et al. 2020). C ) RT-PCR using primers to the shared 3’ UTR of both tmem11-201 and 202 or distinct 5’UTR primers demonstrate that both splice forms are expressed throughout early development in the zebrafish. β-actin is included as a control. D) Zebrafish Bnip3 interacts with Tmem11-201, but not Tmem-202, in a yeast two-hybrid. The top panel is selective only for the presence of plasmid (SD-Leu-Trp), but the bottom panel is selective for interactions (SD-Leu-Trp-His-Ade). Negative controls of vector without bait (pGBKT7) or vector without prey (pGADT7) are included. E) Both N-terminally EGFP-tagged Tmem11 proteins localize to the mitochondria of COS7 cells, as shown by counterstaining with the mitochondrial marker COX IV. F) High expression of the GFP-tagged Tmem11 proteins in COS7 cells cause highly fused mitochondria, as shown by counterstaining with the mitochondrial marker TOM40. G) Both EGFP-tagged Tmem11 proteins are embedded in the mitochondrial membrane (P) and not easily solubilized (S) based on carbonate extraction (pH 10.5, 11.5, or 12.5) of purified mitochondria (M) from transfected cells. An antibody against GFP was used to detect both proteins. TOM20 served as a control membrane protein. H) Both EGFP-tagged Tmem11 proteins localize to the outer mitochondrial membrane, as shown by treatment of purified mitochondria from transfected cells with Proteinase K (PK). OPA1 is a mitochondrial inner membrane protein which is protected from Proteinase K, whereas TOM20, on the outer membrane, is degraded. I) A C-terminally Cherry-tagged Tmem11-201 protein does not localize to the mitochondria of HeLa cells, as shown by counterstaining with the mitochondrial marker COX IV.

Description

The transmembrane (TMEM) protein family vaguely describes any proteins that contain at least one putative transmembrane domain which fully spans a biological membrane (Beasley et al. 2021, Marx et al. 2020) . This protein family has been implicated in cellular functions as diverse as cell division, metastasis, calcium regulation, and mitochondrial dysfunction. Transmembrane protein 11 (Tmem11) is a known regulator of mitochondrial morphology (Macchi et al. 2013; Rival et al. 2011) . The knockdown of TMEM11 in HeLa cells shifts mitochondrial morphology from tubular structures to spherical, enlarged structures (Rival et al. 2011) . A similar phenotype was observed in flies when the TMEM11 ortholog, Pantagruelian Mitochondrion I ( PMI ), was mutated, resulting in excessive fission and a reduction in the number of the mitochondria (Rival et al. 2011) . TMEM11 interacts with some proteins of the mitochondrial contact site and cristae junction organizing system (MICOS), consistent with its role in mitochondrial morphology and cristae organization (Guarani et al., 2015) . Additionally, PMI mutant flies had impaired respiratory chain function, reduced life span, and impaired neuronal activity (Macchi et al. 2013) . In mice, knocking out TMEM11 increased cardiomyocyte proliferation and cardiac function, while overexpression of TMEM11 inhibited cardiomyocyte proliferation and cardiac regeneration (Chen et al. 2023) . Although previously characterized as a mitochondrial inner membrane protein (Rival et al. 2011) , human TMEM11 has recently been found to localize to the outer membrane of the mitochondria using super-resolution microscopy (Gok et al. 2023) . There, it interacts with the mitophagy mediators BNIP3 and BNIP3L to regulate spatial specificity of hypoxia-induced mitophagy (Gok et al. 2023, Rual et al., 2005) . Recently, zebrafish is emerging as a model for mitophagy studies (Feng et al. 2011; Pant and Nazarko 2021; Wrighton et al. 2021) . Given the connection of TMEM11 to mitophagy, we sought to determine whether the zebrafish Tmem11 proteins also localized to the mitochondria as a starting point for understanding this process.

Through Ensembl, we identified the zebrafish protein ortholog (ENSDARG00000070866) and its two splice variants with a shared 3’ end: 201 , the longer form, and 202 , which utilizes a start site 18 amino acids downstream of the initiator methionine of the 201 form ( Figure 1A ). Similar to the human protein (Gok et al. 2023) , both zebrafish Tmem11 proteins are predicted to be transmembrane proteins which cross the membrane three times ( Figure 1B ; Feng et al. 2020). Not surprisingly for a predicted mitochondrial protein, high throughput in situ hybridization data suggested that zebrafish Tmem11 protein is ubiquitously expressed (Thisse and Thisse 2004) , and non-quantitative RT-PCR using primers to the shared 3’UTR or to the different 5’UTRs of 201 and 202 demonstrate that both these proteins are likely expressed throughout early development ( Figure 1C ). In addition, using yeast two-hybrid, we explored whether the zebrafish Tmem11 proteins bind to zebrafish Bnip3, an interaction found previously in humans (Gok et al. 2023) . Only Tmem11-201, but not Tmem11-202 (or vector-only negative controls), grew on selective media when zebrafish Bnip3 was also expressed ( Figure 1D ), indicating an interaction between these two proteins. As this is a heterologous system, it is unclear whether in vivo the additional 18 amino acids at the N-terminus of Tmem11-201 are truly responsible for this interaction. Based on data with the human proteins demonstrating that the transmembrane domains, and not the N-terminus, are necessary and sufficient for the interaction (Gok et al. 2023) and since we do not have a known interactor for this particular construct, it seems like a lack of interaction with the Tmem11-202 protein in this system might be an artifact.

To determine the subcellular localization of zebrafish Tmem11, we tagged both splice variants of Tmem11 on the N-terminus with EGFP and transfected them into COS7 cells for microscopy studies. The cells were stained with the mitochondrial markers COX IV and TOM40, and proteins from both transcripts of Tmem11 appeared to localize to the mitochondria ( Figure 1E and 1F). Notably, at higher expression of both proteins (as determined by the intensity of the signal), the mitochondria were clumped together ( Figure 1F ). This phenotype is consistent with overexpression of human TMEM11 in HeLa cells and indicates a defect with mitochondrial fission or fusion (Rival et al. 2011) . In contrast, a C-terminally tagged Tmem11-Cherry did not co-localize with the mitochondrial marker ( Figure 1I ), and we suspect that this tag may interfere with appropriate integration of the last transmembrane domain into the mitochondrial membrane ( Figure 1B ). To complement our imaging data and further determine which submitochondrial compartment zebrafish Tmem11 localizes to, we conducted biochemical fractionation experiments using HeLa cells transfected with the EGFP-tagged Tmem11 proteins. Mitochondrial fractions were treated with carbonate to extract proteins from the membranes; soluble proteins or peripherally associated membrane proteins are associated with the supernatant at lower pHs than integral membrane proteins which remain in the pellet even at a high pH (Claypool et al., 2006, Fujiki et al., 1982) . We observed that both variants of zebrafish EGFP-Tmem11 were associated with the membrane fraction ( Figure 1G ), consistent with the predictions ( Figure 1B ). In order to determine whether Tmem11 was on the outer membrane or the inner membrane of mitochondria, mitochondrial fractions were treated with Proteinase K to degrade outer membrane proteins, and westerns for GFP (Tmem11), TOM20 (outer membrane marker), or OPA1 (inner membrane marker) were used to detect the remaining proteins. Notably, Tmem11-201 ran at a slightly higher molecular weight than Tmem11-202, as predicted, since 201 includes an additional 18 amino acids. Both EGFP-Tmem11 proteins and TOM20 were significantly degraded when treated with Proteinase K, but OPA1 was not, indicating that these proteins are on the outer membrane of mitochondria, like the mammalian ortholog ( Figure 1H ; Gok et al. 2023). Both OPA1 and TOM20 appear as two bands on the western, as previously reported when using these particular antibodies (Koma et al, 2021, Chang et al, 2023) .

Although our experiments represent overexpression in a heterologous system, which can cause mitochondrial morphology defects, the clarity of our results, in addition to the predicted transmembrane domains and lack of a canonical nuclear localization sequence (Nguyen Ba et al., 2009) , indicate that zebrafish Tmem11 is localized to the outer membrane of the mitochondria, which is consistent with its human ortholog (Gok et al. 2023) . Interestingly, mouse TMEM11 is additionally localized in the nucleus and cytoplasm in cardiomyocytes (Chen et al. 2023) . This discrepancy could be explained due to differences in organismal systems and/or tissue-specificity. In mouse cardiomyocytes, Chen et al (2023) propose that TMEM11 does not affect mitochondrial membrane potential, apoptosis, or mitophagy, but does regulate the transcription factor ATF5, which moves from the mitochondria to the nucleus after impaired mitochondrial import. These data are distinct from the mitophagy regulation through interactions with BNIP3 and BNIP3L reported by Gok et al. (2023) for human TMEM11. Whether zebrafish Tmem11 regulates hypoxia-induced mitophagy in skeletal muscle might be assessed in vivo through CRISPR knockouts of one or both tmem11 splice variants in the context of the mitophagy biosensor zebrafish (Wrighton et al. 2021) . Additional future research on Tmem11 in zebrafish will involve delineating if the splice variants have distinct functions or expression and the physiological role of Tmem11 in regulating mitophagy, mitochondrial morphology, and developmental biology.

Methods

RT-PCR

Total RNA from zebrafish AB embryos at various developmental stages (shield, 1 day post fertilization (dpf), 2 dpf, or 3 dpf) was isolated using TRIzol (Invitrogen). Luna Universal One-Step RT-qPCR (New England Biolabs) was used with 0.5µg total RNA from each developmental stage according to manufacturer’s directions. Primer pairs amplified the two distinct 5’UTRs and the shared 3’UTR. β-actin was used as a positive control (Walsh et al, 2017) . PCR products were resolved on a 1.5% agarose gel with 100bp ladder (New England Biolabs).

Cloning

gBlocks (Integrated DNA Technologies) containing the zebrafish tmem11-201 gene sequence flanked by EcoRI and BamHI restriction sites or the zebrafish bnip3 gene sequence flanked by XhoI and BamHI restriction sites was cloned into pmCherry2-N1 (gift from Michael Davidson (Addgene plasmid # 54517; http://n2t.net/addgene:54517 ; RRID:Addgene_54517)). To clone tmem11-201 into pEGFP-C1 (Clontech), tmem11-201 was amplified with zTMEM11.SalI.F and zTMEM.BamHI.R using Q5 DNA polymerase (New England Biolabs) at annealing temperature of 65°C. pEGFP-C1 was digested with XhoI and BamHI . Ligation of compatible cohesive ends from SalI and XhoI restriction enzymes ablated both sites. To clone the zebrafish tmem11-202 , the zebrafish tmem11-201 pEGFP-C1 plasmid was amplified using LongAmp Taq DNA Polymerase (New England Biolabs) using the primers zTMEM11-202.splice.F and pEGFPC1.splice.R using an annealing temperature of 58°C, phosphorylated with T4 Polynucleotide Kinase (New England Biolabs), ligated with T4 DNA ligase (New England Biolabs), treated with DpnI (New England Biolabs) to degrade template DNA, and transformed into NEB-𝛼 cells. After sequencing (Eurofins Genomics), the gene was out of frame with the EGFP, and a QuikChange Lightning Kit (Agilent) with zTMEM202.SDM.F and zTMEM202.SDM.R was used to restore the frame. Plasmids were propagated in NEB5-𝛼 cells (New England Biolabs) and purified using the PureLink HiPure Plasmid Midiprep Kit (Invitrogen K210004) before transfection into HeLa cells (ATCC CCL-2) or COS7 cells (ATCC CRL-1651).

For yeast two hybrid, bnip3 was cloned into pGADT7 (prey, Matchmaker Gold, Takara Bio) from bnip3 pmCherry2-N1 using the primers zBNIP3.Y2H.EcoRI.F and zBNIP3.Y2H.BamHI.R. tmem11-201 and 202 were cloned into pGBKT7 (bait, Matchmaker Gold, Takara Bio) from tmem11-201 pEGFP-C1 using the primers zTMEM11.Y2H.EcoRI.F for 201 or zTMEM11-202.splice.F for 202 and zTMEM11.Y2H.BamHI.R for both variants.

Yeast Two-Hybrid

A high efficiency transformation (Gietz and Schiestl, 2007) was used to transform bait and prey plasmids into Y187 or Y2H Gold yeast, respectively (Matchmaker Gold, Takara Bio). Yeast were inoculated in YPD (1% yeast extract, 2% peptone, 2% dextrose) and incubated overnight on a rotary shaker at 200 rpm at 30ºC. Cells were then added to 50 mL pre-warmed 2X YPAD (2% yeast extract, 4% peptone, 4% dextrose, 0.008% adenine). When the cell titer was 2 x 10 7 cells/mL, the cells were harvested at 3000 xg for 5 minutes, washed and resuspended in sterile water. The suspension was centrifuged, and the supernatant was discarded. Sterile water was added to a final volume of 1 mL to resuspend the cells. For each transformation, 100 µL yeast were centrifuged and resuspended in 360 µL transformation mix (33.33% PEG 3500, 0.1 M lithium acetate, boiled salmon sperm carrier DNA, and 2-5 µg plasmid DNA). Transformations were incubated at 42ºC for 40 minutes. The transformation mix was removed by centrifugation, and 1 mL sterile water was added to each tube. Yeast were plated onto SD-Leu or SD-Trp (0.05% ammonium sulfate, 0.17% yeast nitrogen base, 2% dextrose, dropout mix, 2% agar) and incubated for 3-4 days at 30ºC. When the colonies were grown, the yeast were mated by combining them in 0.5mL 0.5X YPAD for 24 hours at 30ºC. The mated yeast were plated onto SD-Leu-Trp and incubated for 3-4 days at 30ºC. Subsequent diploid colonies were grown in SD-Leu-Trp liquid media at 30ºC, diluted to an OD 600 of 0.0005, and 5 µL were spotted onto SD-Leu-Trp-His-Ade+X-𝛼-gal or SD-Leu-Trp for incubation at 30ºC for 3-4 days until colonies grew, and blue color developed.

Immunofluorescence

Cells were split onto No. 1.5 sterile glass coverslips (Electron Microscopy Sciences) in a 6-well plate and grown in DMEM + 10% FBS media at 37℃, 5% CO 2 . Once the cells were greater than 60% confluent, they were transfected using Lipofectamine TM 3000 based on the manufacturer’s instructions (Invitrogen). The cells were incubated at 37°C overnight and fixed with 100% ice-cold methanol. Fixed cells were washed three times with 1X phosphate buffered saline (PBS) for 5 minutes and blocked in 5% normal goat serum/0.3% Triton X/PBS for 1hr at RT. The primary antibodies COX IV or TOM40 in 0.3% TritonX/PBS were added to the cells, and they were incubated at 4℃ overnight. After three PBS washes, the cells were incubated in the secondary antibody in 0.3% TritonX/PBS for 1 hour at RT. Cells were stained with DAPI diluted 1:10000 in PBS for 5 minutes and washed twice with 1X PBS for 5 minutes. They were imaged using a Nikon C2 confocal microscope at 600X magnification.

Fractionation of Mitochondria

Four 10 cm plates of HeLa cells were transfected with either tmem11 /pEGFP-C1. Twenty-four hours post transfection, cells were washed once with 1X PBS, trypsinized, and collected in PBS by spinning at 3000 xg for 5 minutes. The cell pellet was resuspended in 1 mL STE (250 mM sucrose, 5 mM Tris-HCl pH 7.5, 1 mM EGTA) with protease inhibitors (Cepham Life Sciences) and 1 mM DTT and incubated on ice for 30 minutes. The resuspended cells were then homogenized with a Teflon dounce (size 20) 50 times on ice. Broken cells were centrifuged at 680 xg for 10 minutes at 4℃. The supernatant containing the mitochondria was moved to a new tube, and the mitochondria were pelleted by centrifugation at 14000 xg for 10 minutes at 4℃. Supernatant containing the cytosol was moved to a new tube and centrifuged at full speed (21000 xg ) for 10 minutes at 4℃ to remove any remaining particulates. Mitochondrial pellets were gently resuspended in 1mL STE with protease inhibitors and DTT and centrifuged at 11000 xg for 10 minutes at 4℃. The supernatant was discarded, and the mitochondrial pellet was resuspended in STE using a microfuge pestle.

To determine if TMEM11 was embedded in a membrane, isolated mitochondria were resuspended in STE and centrifuged at 8000 xg for 10 minutes at 4℃. Pellets were resuspended in 0.1M carbonate solution at a basic pH (pH 10.5, 11.5, or 12.5). After 30 minutes on ice, mitochondria were centrifuged at 21000 xg for 10 minutes at 4℃, and the supernatants were removed. Trichloroacetic acid (TCA) was added to the supernatants to a final concentration of 20% and incubated on ice for 1 hour. The pellets were resuspended in Thorner buffer (40 mM Tris-HCl pH 8, 5% SDS, 8 M urea, 100 µM EDTA, 715 mM β-mercaptoethanol). After 1 hour, precipitated soluble proteins were spun for 10 minutes 4℃ at 21000 xg , washed once with acetone, and resuspended in Thorner buffer.

To determine whether Tmem11 was on the outer membrane, mitochondria were resuspended in STE or STE with 100 µg/mL Proteinase K. After 30 minutes on ice, 0.2M PMSF was added to a final concentration of 25 mM, and the mitochondria were harvested by centrifugation at 21000 xg for 10 minutes at 4℃. Supernatant was discarded, and the pellets were resuspended in 40 µL SDS-PAGE Laemmli sample buffer.

Samples were heated at 95℃ for 2 minutes and resolved by SDS-PAGE with Tricolor Prestained Protein Marker (Bioland Scientific LLC) before transfer to PVDF. Primary antibodies were GFP, TOM20, COX IV, or OPA1. The membrane was imaged using the ChemiDoc TM MP Imaging System (Biorad) and Clarity TM Western ECL Substrate (Biorad).

Reagents

Primers and gBlocks (Integrated DNA Technologies)

Name

Sequence

Purpose

zTMEM11.SalI.F

5’-TAA GTCGAC TAATGGCGTCGCTGGGAAG

Cloning tmem11-201

zTMEM.BamHI.R

5’-TAA GGATCC ATACAGCGTACAGTTCAT

Cloning tmem11-201

zTMEM11-202.splice.F

5’-GTGATGGCGGCCACG

Cloning tmem11-202

pEGFPC1.splice.R

5’-AGATCTGAGTCCGGACTTGTAC

Cloning tmem11-202

zTMEM202.SDM.F

5’-CAAGTCCGGACTCAGTCTTGTGATGGCGGC

Cloning tmem11-202

zTMEM202.SDM.R

5’-GCCGCCATCACAGACTGAGTCCGGACTTG

Cloning tmem11-202

tmem11-201 gBlock

5’-CATGAT GAATTC TAATGGCGTCGCTGGGAAGGAGGCGCGGTGTCCCAGTCAACAGGGAGAGGGGAGTGATGGCGGCCACGGAGTGTTACATCGTCCACGAGATCTACAACGGCGAGAATGCACAGGAGCAGTTCGAGTACGAGCTGGAGCAGGCTCTGGAGGCGCAATACCGCTACATCGTGATCGAGCCCACGCGGATCGGGGACGAGACGGCGCGATGGGTAGCAGTCGGAAATTGTCTGCATAAGACAGCAGTGCTTGCAGGAGCAGCTTGCCTCCTGACGCCGCTCGCCCTCCCCGTCGAATACTCCCGTTACGTGGCGCTGCCGGCTGGCGCTCTGAGCTTGGCCTGTGCCACGCTGTACGGCATATCCTGGCAGTTCGACCCCTGCTGCAAGTACCAGGTGGAGTACGACAGTCAGAAGCTCTCGCGGCTGCCCCTGCACACACTCACCTCCTCCACGCCGGTGGTTCTTGTCCGACGGGACGACGTGCACAGAAAGAGACTGCACAACACGATAGCGTTGGCGGCCCTCGCGTACTGTGCCAAGAAGATCTATGAACTGTACGCTGTAAT GGATCC ATGCTG-3’

Cloning tmem11-201

β-actin.F

5′-ATCAGGGTGTCATGGTTGGT

Control RT-PCR

β-actin.R

5′-CACGCAGCTCGTTGTAGAAG

Control RT-PCR

zTMEM11.3'UTR.RT.F

5’-TCCTTTCCCCTCCCTCGC

RT PCR for 3’UTR

zTMEM11.3'UTR.RT.R

5’-ATGTGACGCACCAAAGGC

RT PCR for 3’UTR

zTMEM11.5UTR.R

5’-CGATGTAGCGGTATTGCGCC

RT PCR for 5’UTR

zTMEM11.201.5UTR.F

5’-GCGTCAAGTCTAGTCCGTTG

RT PCR for 5’UTR of tmem11-201

zTMEM11.202.5UTR.F

5’-GCAGTTGTTATAACACGGTTTTCCC

RT PCR for 5’UTR of tmem11-202

zTMEM11.Y2H.EcoRI.F

5’-ATCA GAATTC ATGGCGTCGCTGG

Cloning into Y2H vector pGBKT7

zTMEM11.Y2H.BamHI.R

5’-ATC GGATCC TCATACAGCGTACAGTTCATAG

Cloning into Y2H vector pGBKT7

zBNIP3.Y2H.EcoRI.F

5’-ATCA GAATTC ATGTCGATTGAAAAGCACAGCG

Cloning into Y2H vector pGADT7

zBNIP3.Y2H.BamHI.R

5’-ATT GGATCC CTACCCGAGACCCACAG

Cloning into Y2H vector pGADT7

zBNIP3.Xho.Bam gBlock

5’-​​ATCT CTCGAG ATGTCGATTGAAAAGCACAGCGTGTCTGAAGAAAACCTTCAGGGTTCTTGGGTGGAGCTGCATTTTAATAATGGGGGAGGCAGCACTTCTAAAGCAGCCACAGATGAACAGTCAGCTAGCACGGCCCCGAGCGGAGACCTGGAGAAGATGCTTCTGGATGCTCAGCACGAGTCGGGTCGGAGCAGCTCCAGAGGAAGCCTACCATGTGACAGTCCTCCAAGATCCCAGACTCCTTTGCACTTGTGCAGGGGCTCCGAGGTCCACAGCTCTGGGGAAAAAAACAGCTCACAGTCAGAGGAAGACTATTTGGAGAGGAGAAAAGAGGTGGAGATCCTGATGAAGAAAAATGCTGATTGGATCTGGGACTGGTCGAGTCGCCCAGAAAACCTGCCACCCAAGGAGTTTCTGCTGCGGCACCCGAAGCGCTCCAGCACACTCAGCATGAGGAACACCAGTGTGATGAAGAAAGGAGGAATCTTCTCTGCTGAGTTCCTCAAAGTCTTCCTGCCCTCTCTGGTCCTCTCACACATCCTCGCTGTGGGTCTCGGGAT GGATCC AGC

Cloning zBNIP3 into pmCherry2-N1

Antibodies

Antigen

Animal and Clonality

Dilution

Source

Purpose

COX IV

Rabbit polyclonal

1:500 (IF)

1:1000 (western)

Cell Signaling Technology 3E11, Catalog #4850

IF, western

TOM40

Rabbit polyclonal

1:1000

Generous gift of CM Koehler, UCLA

IF

GFP

Mouse monoclonal

1:1000

Santa Cruz Technology B2, sc-9996

western

TOM20

Rabbit polyclonal

1:500

Santa Cruz Biotechnology FL-145 Catalog #sc-11415

western

OPA1

Rabbit polyclonal

1:1000

Abclonal, Catalog #A9833

western

anti-mouse rhodamine

Goat polyclonal

1:1000

Jackson Immunochemicals

IF

anti-rabbit rhodamine

Goat polyclonal

1:1000

Jackson Immunochemicals

IF

anti-rabbit FITC

Goat polyclonal

1:1000

Jackson Immunochemicals

IF

anti-mouse HRP

Goat polyclonal

1:10000

Jackson Immunochemicals

western

anti-rabbit HRP

Goat polyclonal

1:10000

Jackson Immunochemicals

western

Plasmids

Gene

Plasmid backbone

Description

tmem11-201

pEGFPC1

Zebrafish tmem11, transcript 1 cloned in frame with EGFP at the N-terminus. Available from authors.

tmem11-202

pEGFPC1

Zebrafish tmem11, transcript 2 cloned in frame with EGFP at the N-terminus. Available from authors.

tmem11-201

pmCherry2-N1. Available from Addgene plasmid # 54517

Zebrafish tmem11, transcript 1 cloned in frame with Cherry2 at the C-terminus. Available from authors.

tmem11-201

pGBKT7

Zebrafish tmem11, transcript 1 cloned in frame for Y2H. Available from authors.

tmem11-202

pGBKT7

Zebrafish tmem11, transcript 2 cloned in frame for Y2H. Available from authors.

bnip3

pGADT7

Zebrafish bnip3 cloned in frame for Y2H. Available from authors.

bnip3

pmCherry2-N1. Available from Addgene plasmid # 54517

Zebrafish bnip3 cloned in frame with Cherry2 at the C-terminus. Available from authors.

Acknowledgments

Acknowledgments

Conversations with Jonathan Friedman at the University of Texas, Southwestern to refine our experiments were greatly appreciated.

Funding Statement

<p>Summer funding for PCC was provided by the John Hauck Foundation, the Office of the Dean of the College of Liberal Arts, the Student-Faculty Collaborative Research Program and the Biology Department of Rollins College. Summer funding for SST and additional supplies were provided by the John Stauffer Charitable Trust and the President’s Research Assistantship through Soka University of America.</p>

References

  1. Beasley Heather K., Rodman Taylor A., Collins Greg V., Hinton Antentor, Exil Vernat. TMEM135 is a Novel Regulator of Mitochondrial Dynamics and Physiology with Implications for Human Health Conditions. Cells. 2021 Jul 11;10(7):1750–1750. doi: 10.3390/cells10071750. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Chang Xiaoru, Niu Shuyan, Shang Mengting, Li Jiangyan, Guo Menghao, Zhang Wenli, Sun Zuoyi, Li Yunjing, Zhang Rui, Shen Xin, Tang Meng, Xue Yuying. ROS-Drp1-mediated mitochondria fission contributes to hippocampal HT22&nbsp;cell apoptosis induced by silver nanoparticles. Redox Biology. 2023 Jul 1;63:102739–102739. doi: 10.1016/j.redox.2023.102739. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Chen Xin-Zhe, Li Xin-Min, Xu Shi-Jun, Hu Shen, Wang Tao, Li Rui-Feng, Liu Cui-Yun, Xue Jun-Qiang, Zhou Lu-Yu, Wang Yun-Hong, Li Pei-Feng, Wang Kun. TMEM11 regulates cardiomyocyte proliferation and cardiac repair via METTL1-mediated m7G methylation of ATF5 mRNA. Cell Death & Differentiation. 2023 Jun 7;30(7):1786–1798. doi: 10.1038/s41418-023-01179-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Claypool Steven M., McCaffery J. Michael, Koehler Carla M. Mitochondrial mislocalization and altered assembly of a cluster of Barth syndrome mutant tafazzins. The Journal of Cell Biology. 2006 Jul 31;174(3):379–390. doi: 10.1083/jcb.200605043. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Ding Wen-Xing, Yin Xiao-Ming. Mitophagy: mechanisms, pathophysiological roles, and analysis. bchm. 2012 Jul 1;393(7):547–564. doi: 10.1515/hsz-2012-0119. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Feng Shi-Hao, Zhang Wei-Xun, Yang Jing, Yang Yang, Shen Hong-Bin. Topology Prediction Improvement of α-helical Transmembrane Proteins Through Helix-tail Modeling and Multiscale Deep Learning Fusion. Journal of Molecular Biology. 2020 Feb 1;432(4):1279–1296. doi: 10.1016/j.jmb.2019.12.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Feng Shi-Hao, Xia Chun-Qiu, Zhang Pei-Dong, Shen Hong-Bin. Ab-Initio Membrane Protein Amphipathic Helix Structure Prediction Using Deep Neural Networks . IEEE/ACM Transactions on Computational Biology and Bioinformatics. 2022 Mar 1;19(2):795–805. doi: 10.1109/tcbb.2020.3029274. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Feng Xi, Liu Xing, Zhang Wei, Xiao Wuhan. p53 directly suppresses BNIP3 expression to protect against hypoxia-induced cell death. The EMBO Journal. 2011 Jul 26;30(16):3397–3415. doi: 10.1038/emboj.2011.248. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Fujiki Y, Hubbard A L, Fowler S, Lazarow P B. Isolation of intracellular membranes by means of sodium carbonate treatment: application to endoplasmic reticulum. The Journal of cell biology. 1982 Apr 1;93(1):97–102. doi: 10.1083/jcb.93.1.97. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Gietz R Daniel, Schiestl Robert H. High-efficiency yeast transformation using the LiAc/SS carrier DNA/PEG method. Nature Protocols. 2007 Jan 1;2(1):31–34. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2007.13. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Gok Mehmet Oguz, Connor Olivia M., Wang Xun, Menezes Cameron J., Llamas Claire B., Mishra Prashant, Friedman Jonathan R. The outer mitochondrial membrane protein TMEM11 demarcates spatially restricted BNIP3/BNIP3L-mediated mitophagy. Journal of Cell Biology. 2023 Feb 16;222(4) doi: 10.1083/jcb.202204021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Guarani Virginia, McNeill Elizabeth M, Paulo Joao A, Huttlin Edward L, Fröhlich Florian, Gygi Steven P, Van Vactor David, Harper J Wade. QIL1 is a novel mitochondrial protein required for MICOS complex stability and cristae morphology. eLife. 2015 May 21;4 doi: 10.7554/elife.06265. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Koma Rikuhide, Shibaguchi Tsubasa, Pérez López Claudia, Oka Toshihiko, Jue Thomas, Takakura Hisashi, Masuda Kazumi. Localization of myoglobin in mitochondria: implication in regulation of mitochondrial respiration in rat skeletal muscle. Physiological Reports. 2021 Mar 1;9(5) doi: 10.14814/phy2.14769. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Macchi Marc, El Fissi Najla, Tufi Roberta, Bentobji Mélanie, Liévens Jean-Charles, Martins L. Miguel, Royet Julien, Rival Thomas. The Drosophila inner-membrane protein PMI controls cristae biogenesis and mitochondrial diameter . Journal of Cell Science. 2012 Jan 1; doi: 10.1242/jcs.115675. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Madeira Fábio, Pearce Matt, Tivey Adrian R N, Basutkar Prasad, Lee Joon, Edbali Ossama, Madhusoodanan Nandana, Kolesnikov Anton, Lopez Rodrigo. Search and sequence analysis tools services from EMBL-EBI in 2022. Nucleic Acids Research. 2022 Apr 12;50(W1):W276–W279. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkac240. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Ma Kaili, Chen Guo, Li Wenhui, Kepp Oliver, Zhu Yushan, Chen Quan. Mitophagy, Mitochondrial Homeostasis, and Cell Fate. Frontiers in Cell and Developmental Biology. 2020 Jun 24;8 doi: 10.3389/fcell.2020.00467. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Marx Sébastien, Dal Maso Thomas, Chen Jia-Wei, Bury Marina, Wouters Johan, Michiels Carine, Le Calvé Benjamin. Transmembrane (TMEM) protein family members: Poorly characterized even if essential for the metastatic process. Seminars in Cancer Biology. 2020 Feb 1;60:96–106. doi: 10.1016/j.semcancer.2019.08.018. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Nguyen Ba Alex N, Pogoutse Anastassia, Provart Nicholas, Moses Alan M. NLStradamus: a simple Hidden Markov Model for nuclear localization signal prediction. BMC Bioinformatics. 2009 Jun 29;10(1) doi: 10.1186/1471-2105-10-202. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Pant Devesh C., Nazarko Taras Y. Selective autophagy: the rise of the zebrafish model. Autophagy. 2020 Dec 15;17(11):3297–3305. doi: 10.1080/15548627.2020.1853382. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Rival Thomas, Macchi Marc, Arnauné‐Pelloquin Laetitia, Poidevin Mickael, Maillet Frédéric, Richard Fabrice, Fatmi Ahmed, Belenguer Pascale, Royet Julien. Inner‐membrane proteins PMI/TMEM11 regulate mitochondrial morphogenesis independently of the DRP1/MFN fission/fusion pathways. EMBO reports. 2011 Jan 28;12(3):223–230. doi: 10.1038/embor.2010.214. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Rual Jean-François, Venkatesan Kavitha, Hao Tong, Hirozane-Kishikawa Tomoko, Dricot Amélie, Li Ning, Berriz Gabriel F., Gibbons Francis D., Dreze Matija, Ayivi-Guedehoussou Nono, Klitgord Niels, Simon Christophe, Boxem Mike, Milstein Stuart, Rosenberg Jennifer, Goldberg Debra S., Zhang Lan V., Wong Sharyl L., Franklin Giovanni, Li Siming, Albala Joanna S., Lim Janghoo, Fraughton Carlene, Llamosas Estelle, Cevik Sebiha, Bex Camille, Lamesch Philippe, Sikorski Robert S., Vandenhaute Jean, Zoghbi Huda Y., Smolyar Alex, Bosak Stephanie, Sequerra Reynaldo, Doucette-Stamm Lynn, Cusick Michael E., Hill David E., Roth Frederick P., Vidal Marc. Towards a proteome-scale map of the human protein–protein interaction network. Nature. 2005 Sep 28;437(7062):1173–1178. doi: 10.1038/nature04209. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Thisse, B., Thisse, C. (2004) Fast Release Clones: A High Throughput Expression Analysis. ZFIN Direct Data Submission. (http://zfin.org).
  23. Walsh S, Becker A, Sickler PS, Clarke DG, Jimenez E. 2017. An Undergraduate Laboratory Manual for Analyzing a CRISPR Mutant with a Predicted Role in Regeneration. J Hum Biol Heal Educ. 1:008.
  24. Wrighton Paul J., Shwartz Arkadi, Heo Jin-Mi, Quenzer Eleanor D., LaBella Kyle A., Harper J. Wade, Goessling Wolfram. Quantitative intravital imaging in zebrafish reveals in vivo dynamics of physiological-stress-induced mitophagy . Journal of Cell Science. 2021 Feb 15;134(4) doi: 10.1242/jcs.256255. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from microPublication Biology are provided here courtesy of California Institute of Technology

RESOURCES