Skip to main content
NCBI home page
eLife logoLink to eLife
. 2017 Mar 10;6:e23961. doi: 10.7554/eLife.23961

Nuclear export receptor CRM1 recognizes diverse conformations in nuclear export signals

Ho Yee Joyce Fung 1, Szu-Chin Fu 1, Yuh Min Chook 1,*
Editor: Mingjie Zhang2
PMCID: PMC5358978  PMID: 28282025

Abstract

Nuclear export receptor CRM1 binds highly variable nuclear export signals (NESs) in hundreds of different cargoes. Previously we have shown that CRM1 binds NESs in both polypeptide orientations (Fung et al., 2015). Here, we show crystal structures of CRM1 bound to eight additional NESs which reveal diverse conformations that range from loop-like to all-helix, which occupy different extents of the invariant NES-binding groove. Analysis of all NES structures show 5-6 distinct backbone conformations where the only conserved secondary structural element is one turn of helix that binds the central portion of the CRM1 groove. All NESs also participate in main chain hydrogen bonding with human CRM1 Lys568 side chain, which acts as a specificity filter that prevents binding of non-NES peptides. The large conformational range of NES backbones explains the lack of a fixed pattern for its 3-5 hydrophobic anchor residues, which in turn explains the large array of peptide sequences that can function as NESs.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.001

Research Organism: S. cerevisiae, Human, Virus

Introduction

The chromosome region maintenance 1 protein (CRM1) or Exportin-1 (XPO1) binds 8–15 residues-long nuclear export signals (NESs) in hundreds of different protein cargoes (Fornerod et al., 1997; Fukuda et al., 1997; Stade et al., 1997; Ossareh-Nazari et al., 1997; Xu et al., 2012a; Kırlı et al., 2015; Thakar et al., 2013). NES sequences are very diverse but each usually has 4–5 hydrophobic residues (often Leu/Val/Ile/Phe/Met; labeled Ф0–5) that bind hydrophobic pockets (labeled P0–P4) in a hydrophobic groove formed by HEAT repeats 11 and 12 of CRM1 (9–16). The hydrophobic anchor residues are arranged in many ways, currently described by ten consensus patterns for corresponding NES classes 1a, 1b, 1c, 1d, 2, 3, 1a-R, 1b-R, 1c-R and 1d-R (Figure 1A) (Fung et al., 2015).

Figure 1. Structures of CRM1-bound NESs that match the potentially all-helical class 3 pattern.

(A) Current NES sequence patterns (Φ is Leu, Val, Ile, Phe or Met and X is any amino acid). Potential amphipathic α-helices, predicted with hydrophobic patterns of i, i + 4, i + 7 or i, i + 3, i + 7 or i, i + 3, i + 7, i + 10, are shaded grey. (B) Structure of PKINES(Ф0L) (dark blue, PDB ID: 3NBY), RevNES (pink, 3NBZ) and CPEB4NES (yellow, 5DIF) bound to the NES-binding groove of CRM1 (grey surface). NESs are shown in cartoon representations with their Φ side chains shown as sticks. (C) The overall structure of the engineered ScCRM1 (grey)-Ran•GTP (orange)-RanBP1 (purple)-mDia2NES (pale green) complex. The structure of (D) mDia2NES (pale green), (E) CDC7NES (green-cyan) and (F) X11L2NES (forest) bound to the NES-binding groove of ScCRM1 in the engineered ScCRM1-Ran-RanBP1 complex. *The X11L2NES sequence matches the class 3 pattern, but binds CRM1 according to the new hydrophobic pattern Φ0XXΦ1XXXΦ2XXΦ3XXXΦ4 that we termed the class 4 pattern. mDia2NES is not shown in the leftmost panel of (D) to view the five hydrophobic pockets (P0–P4) of the CRM1 groove. Rightmost panels of (D–F): overlays of 3.0σ positive densities of kick OMIT mFo-DFc maps (calculated with peptides omitted) and final coordinates of the NES peptides. Middle panels of (D–F): black dashes show CRM1-NES hydrogen bonds and polar contacts.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.002

Figure 1—source data 1. Data collection and refinement statistics.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.003
elife-23961-fig1-data1.docx (21.4KB, docx)
DOI: 10.7554/eLife.23961.003
Figure 1—source data 2. Data collection and refinement statistics (cont.).
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.004
elife-23961-fig1-data2.docx (19.7KB, docx)
DOI: 10.7554/eLife.23961.004
Figure 1—source data 3. Crystallization conditions of CRM1-NES complexes.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.005
elife-23961-fig1-data3.docx (15.7KB, docx)
DOI: 10.7554/eLife.23961.005

Figure 1.

Figure 1—figure supplement 1. Binding affinities of NES to CRM1 measured by differential bleaching experiments.

Figure 1—figure supplement 1.

Data from triplicate experiments of direct (titration of CRM1 to FITC-PKINES in the presence of excess RanGTP) or competition titrations (titration of MBP-NES to FITC-PKINES and CRM1 with excess RanGTP) are plotted as mean ± SD and fitted binding curves are overlaid on top. MBP-NES competes with FITC-PKINES for CRM1. Residuals are plotted at the bottom. Dissociation constants are reported below the graphs with ranges in brackets representing the 68.3% confidence interval. *Experiments done on different days were fitted using a corresponding triplicate set of direct titrations (traces in black).
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.006

Figure 1—figure supplement 2. Modeling strategy for NESs with weak Φ side chain densities.

Figure 1—figure supplement 2.

(A) The difference densities (mFo-DFc contoured at 2.5σ) for mDia2NES when the dataset was refined without the NES peptide. White circle on the left panel shows good side chain density for an arginine side chain. The image in the right panel shows the structure rotated 90 degrees to show strong side chain density for a hydrophobic residue pointing into the P2 pocket of CRM1. (B) Left panels: difference densities (mFo-DFc contoured at 3.0σ; shown in dashed white circles) for the incorrect model of FMRP-1bNES. Right panels: difference densities (mFo-DFc contoured at 3.0σ) for the correct model of FMRP-1bNES are shown at the same positions as the left panels. The absence of difference densities at side chain positions provides support for assignment of 11LRALERLQID20 to the NES peptide structure.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.007

Figure 1—figure supplement 3. Mutagenesis of FMRP-1bNES to validate the sequence assignment of the NES.

Figure 1—figure supplement 3.

Differential bleaching experiments of FMRP-1bNES mutant YLKEVDQLRALER show that it does not bind CRM1, thus providing support that assignment of 11LRALERLQID20 to the FMRP-1bNES is most likely correct. Triplicate direct tirations of CRM1 into FITC-PKINES in the presence of excess RanGTP is shown in black, and triplicate competition titrations of MBP-FMRP-1bNES mutant to CRM1 and FITC-PKINES is shown in teal. The KD values obtained are shown below the graph and numbers in brackets represent 68.3% confidence level (U=underteremined, NB=not binding).
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.008

Figure 1—figure supplement 4. Electron densities of the NES peptides.

Figure 1—figure supplement 4.

2mFo-DFc map meshes contoured at 1.0σ and kicked OMIT map meshes contoured at 3.0σ are overlaid on the final coordinates of the indicated structures with NES peptides shown as sticks.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.009

Figure 1—figure supplement 5. A longer CDC7NES peptide binds the CRM1 groove without interacting with the P4 pocket.

Figure 1—figure supplement 5.

(A) Pull-down binding assay (~10 µg immobilized GST-CDC7NES and the longer GST-CDC7NESext, 2.5 µM HsCRM1 and 7.5 µM ScRanGTP in a reaction volume of 200 µL) show that both peptides binding to CRM1. (B) Structure of the longer CDC7NESext peptide (deep teal) bound to the CRM1 groove (grey surface). (C) 2mFo-DFc map (mesh) contoured at 0.8σ and kick OMIT map (mesh) at 2.5σ overlaid onto the final coordinates of CDC7NESext peptide (sticks).
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.010

Figure 1—figure supplement 6. Variable number of Ф side chains are needed to have an active NES.

Figure 1—figure supplement 6.

Sequences of wild type mDia2NES, the mDia2NES(Φ0A) and mDia2NES(AA) mutants are shown along with those for wild type PKINES and the PKINES(Φ4A) mutant. mDia2NES(Φ0A) and PKINES(Φ4A) were mutated to each have only 3 Ф side chains, leucines in positions Ф1, Ф2 and Ф3. Arg1189 and Arg1191 side chains of mDia2NES make electrostatic interactions with the CRM1 groove, and were both mutated to alanines to generate the mDia2NES(AA) mutant. Affinities of MBP-mDia2NES and PKINES mutants binding to HsCRM1 were measured using differential bleaching competition assays. Fitted binding curves are overlaid onto data points plotted as mean ± SD and residuals are plotted in the bottom. KD values are reported with ranges in brackets representing the 68.3% confidence interval. *Experiments done on different days were fitted using a corresponding triplicate set of direct titrations (in black). mDia2NES(Φ0A) and PKINES(Φ4A) bind CRM1 very differently even though they both have the same 3 Ф (Leu) side chains. mDia2NES(Φ0A) retains CRM1 binding (KD = 9.1 [7.5, 11.1] μM, vs wild type mDia2NESKD = 1.7 [1.3, 2.1] μM) but the PKINES(Φ4A) mutant no longer binds CRM1 (KD = 150 [100, 240] μM vs wild type PKI NESKD = 35 [26, 42] nM). mDia2NES(AA) binds CRM1 2-fold tighter (KD = 800 [600, 1100] nM), suggesting that electrostatic interactions involving Arg1189 and Arg1191 of the NES are not critical for CRM1 binding. Loss of the electrostatic interactions may be compensated by the gain of helical propensity, which may lead to stabilization of the mDia2NES helix.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.011
Open in a new tab

Previous structures of CRM1 bound to five different NESs showed virtually identical NES-binding grooves (Fung et al., 2015; Monecke et al., 2009; Dong et al., 2009; Güttler et al., 2010). NESs from Snurportin-1 (SNUPNNES; class 1c) and Protein Kinase A Inhibitor (PKINES; class 1a) bind CRM1 as α-helix followed by a short β-strand, while the proline-rich NES from HIV-1 REV (RevNES; class 2) adopts mostly extended conformation (Figure 1B) (Güttler et al., 2010). The majority of CRM1-NES interactions involve NES hydrophobic anchor side chains, with very few polar and main chain interactions. Previously, we studied NESs with the Φ1XXΦ2XXXΦ3XXΦ4 (class 3) pattern where the i, i + 3, i + 7, i + 10 Φ positions suggested a single long amphipathic helix. However, it is perplexing that a long all-helical peptide could fit in the narrow tapering CRM1 groove. Structures of such NESs from kinase RIO2 and cytoplasmic polyadenylation element-binding protein 4 (hRio2NES, CPEB4NES) showed that they do not adopt all-helical conformations but unexpectedly adopt helix-strand conformations that bind CRM1 in the opposite or minus (−) polypeptide direction to that of SNUPNNES, PKINES and RevNES ((+) NESs) (Fung et al., 2015). hRio2NES and CPEB4NES were hence reclassified as class 1a-R NESs (Figure 1A).

We do not understand the extent of NES structural diversity nor how NESs with different hydrophobic patterns that presumably reflect different secondary structures all bind to the seemingly invariant and three-dimensionally constrained CRM1 groove. Here, eight new structures of CRM1 bound to diverse NESs show several different and unexpected NES backbone conformations that share only a common one-turn helix element. All NESs also participate in hydrogen bonding with Lys568 of HsCRM1, and mutagenic/structural analysis identifies Lys568 as a selectivity filter that blocks binding of non-NES peptides.

Results

CRM1-bound NESs adopt diverse conformations

We study three NESs that uniquely match the all-helical class 3 pattern (Ф1XXФ2XXXФ3XXФ4). Because most previously studied NESs have substantial helical content, we also study five NESs that match class 2 (Ф1XФ2XXФ3XФ4) and class 1b (Ф1XXФ2XXФ3XФ4) patterns, where the hydrophobic residue positions do not suggest an amphipathic helix (Figure 1A). All eight NESs bind HsCRM1 in the presence of RanGTP with dissociation constants (KDs) of 670 nM-20 μM, and were crystallized bound to the previously described engineered ScCRM1-RanGppNHp-Yrb1p complex (Figure 1—figure supplement 1, Figure 1—source data 1, 2 and 3) (Fung et al., 2015). Details of how the NES peptides were modelled can be found in methods section and in Figure 1—figure supplements 2 and 3. NES-bound CRM1 grooves in the structures (2.1–2.4 Å resolution) resemble the PKINES-bound MmCRM1 groove (Cα/all-atom rmsds 0.5 Å/1.1 Å for 85 groove residues), and all NESs use 4–5 hydrophobic anchor residues to bind P0-P4 hydrophobic pockets of CRM1 (Figures 1D–F and 2) (Güttler et al., 2010).

Figure 2. Structures of NESs with non-helical sequence patterns.

(A–E) FMRPNES (light orange), SMAD4NES (salmon), HDACNES (slate), PaxNES (pale cyan) and FMRP-1bNES (deep teal) bound to the ScCRM1 groove. Black dashes show CRM1-NES hydrogen bonds and polar contacts, and unoccupied CRM1 hydrophobic pockets are labeled. *HDAC5NES and PaxNES sequences match the class 1b pattern, but both peptides bind CRM1 using Ф residues that match class 1a pattern. Average displacements of each Φ Cα in the eight NESs (including mDia2NES, CDC7NES, X11L2NES in Figure 1) from the equivalent Φ Cα of PKINES(Ф0L) are 1.3 ± 0.6 (Φ4), 0.8 ± 0.5 (Φ3), 0.7 ± 0.4 (Φ2), 0.9 ± 0.3 (Φ1) and 1.8 ± 0.9 (Φ0) Å.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.012

Figure 2.

Figure 2—figure supplement 1. Electron densities of the NES peptides.

Figure 2—figure supplement 1.

2mFo-DFc map meshes contoured at 1.0σ and kicked OMIT map meshes contoured at 3.0σ are overlaid on the final coordinates of the indicated structures with NES peptides shown as sticks.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.013
Figure 2—figure supplement 2. Engineering class 1b NESs.

Figure 2—figure supplement 2.

(A) Sequences of class 1b NESs generated from PKINES and FMRPNES. The binding of mutants to CRM1 were tested in pull-down assay with ~7.5 µg immobilized GST-NESs, 2.5 µM HsCRM1 and 7.5 µMScRanGTP in 200 µL reaction volumes. The reactions were extensively washed and visualized with SDS/PAGE and Coomassie staining. (B) Leptomycin B (LMB) sensitive nuclear export activity of FMRP-1bNES was verified by expressing EYFP2-SV40NLS-FMRP-1bNES in HeLa cells and imaged with spinning disk confocal microscope (60X).
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.014
Open in a new tab

Class 3 NESs from mouse diaphanous homolog 3 (mDia2NES: 1179SVPEVEALLARLRAL1193) and the cell division cycle 7-related protein kinase (CDC7NES: 456QDLRKLCERLRGMDSSTP473) are indeed all-helix peptides, both forming 3-turn α-helices that occupy only the wide part of the CRM1 groove (Figure 1D,E, Figure 1—figure supplement 4). The last residue of the mDia2 protein (Leu1193) binds the CRM1 P3 pocket leaving the P4 pocket empty. CDC7NES is far from the protein C-terminus but structures of longer peptides suggest that CDC7NESexits the groove after Met468 or Φ3 (Figure 1—figure supplement 5). The mDia2NES and CDC7NESsequence patterns should thus be Φ0XXΦ1XXXΦ2XXΦ3. The Φ4 anchor position is clearly not used in mDia2NES and CDC7NES even though Φ4 is key for activities of several other NESs (Wen et al., 1995; Meyer et al., 1996; Richards et al., 1996; Scott et al., 2002; Tsukahara and Maru, 2004). The number of Φ anchor residues necessary for CRM1 binding can vary between 3–5 (Figure 1—figure supplement 6). A third class 3-matching NES from beta-amyloid binding protein X11L2 (X11L2NES: 55SSLQELVQQFEALPGDLV72) binds differently (Figure 1F, Figure 1—figure supplement 4). 57LQELVQQFEAL67 forms a 3-turn α-helix, 68PGDL71 forms a type I β-turn, and X11L2NES therefore exhibits a new Φ0XXΦ1XXXΦ2XXΦ3XXXΦ4 (class 4) pattern.

Structures of NESs with non-helical patterns are also informative. The previous structure of RevNES (class 2) suggested that its three prolines may constrain against a helical conformation (Figure 1B) (Güttler et al., 2010). Class 2 NESs in the Mothers against decapentaplegic homolog 4 protein (SMAD4NES: 133YERVVSPGIDLSGLTLQ149) and the fragile X mental retardation protein (FMRPNES: 423YLKEVDQLRLERLQI437) have few to no prolines but still bind CRM1 with mostly loop-like structures (Figure 2A,B, Figure 2—figure supplement 1). Histone deacetylase 5 (HDAC5NES: 1082EAETVSAMALLSVG1095) and Paxillin (PaxNES: 264RELDELMASLSDFKFMAQ281) have NESs with non-α-helical class 1b pattern (Ф1XXФ2XXФ3XФ4), but the peptides bind according to the class 1a pattern instead (Figure 2C,D, Figure 2—figure supplement 1). This left no other experimentally verified NES in the databases that unambiguously match class 1b pattern (Kosugi et al., 2008; Xu et al., 2012c). We engineered a class 1b NES by adding an alanine to FMRPNES (FMRP-1bNES; YLKEVDQLRALERLQID), which forms a short 1.5-turn 310 helix followed by a 3-residue β-strand (Figure 2E, Figure 2—figure supplements 1 and 2). The 310 helix favorably presents Φ1 and Φ2 into the CRM1 groove and natural class 1b NESs are likely to bind similarly.

Structural requirements for an NES

Structures of >13 different CRM1-bound NESs are now available, and may be sorted into five or six groups according to peptide backbone conformations (Figure 3A). Class 1 NESs are helix-strand peptides with either α-helices (class 1a, 1c) or 310 helices (class 1b). Class 1-R NESs are strand-helix peptides, class 2 NESs are mostly loop-like and class 3 NESs are all-helix peptides. The helix-β-turn X11L2NES structure revealed a new Φ0XXΦ1XXXΦ2XXΦ3XXXΦ4 (class 4) pattern.

Figure 3. NESs adopt diverse conformations to bind CRM1, sharing only a small one turn of the helix structural element.

(A) Overlay of 13 different CRM1-bound NESs: mDia2NES, CDC7NES, X11L2NES, FMRPNES, SMAD4NES, HDACNES, PaxNES and FMRP-1bNES, SNUPNNES (3GB8), PKINES(Φ0L) (3NBY), RevNES (3NBZ), hRio2NES (5DHF), CPEB4NES (5DIF) (shown as ribbons with Φ residues in sticks; their CRM1 H12A helices were superimposed). A grey rectangle highlights the only secondary structural element shared by all 13 NESs: a single turn of helix. (B) Ramachandran plot of phi/psi angles of the four residues in each of the conserved one-turn of helix. Arrows indicate changes in psi angles along the polypeptide direction. For example, (+) HDAC5NES: Φ2 Ψ = −43.5°, Φ2+1Ψ = −21.7°, Φ2+2Ψ = −1.3°, Φ3 Ψ = 133.8° and (−) CPEB4NES: Φ2+2Ψ = −40.2°, Φ2+1Ψ = −31.0°, Φ2 Ψ = 16.5°, Φ2-1Ψ = 111.5°. *Residues in SNUPNNES plotted are Φ2+1, Φ2+2, Φ2+3 and Φ3. (C) Detailed view of niche motifs in (+) NESs, FMRPNES and mDia2NES.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.015

Figure 3.

Figure 3—figure supplement 1. NES main chain hydrogen bonds with ScCRM1 Lys579 in (−) NESs.

Figure 3—figure supplement 1.

Structures of CPEB4NES (5DIF), hRio2NES (5DHF) and PKINES-Flip3 mutant (5DH9) bound to ScCRM1, showing hydrogen bonds made by the Lys579 side chain of ScCRM1. Niche motifs observed in (+) NESs are absent here, but in CPEB4NES and PKINES-Flip3 mutant, Lys579 is still coordinated by two main chain carbonyls from Ф1-1 and Ф2-1.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.016
Figure 3—figure supplement 2. The Lys568 of HsCRM1 is important for NES binding.

Figure 3—figure supplement 2.

(A) Pull-down binding assays with ~5 µg immobilized GST-NESs, 500 nM wild type HsCRM1, the HsCRM1(K568A) or HsCRM1(K568M) mutant and 1.5 µM ScRanGTP in 1 mL reaction volumes. Most of the NESs showed decreased binding to the K568A and K568M mutants compared to wild type CRM1. Because of the limited dynamic range of detection in pull-down assays, it is unclear if binding of hRio2NES and X11L2NES to mutant versus wild type CRM1 proteins are different. (B) Binding affinity of FITC-PKINES to HsCRM1, HsCRM1(K568A) and HsCRM1(K568M) measured using differential bleaching. Different concentration regimes were used for different mutants to obtain meaningful data points and at least three titrations were performed for each CRM1. Fitted binding curves are overlaid onto data points plotted as mean ± SD and residuals are plotted in the bottom. KD values are reported with ranges in brackets representing the 68.3% confidence interval.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.017
Open in a new tab

The only common secondary structural element in the NES structures is one turn of NES helix at Φ2X2-3Φ3 (grey box, Figure 3A). This conserved turn of helix is flanked on one side by additional turns of helix (classes 1, 1-R) or by loops (class 2), and on the other side by β-strands (classes 1, 1-R, 2) or β-turn (class 4), or the helix ends as the chain terminates or exits the groove (class 3) (Figure 3A). Dihedral (psi) angles in the 1-turn of helix gradually increase in progression from helical to β-strand conformations (Figure 3B).

In all (+) NESs, main chain carbonyls of Φ2+1 and Φ3 residues in the 1-turn helix element hydrogen bonds with the ScCRM1 Lys579 (or MmCRM1/HsCRM1 Lys568) side chain, much like niche3/4 motifs where carbonyls of residues i and i + 2 or i + 3 coordinate a cationic group (Torrance et al., 2009). The Φ3-Lys579 hydrogen bond is possible only because the β-strand psi angle turns Φ3 carbonyl towards Lys579 (Figure 3C). NES helix-Lys579 hydrogen bonds are absent in (−) NESs as backbone carbonyls point in the opposite direction. Here, carbonyls of the N-terminal β-strand hydrogen bond with Lys579 (Figure 3—figure supplement 1). Therefore, another common structural feature of NESs is hydrogen bonding between NES backbone and ScCRM1 Lys579 (HsCRM1 Lys568). Mutations of HsCRM1 Lys568 impair NES binding. Mutants HsCRM1(K568A) and HsCRM1(K568M) bind FITC-PKINES two to three orders of magnitude weaker than wild type HsCRM1, supporting the importance of Lys568-NES interactions (Figure 3—figure supplement 2).

In summary, an active NES (1) can use many different backbone conformations to present 3–5 hydrophobic anchor residues into 3–5 CRM1 hydrophobic pockets (P0 and/or P4 are sometimes not used), (2) has one turn of helix with helix-strand transition that binds the central portion of the CRM1 groove and (3) has backbone conformation that can hydrogen bond with Lys568 of HsCRM1.

HsCRM1 Lys568 is a selectivity filter for NES recognition

What then are CRM1 groove features that selectively recognize the key NES features? Arrangement of hydrophobic pockets in the groove likely selects NESs with suitably placed Φ residues. Groove shape, tapering and most constricted at ScCRM1 Lys579 (HsCRM1 Lys568), likely selects for NES helices that transition to strands or NES helices that end (Figure 3C). Is groove-constricting HsCRM1 Lys568 perhaps key for differentiating active from false positive NES sequences? We tested mutants HsCRM1(K568A) and HsCRM1(K568M) for interactions with three previously identified false positive NESs that match NES consensus but do not bind CRM1: peptides from Hexokinase-2 (Hxk2pep: 18DVPKELMQQIENFEKIFTV36, class 3 match), Deformed Epidermal Autoregulatory Factor 1 homolog (DEAF1pep:452SWLYLEEMVNSLLNTAQQ469; class 1a-R match) and COMM domain-containing protein 1 (COMMD1pep; 173KTLSEVEESISTLISQPN190; class 3 match) (Figure 4A) (Xu et al., 2012c, 2015). Wild type HsCRM1 does not bind the peptides but HsCRM1(K568A) binds Hxk2pep and DEAF1pep, and HsCRM1(K568M) binds DEAF1pep but not Hxk2pep, suggesting that Lys568 is important in filtering out false positive NESs (Figure 4A).

Figure 4. HsCRM1 Lys568 is a selectivity filter.

(A) False positive NES sequences with Φ residues of consensus matches underlined. Pull-down binding assay of ~5 µg immobilized GST-NESs and 7.5 µM ScRanGTP with 2.5 µM of either wild type HsCRM1 or mutant HsCRM1(K568A) or HsCRM1(K568M) in 200 µL reactions. (C–D) Structures of Hxk2pep (pink) (C) and DEAF1pep (purple) (D) bound to ScCRM1(K579A). Left panels, peptides were removed to show the surface of the mutant ScCRM1(K579A) groove. Middle panels, peptides bound to the mutant ScCRM1(K579A). Right panels, CRM1(K579A)-bound Hxk2pep and DEAF1pep superimposed onto the PKINES(Ф0L)-bound MmCRM1 groove (3NBY; CRM1 H12A helices were aligned; PKINES not shown) to show steric clash of the Hxk2pep and DEAF1pep peptides with the MmCRM1 Lys568 side chain.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.018

Figure 4—source data 1. Data collection and refinement statistics and crystallization conditions.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.019
elife-23961-fig4-data1.docx (16.1KB, docx)
DOI: 10.7554/eLife.23961.019

Figure 4.

Figure 4—figure supplement 1. Electron densities of the HXK2pep and DEAFpep false positive NES peptides bound to the ScCRM1(K579A) mutant.

Figure 4—figure supplement 1.

2mFo-DFc map meshes contoured at 0.8σ and kicked OMIT map meshes contoured at 3.0σ are overlaid on the final coordinates of the indicated structures with NES peptides shown as sticks.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.020
Figure 4—figure supplement 2. Additional overlays of Hxk2pep and DEAF1pep onto NES-bound wild type CRM1 grooves.

Figure 4—figure supplement 2.

(A) Hxk2pep-ScCRM1(K579A) (Hxk2pep in pink cartoon and ScCRM1(K579A) shown as grey surface) superimposed onto the PKINES(Ф0L)-bound MmCRM1 groove (wild type CRM1, 3NBY; blue surface), the PaxNES- bound ScCRM1 groove (pale cyan), the FMRPNES-bound ScCRM1 (wheat) and the mDia2NES-bound ScCRM1 (pale green) by aligning their CRM1 H12A helices. The superpositions show steric clash of the Hxk2pep peptide with the MmCRM1 Lys568 or ScCRM1 Lys579 side chains. (B) DEAF1pep-ScCRM1(K579A) (DEAFpep in magenta cartoon and ScCRM1(K579A) shown as grey surface) superimposed onto the PKINES(Ф0L)-bound MmCRM1 groove (wild type CRM1, 3NBY; blue surface), the hRio2NES-bound ScCRM1 (orange, 5DHF) and the CPEB4NES-bound ScCRM1 (yellow, 5DIF). The N-terminus of DEAF1pep clashes with of MmCRM1 Lys568 orScCRM1 Lys579 side chains. Zoomed in views are rotated to show proximity of DEAF1pep Ф1XФ2 to the ScCRM1 Lys579 side chain.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.021
Open in a new tab

Both ScCRM1(K579A)-bound Hxk2pep and DEAF1pep are all-helix peptides (Figure 4B,C, Figure 4—figure supplement 1, Figure 4—source data 1). The fourth turn of the Hxk2pep helix packs into hydrophobic space widened by removal and rearrangement of the Lys579 and Glu582 side chains, respectively (Figure 4B). The 2.5-turn α-helix of DEAF1pepbinds in the (−) direction and is slightly longer than helices in true (−) NESs (Figure 4C). Superpositions of Hxk2pep and DEAF1pep onto wild type CRM1 grooves show the fourth turn of the Hxk2pep helix and the N-terminus of the DEAF1pep helix clashing with ScCRM1 Lys579/MmCRM1 Lys568 side chains (Figure 4B,C, Figure 4—figure supplement 2). The rest of the mutant ScCRM1(K579A) groove is highly similar to the wild type groove. Therefore, the key feature of the wild type groove that prevents Hxk2pep and DEAF1pep binding is Lys568, which is not only a critical hydrogen bond donor for binding NESs, but its long side chain also blocks binding of sequences that do not meet NES structural requirements.

Discussions

Class 1a, 1b, 1c, 2, 3, 4 and 1a-R NES structures show 5–6 distinct backbone conformations that match their respective hydrophobic sequence patterns. We can infer structures of remaining NES classes: class 1d NESs (Ф1XXФ2XXXФ3XФ4) are likely α-helix-strand and other (−) NES classes are likely the reverse of their (+) counterparts. Symmetrical class 2, 3 and 4 patterns are identical in both (+)/(−) directions but (−) class 3 and 4 NESs, lacking β-strands to hydrogen bond with HsCRM1 Lys568, may not be ideal NESs.

Structures of many diverse NES sequences suggest how one unchanging peptide-bound CRM1 groove can recognize up to a thousand different peptides. Dependence of 3–5 hydrophobic residues in 8–15 residues-long NES arises from the substantial binding energy of anchor hydrophobic side chains interacting with 3–5 CRM1 hydrophobic pockets. However, lack of contact with NES backbone allows anchor side chains to be presented in many conformations including both N- to C-terminal orientations, explaining broad specificity defined by highly variable spacings between anchors. Interestingly, NES conformation is not entirely unrestrained, as CRM1 groove constriction imposes either exit/termination of the NES chain or its continuation in extended configuration. Solutions for the broadly specific NES recognition contrast with those of analogous systems. MHC I and II proteins, each recognizing at least hundreds of different peptide antigens, use many peptide main chain contacts for affinity with only a few supplementary peptide side chain interactions (Zhang et al., 1998; Madden, 1995). The result here is a conformational selection of particular lengths of extended peptides binding in conserved N- to C-terminal orientation, with little sequence restriction. The Calmodulin-helical peptide system is yet another contrast, as the binding domain uses its flexible fold to adapt to various helical ligands (Tidow and Nissen, 2013; Hoeflich and Ikura, 2002).

CRM1-NES structures expanded the six NES patterns derived from peptide library studies to the eleven patterns shown in Figures 1A and 3A. The ever-expanding set of NES patterns suggests that no fixed hydrophobic pattern likely describes the NES. Furthermore, only ~50% of consensus-matching previously reported NESs that were tested actually bound CRM1, contributing to the inefficiency of available NES predictors (with precision of 50% at 20% recall rate) (Xu et al., 2012b, 2015; Kosugi et al., 2014; Fu et al., 2011). The many available NES structures, diversity of NES conformations and the structurally conserved one-turn helix NES element revealed here will enable development of structure- rather than sequence-based NES predictors (Raveh et al., 2011; Schindler et al., 2015; Trellet et al., 2013; Yan et al., 2016). There is a need to identify many more CRM1 cargoes as apoptosis of different cancer cells upon CRM1 inhibition by the drug Selinexor (in clinical trials for a variety of cancers) and other inhibitors (Parikh et al., 2014; Mendonca et al., 2014; Das et al., 2015; Alexander et al., 2016; Gounder et al., 2016; Abdul Razak et al., 2016; Lapalombella et al., 2012; Inoue et al., 2013; Etchin et al., 2013; Tai et al., 2014; Cheng et al., 2014; Kim et al., 2016; Hing et al., 2016; Vercruysse et al., 2016) appears to be driven by nuclear accumulation of different sets of NES-containing cargoes, but identities of most of these apoptosis-causing cargoes are still unknown.

Finally, we find that the HsCRM1 Lys568 side chain acts as a filter that physically selects for NESs with helices that transition to strands or end at the narrow part of the CRM1 groove. Interestingly, Lys568 interacts electrostatically with HsCRM1 Glu571, which is mutated to glycine or lysine in chronic lymphocytic leukemia and lymphomas with poor prognosis (Puente et al., 2011; Jardin et al., 2016; Camus et al., 2016). Disease mutations will abolish Glu571-Lys568 contacts and possibly affect NES binding and selectivity.

Materials and methods

Crystallization of CRM1-Ran-RanBP1-NES complexes

CRM1 (ScCRM1 residues 1–1058, △377–413, 537DLTVK541 to GLCEQ, V441D), Yrb1p (yeast RanBP1 residues 62–201), human Ran full length and various NESs were expressed and purified as described in Fung et al. (Fung et al., 2015). CRM1 (K579A) mutant was expressed in pGex-TEV and purified like CRM1. Crystallization, data collection and processing, and solving of the structures were also performed in the same manner as previously described. X-ray/stereochemistry weight and X-ray/ADP weight were both optimized by phenix.refine in PHENIX (RRID:SCR_014224).

NES peptides are modeled according to the positive difference density (2mFo-DFc map) at the binding groove after refinement of the CRM1-Ran-RanBP1 model. In all structures, there are good electron densities for the NES main chain and directions of side chain density in the helical portion of the peptides allow unambiguous determination that they are all oriented in the positive (+) NES orientation. Side chain assignments of the NES peptides are guided by (1) densities of Ф side chains that point into the binding groove, (2) densities for long non-Ф side chains such as arginine, phenylalanine and methionine and (3) physical considerations such as steric clashes.

For example, to model the bound mDia2NES peptide (sequence: GGSY-1179SVPEVEALLARLRAL1193), we made use of the obvious electron densities (mFo-DFc map) for long side chains to guide sequence assignment. There is a strong side chain density suitable for an arginine side chain on the peptide (white dashed circle in Figure 1—figure supplement 2A). There are only two arginine residues in the mDia2NES peptide, Arg1189 and Arg1191. If the long side chain density is assigned to Arg1189, then Arg1191 would end up pointing into the binding groove – a very energetically unfavorable and unlikely situation. Furthermore, Ala1188 would end up in the P2 pocket of CRM1 where there is an obvious density for a longer hydrophobic side chain (left panel, Figure 1—figure supplement 2A). On the other hand, when Arg1191 is assigned to the long and continuous side chain density (adjacent to helix H12A of CRM1), the remaining side chains in the NES end up in positions that are consistent the electron densities.

For the FMRP-1bNES (sequence: 1GGS-YLKEVDQLRALERLQID20), there are no obvious long side chain densities that could help with modeling. There are however obvious densities for several side chains in the first two turn of the NES helix. These side chain densities are consistent with two possible sequence assignments: 5LKEVDQLRAL14 or the more C-terminal 11LRALERLQID20. We tested modeling of FMRP-1bNES by refining both peptide models and by testing a mutant peptide that should distinguish between the two models. Ten cycles of PHENIX refinement of the 5LKEVDQLRAL14 model resulted in positive and negative difference densities (mFo-DFc map) at several NES side chains, which suggested an incorrect assignment (left panels, Figure 1—figure supplement 2B). In contrast, different densities are absent when the 11LRALERLQID20 model is refined (right panels, Figure 1—figure supplement 2B). The final FMRP-1bNES structure was therefore modelled as 11LRALERLQID20. The sequence assignment of FMRP-1bNES was also tested using a mutant FMRP-1bNES that has the sequence YLKEVDQLRALER. If the NES is 5LKEVDQLRAL14, FMRP-1bNES mutant YLKEVDQLRALER should bind well to CRM1. However, if 11LRALERLQID20 is the FMRP-1bNES, mutant YLKEVDQLRALER should not bind CRM1 as the C-terminal half of the NES or 17LQID20 which includes Ф3 and Ф4 is missing. Results in Figure 1—figure supplement 3 show that FMRP-1bNES mutant YLKEVDQLRALER does not bind CRM1, providing further support that the NES is indeed 11LRALERLQID20 as currently assigned.

NES activity assays

Pull-down binding assays, in vivo NES activity assay and differential bleaching experiments for determining binding affinities were all performed the same way as described in Fung et al. (2015). The data were analyzed in PALMIST (Scheuermann et al., 2016) and plotted with GUSSI (Brautigam, 2015).

Accession codes

Structures and crystallographic data have been deposited at the PDB: 5UWI (CRM1-HDAC5NES), 5UWH (CRM1-PaxNES), 5UWO (CRM1-FMRP-1bNES), 5UWJ (CRM1-FMRPNES), 5UWU (CRM1-SMAD4NES) 5UWP (CRM1-mDia2NES), 5UWQ (CRM1-CDC7NES), 5UWR (CRM1-CDC7NES ext), 5UWS (CRM1-X11L2NES), 5UWT (CRM1(K579A)-Hxk2pep), 5UWW (CRM1(K579A)-DEAF1pep).

Acknowledgements

We thank the Structural Biology Laboratory and Macromolecular Biophysics Resource at UTSW for their assistance with crystallographic and biophysical data collection. Results shown in this report are derived from work performed at Argonne National Laboratory, Structural Biology Center at the Advanced Photon Source. Argonne is operated by UChicago Argonne, LLC, for the US Department of Energy, Office of Biological and Environmental Research under contract DE-AC02-06CH11357. Ho Yee Joyce Fung is a Howard Hughes Medical Institute International Student Research fellow. This work was funded by the Cancer Prevention Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT) Grants RP120352 and RP150053 (YMC), R01 GM069909 (YMC), the Welch Foundation Grant I-1532 (YMC), Leukemia and Lymphoma Society Scholar Award (YMC), the University of Texas Southwestern Endowed Scholars Program (YMC), and a Croucher Foundation Scholarship (HYJF).

Funding Statement

The funders had no role in study design, data collection and interpretation, or the decision to submit the work for publication.

Funding Information

This paper was supported by the following grants:

  • Howard Hughes Medical Institute International Student Research fellow to Ho Yee Joyce Fung.

  • Croucher Foundation Graduate Student Scholarship to Ho Yee Joyce Fung.

  • Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas RP120352 to Yuh Min Chook.

  • Cancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas RP150053 to Yuh Min Chook.

  • National Institutes of Health R01 GM069909 to Yuh Min Chook.

  • Welch Foundation I-1532 to Yuh Min Chook.

  • Leukemia and Lymphoma Society Scholar Award to Yuh Min Chook.

  • University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center Endowed Scholars Program to Yuh Min Chook.

Additional information

Competing interests

The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Author contributions

HYJF, Conceptualization, Formal analysis, Funding acquisition, Validation, Investigation, Visualization, Methodology, Writing—original draft, Writing—review and editing.

S-CF, Formal analysis, Investigation, Visualization, Methodology.

YMC, Conceptualization, Supervision, Funding acquisition, Visualization, Methodology, Writing—original draft, Writing—review and editing.

Additional files

Major datasets

The following datasets were generated:

Ho Yee Joyce Fung,Yuh Min Chook,2017,Crystal Structure of HDAC5 NES Peptide in complex with CRM1-Ran-RanBP1,http://www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore/explore.do?structureId=5UWI,Publicly available at the RCSB Protein Data Bank (accession no. 5UWI)

Ho Yee Joyce Fung,Yuh Min Chook,2017,Crystal Structure of Paxillin NES Peptide in complex with CRM1-Ran-RanBP1,www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore/explore.do?structureId=5UWH,Publicly available at the RCSB Protein Data Bank (accession no. 5UWH)

Ho Yee Joyce Fung,Yuh Min Chook,2017,Crystal Structure of Engineered FMRP-1b NES Peptide in complex with CRM1-Ran-RanBP1,www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore/explore.do?structureId=5UWO,Publicly available at the RCSB Protein Data Bank (accession no. 5UWO)

Ho Yee Joyce Fung,Yuh Min Chook,2017,Crystal Structure of FMRP NES Peptide in complex with CRM1-Ran-RanBP1,www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore/explore.do?structureId=5UWJ,Publicly available at the RCSB Protein Data Bank (accession no. 5UWJ)

Ho Yee Joyce Fung,Yuh Min Chook,2017,Crystal Structure of SMAD4 NES Peptide in complex with CRM1-Ran-RanBP1,www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore/explore.do?structureId=5UWU,Publicly available at the RCSB Protein Data Bank (accession no. 5UWU)

Ho Yee Joyce Fung,Yuh Min Chook,2017,Crystal Structure of mDia2 NES Peptide in complex with CRM1-Ran-RanBP1,www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore/explore.do?structureId=5UWP,Publicly available at the RCSB Protein Data Bank (accession no. 5UWP)

Ho Yee Joyce Fung,Yuh Min Chook,2017,Crystal Structure of CDC7 NES Peptide in complex with CRM1-Ran-RanBP1,www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore/explore.do?structureId=5UWQ,Publicly available at the RCSB Protein Data Bank (accession no. 5UWQ)

Ho Yee Joyce Fung,Yuh Min Chook,2017,Crystal Structure of CDC7 NES Peptide (extended) in complex with CRM1-Ran-RanBP1,www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore/explore.do?structureId=5UWR,Publicly available at the RCSB Protein Data Bank (accession no. 5UWR)

Ho Yee Joyce Fung,Yuh Min Chook,2017,Crystal Structure of X11L2 NES Peptide in complex with CRM1-Ran-RanBP1,www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore/explore.do?structureId=5UWS,Publicly available at the RCSB Protein Data Bank (accession no. 5UWS)

Ho Yee Joyce Fung,Yuh Min Chook,2017,Crystal Structure of Hxk2 Peptide in complex with CRM1 K579A mutant-Ran-RanBP1,www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore/explore.do?structureId=5UWT,Publicly available at the RCSB Protein Data Bank (accession no. 5UWT)

Ho Yee Joyce Fung,Yuh Min Chook,2017,Crystal Structure of DEAF1 Peptide in complex with CRM1 K579A mutant-Ran-RanBP1,www.rcsb.org/pdb/explore/explore.do?structureId=5UWW,Publicly available at the RCSB Protein Data Bank (accession no. 5UWW)

References

  1. Abdul Razak AR, Mau-Soerensen M, Gabrail NY, Gerecitano JF, Shields AF, Unger TJ, Saint-Martin JR, Carlson R, Landesman Y, McCauley D, Rashal T, Lassen U, Kim R, Stayner LA, Mirza MR, Kauffman M, Shacham S, Mahipal A. First-in-class, first-in-human phase I study of Selinexor, a selective inhibitor of nuclear export, in patients with advanced solid tumors. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2016;34:4142–4150. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.65.3949. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Alexander TB, Lacayo NJ, Choi JK, Ribeiro RC, Pui CH, Rubnitz JE. Phase I study of selinexor, a selective inhibitor of nuclear export, in combination with fludarabine and cytarabine, in pediatric relapsed or refractory acute leukemia. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2016;34:4094–4101. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.67.5066. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bogerd HP, Fridell RA, Benson RE, Hua J, Cullen BR. Protein sequence requirements for function of the human T-cell leukemia virus type 1 rex nuclear export signal delineated by a novel in vivo randomization-selection assay. Molecular and Cellular Biology. 1996;16:4207–4214. doi: 10.1128/MCB.16.8.4207. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Brautigam CA. Calculations and Publication-Quality illustrations for analytical ultracentrifugation data. Methods in Enzymology. 2015;562:109–133. doi: 10.1016/bs.mie.2015.05.001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Camus V, Stamatoullas A, Mareschal S, Viailly PJ, Sarafan-Vasseur N, Bohers E, Dubois S, Picquenot JM, Ruminy P, Maingonnat C, Bertrand P, Cornic M, Tallon-Simon V, Becker S, Veresezan L, Frebourg T, Vera P, Bastard C, Tilly H, Jardin F. Detection and prognostic value of recurrent exportin 1 mutations in tumor and cell-free circulating DNA of patients with classical hodgkin lymphoma. Haematologica. 2016;101:1094–1101. doi: 10.3324/haematol.2016.145102. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Cheng Y, Holloway MP, Nguyen K, McCauley D, Landesman Y, Kauffman MG, Shacham S, Altura RA. XPO1 (CRM1) inhibition represses STAT3 activation to drive a survivin-dependent oncogenic switch in triple-negative breast Cancer. Molecular Cancer Therapeutics. 2014;13:675–686. doi: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-13-0416. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Das A, Wei G, Parikh K, Liu D. Selective inhibitors of nuclear export (SINE) in hematological malignancies. Experimental Hematology & Oncology. 2015;4:7. doi: 10.1186/s40164-015-0002-5. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Dong X, Biswas A, Süel KE, Jackson LK, Martinez R, Gu H, Chook YM. Structural basis for leucine-rich nuclear export signal recognition by CRM1. Nature. 2009;458:1136–1141. doi: 10.1038/nature07975. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Etchin J, Sanda T, Mansour MR, Kentsis A, Montero J, Le BT, Christie AL, McCauley D, Rodig SJ, Kauffman M, Shacham S, Stone R, Letai A, Kung AL, Thomas Look A. KPT-330 inhibitor of CRM1 (XPO1)-mediated nuclear export has selective anti-leukaemic activity in preclinical models of T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukaemia and acute myeloid leukaemia. British Journal of Haematology. 2013;161:117–127. doi: 10.1111/bjh.12231. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Fornerod M, Ohno M, Yoshida M, Mattaj IW. CRM1 is an export receptor for leucine-rich nuclear export signals. Cell. 1997;90:1051–1060. doi: 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80371-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Fu SC, Imai K, Horton P. Prediction of leucine-rich nuclear export signal containing proteins with NESsential. Nucleic Acids Research. 2011;39:e111. doi: 10.1093/nar/gkr493. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Fukuda M, Asano S, Nakamura T, Adachi M, Yoshida M, Yanagida M, Nishida E. CRM1 is responsible for intracellular transport mediated by the nuclear export signal. Nature. 1997;390:308–311. doi: 10.1038/36894. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Fung HY, Fu SC, Brautigam CA, Chook YM. Structural determinants of nuclear export signal orientation in binding to exportin CRM1. eLife. 2015;4:10034. doi: 10.7554/eLife.10034. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Gounder MM, Zer A, Tap WD, Salah S, Dickson MA, Gupta AA, Keohan ML, Loong HH, D'Angelo SP, Baker S, Condy M, Nyquist-Schultz K, Tanner L, Erinjeri JP, Jasmine FH, Friedlander S, Carlson R, Unger TJ, Saint-Martin JR, Rashal T, Ellis J, Kauffman M, Shacham S, Schwartz GK, Abdul Razak AR. Phase IB study of selinexor, a First-in-Class inhibitor of nuclear export, in patients with advanced refractory bone or soft tissue sarcoma. Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2016;34:3166–3174. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.67.6346. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Güttler T, Madl T, Neumann P, Deichsel D, Corsini L, Monecke T, Ficner R, Sattler M, Görlich D. NES consensus redefined by structures of PKI-type and Rev-type nuclear export signals bound to CRM1. Nature Structural & Molecular Biology. 2010;17:1367–1376. doi: 10.1038/nsmb.1931. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Hing ZA, Fung HY, Ranganathan P, Mitchell S, El-Gamal D, Woyach JA, Williams K, Goettl VM, Smith J, Yu X, Meng X, Sun Q, Cagatay T, Lehman AM, Lucas DM, Baloglu E, Shacham S, Kauffman MG, Byrd JC, Chook YM, Garzon R, Lapalombella R. Next-generation XPO1 inhibitor shows improved efficacy and in vivo tolerability in hematological malignancies. Leukemia. 2016;30:2364–2372. doi: 10.1038/leu.2016.136. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Hoeflich KP, Ikura M. Calmodulin in action: diversity in target recognition and activation mechanisms. Cell. 2002;108:739–742. doi: 10.1016/S0092-8674(02)00682-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Inoue H, Kauffman M, Shacham S, Landesman Y, Yang J, Evans CP, Weiss RH. CRM1 blockade by selective inhibitors of nuclear export attenuates kidney Cancer growth. The Journal of Urology. 2013;189:2317–2326. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.10.018. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Jardin F, Pujals A, Pelletier L, Bohers E, Camus V, Mareschal S, Dubois S, Sola B, Ochmann M, Lemonnier F, Viailly PJ, Bertrand P, Maingonnat C, Traverse-Glehen A, Gaulard P, Damotte D, Delarue R, Haioun C, Argueta C, Landesman Y, Salles G, Jais JP, Figeac M, Copie-Bergman C, Molina TJ, Picquenot JM, Cornic M, Fest T, Milpied N, Lemasle E, Stamatoullas A, Moeller P, Dyer MJ, Sundstrom C, Bastard C, Tilly H, Leroy K. Recurrent mutations of the exportin 1 gene (XPO1) and their impact on selective inhibitor of nuclear export compounds sensitivity in primary mediastinal B-cell lymphoma. American Journal of Hematology. 2016;91:923–930. doi: 10.1002/ajh.24451. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Kırlı K, Karaca S, Dehne HJ, Samwer M, Pan KT, Lenz C, Urlaub H, Görlich D. A deep proteomics perspective on CRM1-mediated nuclear export and nucleocytoplasmic partitioning. eLife. 2015;4:11466. doi: 10.7554/eLife.11466. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Kim J, McMillan E, Kim HS, Venkateswaran N, Makkar G, Rodriguez-Canales J, Villalobos P, Neggers JE, Mendiratta S, Wei S, Landesman Y, Senapedis W, Baloglu E, Chow CB, Frink RE, Gao B, Roth M, Minna JD, Daelemans D, Wistuba II, Posner BA, Scaglioni PP, White MA. XPO1-dependent nuclear export is a druggable vulnerability in KRAS-mutant lung Cancer. Nature. 2016;538:114–117. doi: 10.1038/nature19771. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Kosugi S, Hasebe M, Tomita M, Yanagawa H. Nuclear export signal consensus sequences defined using a localization-based yeast selection system. Traffic. 2008;9:2053–2062. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0854.2008.00825.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Kosugi S, Yanagawa H, Terauchi R, Tabata S. NESmapper: accurate prediction of leucine-rich nuclear export signals using activity-based profiles. PLoS Computational Biology. 2014;10:e1003841. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003841. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. la Cour T, Kiemer L, Mølgaard A, Gupta R, Skriver K, Brunak S. Analysis and prediction of leucine-rich nuclear export signals. Protein Engineering Design and Selection. 2004;17:527–536. doi: 10.1093/protein/gzh062. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Lapalombella R, Sun Q, Williams K, Tangeman L, Jha S, Zhong Y, Goettl V, Mahoney E, Berglund C, Gupta S, Farmer A, Mani R, Johnson AJ, Lucas D, Mo X, Daelemans D, Sandanayaka V, Shechter S, McCauley D, Shacham S, Kauffman M, Chook YM, Byrd JC. Selective inhibitors of nuclear export show that CRM1/XPO1 is a target in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Blood. 2012;120:4621–4634. doi: 10.1182/blood-2012-05-429506. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Madden DR. The three-dimensional structure of peptide-MHC complexes. Annual Review of Immunology. 1995;13:587–622. doi: 10.1146/annurev.iy.13.040195.003103. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Mendonca J, Sharma A, Kim HS, Hammers H, Meeker A, De Marzo A, Carducci M, Kauffman M, Shacham S, Kachhap S. Selective inhibitors of nuclear export (SINE) as novel therapeutics for prostate Cancer. Oncotarget. 2014;5:6102–6112. doi: 10.18632/oncotarget.2174. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Meyer BE, Meinkoth JL, Malim MH. Nuclear transport of human immunodeficiency virus type 1, visna virus, and equine infectious Anemia virus rev proteins: identification of a family of transferable nuclear export signals. Journal of Virology. 1996;70:2350–2359. doi: 10.1128/jvi.70.4.2350-2359.1996. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Monecke T, Güttler T, Neumann P, Dickmanns A, Görlich D, Ficner R. Crystal structure of the nuclear export receptor CRM1 in complex with Snurportin1 and RanGTP. Science. 2009;324:1087–1091. doi: 10.1126/science.1173388. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Ossareh-Nazari B, Bachelerie F, Dargemont C. Evidence for a role of CRM1 in signal-mediated nuclear protein export. Science. 1997;278:141–144. doi: 10.1126/science.278.5335.141. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Parikh K, Cang S, Sekhri A, Liu D. Selective inhibitors of nuclear export (SINE)--a novel class of anti-cancer agents. Journal of Hematology & Oncology. 2014;7:78. doi: 10.1186/s13045-014-0078-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Puente XS, Pinyol M, Quesada V, Conde L, Ordóñez GR, Villamor N, Escaramis G, Jares P, Beà S, González-Díaz M, Bassaganyas L, Baumann T, Juan M, López-Guerra M, Colomer D, Tubío JM, López C, Navarro A, Tornador C, Aymerich M, Rozman M, Hernández JM, Puente DA, Freije JM, Velasco G, Gutiérrez-Fernández A, Costa D, Carrió A, Guijarro S, Enjuanes A, Hernández L, Yagüe J, Nicolás P, Romeo-Casabona CM, Himmelbauer H, Castillo E, Dohm JC, de Sanjosé S, Piris MA, de Alava E, San Miguel J, Royo R, Gelpí JL, Torrents D, Orozco M, Pisano DG, Valencia A, Guigó R, Bayés M, Heath S, Gut M, Klatt P, Marshall J, Raine K, Stebbings LA, Futreal PA, Stratton MR, Campbell PJ, Gut I, López-Guillermo A, Estivill X, Montserrat E, López-Otín C, Campo E. Whole-genome sequencing identifies recurrent mutations in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. Nature. 2011;475:101–105. doi: 10.1038/nature10113. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Raveh B, London N, Zimmerman L, Schueler-Furman O. Rosetta flexpepdock ab-initio: simultaneous folding, docking and refinement of peptides onto their receptors. PLoS One. 2011;6:e18934. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0018934. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  34. Richards SA, Lounsbury KM, Carey KL, Macara IG. A nuclear export signal is essential for the cytosolic localization of the ran binding protein, RanBP1. The Journal of Cell Biology. 1996;134:1157–1168. doi: 10.1083/jcb.134.5.1157. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Scheuermann TH, Padrick SB, Gardner KH, Brautigam CA. On the acquisition and analysis of microscale thermophoresis data. Analytical Biochemistry. 2016;496:79–93. doi: 10.1016/j.ab.2015.12.013. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  36. Schindler CE, de Vries SJ, Zacharias M. Fully blind Peptide-Protein docking with pepATTRACT. Structure. 2015;23:1507–1515. doi: 10.1016/j.str.2015.05.021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  37. Scott MG, Le Rouzic E, Périanin A, Pierotti V, Enslen H, Benichou S, Marullo S, Benmerah A. Differential nucleocytoplasmic shuttling of beta-arrestins. characterization of a leucine-rich nuclear export signal in beta-arrestin2. Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2002;277:37693–37701. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M207552200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Stade K, Ford CS, Guthrie C, Weis K. Exportin 1 (Crm1p) is an essential nuclear export factor. Cell. 1997;90:1041–1050. doi: 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80370-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Tai YT, Landesman Y, Acharya C, Calle Y, Zhong MY, Cea M, Tannenbaum D, Cagnetta A, Reagan M, Munshi AA, Senapedis W, Saint-Martin JR, Kashyap T, Shacham S, Kauffman M, Gu Y, Wu L, Ghobrial I, Zhan F, Kung AL, Schey SA, Richardson P, Munshi NC, Anderson KC. CRM1 inhibition induces tumor cell cytotoxicity and impairs osteoclastogenesis in multiple myeloma: molecular mechanisms and therapeutic implications. Leukemia. 2014;28:155–165. doi: 10.1038/leu.2013.115. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  40. Thakar K, Karaca S, Port SA, Urlaub H, Kehlenbach RH. Identification of CRM1-dependent nuclear export cargos using quantitative mass spectrometry. Molecular & Cellular Proteomics. 2013;12:664–678. doi: 10.1074/mcp.M112.024877. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  41. Tidow H, Nissen P. Structural diversity of calmodulin binding to its target sites. FEBS Journal. 2013;280:5551–5565. doi: 10.1111/febs.12296. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  42. Torrance GM, Leader DP, Gilbert DR, Milner-White EJ. A novel main chain motif in proteins bridged by cationic groups: the niche. Journal of Molecular Biology. 2009;385:1076–1086. doi: 10.1016/j.jmb.2008.11.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Trellet M, Melquiond AS, Bonvin AM. A unified conformational selection and induced fit approach to protein-peptide docking. PLoS One. 2013;8:e58769. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0058769. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  44. Tsukahara F, Maru Y. Identification of novel nuclear export and nuclear localization-related signals in human heat shock cognate protein 70. Journal of Biological Chemistry. 2004;279:8867–8872. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M308848200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  45. Vercruysse T, De Bie J, Neggers JE, Jacquemyn M, Vanstreels E, Schmid-Burgk JL, Hornung V, Baloglu E, Landesman Y, Senapedis W, Shacham S, Dagklis A, Cools J, Daelemans D. The second-generation exportin-1 inhibitor KPT-8602 demonstrates potent activity against acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Clinical Cancer Research. 2016 doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-1580. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  46. Wen W, Meinkoth JL, Tsien RY, Taylor SS. Identification of a signal for rapid export of proteins from the nucleus. Cell. 1995;82:463–473. doi: 10.1016/0092-8674(95)90435-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  47. Xu D, Farmer A, Collett G, Grishin NV, Chook YM. Sequence and structural analyses of nuclear export signals in the NESdb database. Molecular Biology of the Cell. 2012b;23:3677–3693. doi: 10.1091/mbc.E12-01-0046. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  48. Xu D, Farmer A, Collett G, Grishin NV, Chook YM. Sequence and structural analyses of nuclear export signals in the NESdb database. Molecular Biology of the Cell. 2012c;23:3677–3693. doi: 10.1091/mbc.E12-01-0046. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  49. Xu D, Grishin NV, Chook YM. NESdb: a database of NES-containing CRM1 cargoes. Molecular Biology of the Cell. 2012a;23:3673–3676. doi: 10.1091/mbc.E12-01-0045. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  50. Xu D, Marquis K, Pei J, Fu SC, Cağatay T, Grishin NV, Chook YM. LocNES: a computational tool for locating classical NESs in CRM1 cargo proteins. Bioinformatics. 2015;31:1357–1365. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btu826. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  51. Yan C, Xu X, Zou X. Fully blind docking at the atomic level for Protein-Peptide complex structure prediction. Structure. 2016;24:1842–1853. doi: 10.1016/j.str.2016.07.021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  52. Zhang C, Anderson A, DeLisi C. Structural principles that govern the peptide-binding motifs of class I MHC molecules. Journal of Molecular Biology. 1998;281:929–947. doi: 10.1006/jmbi.1998.1982. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
eLife. 2017 Mar 10;6:e23961. doi: 10.7554/eLife.23961.045

Decision letter

Editor: Mingjie Zhang1

In the interests of transparency, eLife includes the editorial decision letter and accompanying author responses. A lightly edited version of the letter sent to the authors after peer review is shown, indicating the most substantive concerns; minor comments are not usually included.

Thank you for submitting your article "CRM1 recognizes diverse Nuclear Export Signals conformations" for consideration by eLife. Your article has been reviewed by two peer reviewers, and the evaluation has been overseen by a Reviewing Editor and John Kuriyan as the Senior Editor. The following individuals involved in review of your submission have agreed to reveal their identity: Gino Cingolani (Reviewer #1) and Douglas Barrick (Reviewer #2).

The reviewers have discussed the reviews with one another and the Reviewing Editor has drafted this decision to help you prepare a revised submission.

Summary:

This "Research Advances" manuscript describes continued structural analysis of NES sequences bound to CRM1, a nuclear export receptor. In the previous 2015 eLife paper, the authors published two crystal structures of bound sequences and showed that they can interact in different ways, reversing chain orientation. In the present study, they solve eight additional structures from diverse sequences, and characterize additional variation in the mode of binding. The results demonstrate that a 'folded' secondary structure is not a prerequisite to bear a functional NES. Instead, sidechains from the NES sequences arranged in conformations that match the tight and restrained groove generated at the HEAT:HEAT interface are the key determinants. The results help to define different sequence motifs for binding, and how they translate into structure. The present study is certainly an advance from the previous work. As such, the manuscript is favorable for the format of "Research Advances" in eLife.

Essential revisions:

1) One major comment to be addressed in revision is that the authors should do a better job in Figure 1 showing the sequences in each NES subfamily, their expected structures, and their actual structures (perhaps a string of h's, s's, and t's). And importantly, indicate which sequences are from the current study, and which are from previous studies. Without a better guide, most readers won't remember which NES sequence has which structure, sequence motif, and orientation.

2) Although all of the crystal structures are solved at a resolution ranging from 2.0~2.5 Å, the electron densities for some of the NES peptides may not have sufficient quality for reliably model building (some of the sidechain densities for the critical hydrophobic residues are missing, e.g. FMRP-1b, mDia-2, etc.). The overall statistics (R factor and R-free factor) cannot reflect this because the peptide only constitutes a small portion of the entire structure. Moreover, the B factors for some of the peptides are extremely high compared to the CRM1*-Ran-RanBP1 protein, suggesting overfitting of the peptides to some extent. The authors need to address this point by stating the rationales for modelling the peptides as they reported.

eLife. 2017 Mar 10;6:e23961. doi: 10.7554/eLife.23961.046

Author response

Essential revisions:

1) One major comment to be addressed in revision is that the authors should do a better job in Figure 1 showing the sequences in each NES subfamily, their expected structures, and their actual structures (perhaps a string of h's, s's, and t's). And importantly, indicate which sequences are from the current study, and which are from previous studies. Without a better guide, most readers won't remember which NES sequence has which structure, sequence motif, and orientation.

To better show the sequence patterns of each NES subfamily, we changed the font in Figure 1A of the manuscript to the monospace Courier New font. To incorporate information about potential α-helices within consensus sequences of the different NES classes or subfamily, we shaded these regions grey. These regions of the NESs are predicted to be amphipathic α-helices because their hydrophobic residues form patterns of i, i+4, i+7 or i, i+3, i+7 or i, i+3, i+7, i+10. This explanation of how we predict α-helical parts of NESs is now included in 1) the legend for Figure 1, 2) the revised Introduction where we added new text to better explain the unexpected previously solved structures of CRM1-bound hRio2NES and CPEB4NES which has the potentially all-helical class 3 pattern, and 3) the Results section where we revised the text to include rationale for the potentially non-helical class 2 and class 1b NESs.

We also added information into Figure 1B, D-F and Figure 2 of the manuscript so that they can serve as better guides to clearly distinguish previous structures from new structures, and connect sequence motifs with peptide structure/orientation:

1) We added prominently displayed PDB IDs to the structures in Figure 1B of the manuscript to clearly indicate that all three peptides are previously published structures.

2) In Figure 1B, we also added the sequence of each NES and their respective NES class, marked Φ0-Φ4 residues in the sequences and labeled one Φ residue of each peptide structure to connect the structures to the sequences.

3) In Figure 1D-F and Figure 2, we clearly indicated the NES class or subfamily for each NES peptide, marked the Φ0-Φ4 residues in the sequences, and one Φ residue in each peptide structure.

Changes in the text of the manuscript:

We revised the legend for Figure 1 according to the changes above: “(A) NES sequence patterns (Φ is Leu, Val, Ile, Phe or Met and X is any amino acid). Potential amphipathic α-helices, predicted with hydrophobic patterns of i, i+4, i+7 or i, i+3, i+7 or i, i+3, i+7, i+10, are shaded grey.”

We also revised text in the Introduction and Results of the manuscript. The revised text in Introduction reads: “Previously, we studied NESs with the Φ1XXΦ2XXXΦ3XXΦ4 (class 3) pattern where the i, i+3, i+7, i+10 Φ positions suggested a single long amphipathic helix. […] Structures of such NESs from kinase RIO2 and cytoplasmic polyadenylation element-binding protein 4 (hRio2NES, CPEB4NES) showed that they do not adopt all-helical conformations but unexpectedly adopt helix-strand conformations that bind CRM1 in the opposite or minus (-) polypeptide direction to that of SNUPNNES, PKINES and RevNES ((+) NESs) (16).”

The revised text in Results reads: “We study three NESs that uniquely match the all-helical class 3 pattern (Ф1XXФ2XXXФ3XXФ4). Because most previously studied NESs have substantial helical content, we also study five NESs that match class 2 (Ф1XФ2XXФ3XФ4) and class 1b (Ф1XXФ2XXФ3XФ4) patterns, where the hydrophobic residue positions do not suggest an amphipathic helix (Figure 1A).”

2) Although all of the crystal structures are solved at a resolution ranging from 2.0~2.5 Å, the electron densities for some of the NES peptides may not have sufficient quality for reliably model building (some of the sidechain densities for the critical hydrophobic residues are missing, e.g. FMRP-1b, mDia-2, etc.). The overall statistics (R factor and R-free factor) cannot reflect this because the peptide only constitutes a small portion of the entire structure. Moreover, the B factors for some of the peptides are extremely high compared to the CRM1*-Ran-RanBP1 protein, suggesting overfitting of the peptides to some extent. The authors need to address this point by stating the rationales for modelling the peptides as they reported.

We thank the reviewers for pointing out the need to provide clear rationale for the way we modeled the NES peptides. As they noted, densities are missing for the Φ1 and Φ3 side chains of mDia2NES and for the Φ1 side chain of FMRP-1bNES.

To model the bound mDia2NES peptide (sequence: GGSY-1179SVPEVEALLARLRAL1193), we made use of the obvious electron densities (mFo-DFc map) for long side chains to guide sequence assignment. There is strong side chain density suitable for an arginine side chain on the peptide (white dashed circle in Figure 1—figure supplement 2A). There are only two arginine residues in the mDia2NES peptide, Arg1189 and Arg1191. If the long side chain density is assigned to Arg1189, then Arg1191 would end up pointing into the binding groove – a very energetically unfavorable and unlikely situation. Furthermore, Ala1188 would end up in the P2 pocket of CRM1 where there is obvious density for a longer hydrophobic side chain (left panel of Figure 1—figure supplement 2A). On the other hand, when Arg1191 is assigned to the long and continuous side chain density (adjacent to helix H12A of CRM1), the remaining side chains in the NES end up in positions that are consistent the electron densities.

For the FMRP-1bNES (sequence: 1GGS-YLKEVDQLRALERLQID20), there are no obvious long side chain densities that could help with modeling. There are however obvious densities for several side chains in the first two turn of the NES helix. These side chain densities are consistent with two possible sequence assignments: 5LKEVDQLRAL14 or the more C-terminal 11LRALERLQID20. We tested modeling of FMRP-1bNES by refining both peptide models and by testing a mutant peptide that should distinguish between the two models. Ten cycles of PHENIX refinement of the 5LKEVDQLRAL14 model resulted in positive and negative difference densities (mFo-DFc map) at several NES side chains, which suggested an incorrect assignment (left panels, Figure 1—figure supplement 2B). In contrast, difference densities are absent when the 11LRALERLQID20 model is refined (right panels, Figure 1—figure supplement 2B). The final FMRP-1bNES structure was therefore modelled as 11LRALERLQID20.

The sequence assignment of FMRP-1bNES was also tested in an additional experiement using a mutant FMRP-1bNES that has the sequence YLKEVDQLRALER. If the NES is 5LKEVDQLRAL14, FMRP-1bNES mutant YLKEVDQLRALER should bind well to CRM1. However, if 11LRALERLQID20 is the FMRP-1bNES, mutant YLKEVDQLRALER should not bind CRM1 as the C-terminal half of the NES or 17LQID20 which includes Ф3 and Ф4 is missing. New experimental results in Figure 1—figure supplement 3 show that FMRP-1bNES mutant YLKEVDQLRALER does not bind CRM1, providing further support that the NES is indeed 11LRALERLQID20 as currently assigned.

We also agree with the reviewers that B-factors of the NES peptides, which are mostly between 60-90 Å2, with the expection of CDC7NES-ext and Hxk2pep at 90-100 Å2, are high compared to the overall average B-factors for the proteins in the crystalsin all structures). We examined the average B-factors for 29 CRM1 residues that line the NES groove, and noticed that they are in the 50-70 Å2 range, higher than average B-factors for the rest of CRM1 but lower than NES B-factors. The high NES B-factors are likely due to partial occupancy of the NES peptides in the CRM1 grooves. Our peptide models remain reliable despite high B-factors as kick OMIT densities calculated with NES peptides omitted clearly show presence of the NES peptides and the omit densities also match the final peptide models well (Figure 1—figure supplement 4 and Figure 2—figure supplement 1).

Changes in the text of the manuscript:

We added a sentence in main text of the manuscript (Results section) to refer to the Methods section for details on our modeling strategy: “All eight NESs bind HsCRM1 in the presence of RanGTP with dissociation constants (KDs) of 670 nM-20 μM, and were crystallized bound to the previously described engineered ScCRM1-RanGppNHp-Yrb1p complex (Figure 1—figure supplement 1, Figure 1—source data 1, 2, 3) (Xu et al., 2012). Details of how the NES peptides were modelled can be found in the Methods section and in Figure 1—figure supplement 2, 3.”

We also added the following description of how peptides are modeled to the Methods section:

“NES peptides are modeled according to the positive difference density (2mFo-DFc map) at the binding groove after refinement of the CRM1-Ran-RanBP1 model. […] Results in Figure 1—figure supplement 3 show that FMRP-1bNES mutant YLKEVDQLRALER does not bind CRM1, providing further support that the NES is indeed 11LRALERLQID20 as currently assigned.”

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    Figure 1—source data 1. Data collection and refinement statistics.

    DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.003

    elife-23961-fig1-data1.docx (21.4KB, docx)
    DOI: 10.7554/eLife.23961.003
    Figure 1—source data 2. Data collection and refinement statistics (cont.).

    DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.004

    elife-23961-fig1-data2.docx (19.7KB, docx)
    DOI: 10.7554/eLife.23961.004
    Figure 1—source data 3. Crystallization conditions of CRM1-NES complexes.

    DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.005

    elife-23961-fig1-data3.docx (15.7KB, docx)
    DOI: 10.7554/eLife.23961.005
    Figure 4—source data 1. Data collection and refinement statistics and crystallization conditions.

    DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7554/eLife.23961.019

    elife-23961-fig4-data1.docx (16.1KB, docx)
    DOI: 10.7554/eLife.23961.019

    Articles from eLife are provided here courtesy of eLife Sciences Publications, Ltd

    RESOURCES