Martin R. Pool

BACKGROUND: Morbidity and mortality of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is increased in metabolic disorders. However, options for preventing and treating these prevalent outcomes are limited. Intramyocardial lipotoxicity contributes to cardiac dysfunction. Here, we investigate the mechanisms underlying EDEM2 (endoplasmic reticulum degradation–enhancing alpha-mannosidase–like protein 2) regulation of cardiac lipid homeostasis and assess strategies that inhibit the incidence and progression of HFpEF. METHODS: Metabolic stress was induced in C57BL/6 male mice using a high-fat diet and N ω-nitro-L-arginine methyl ester. The recombinant adeno-associated virus 9 delivery system was used for loss- and gain-of-function studies. Palmitic acid and oleic acid stimulation of rat cardiomyocytes and human induced pluripotent stem cell–derived cardiomyocytes imitated a condition of high lipids in vitro. Molecular mechanisms were investigated via RNA sequencing, mass spectrometry proteomics, lipidomic analyses, transmission electron microscopy, histology, and luciferase reporter assays. RESULTS: In the human heart, we first detected lipid overload accompanied by a reduction of XBP1 (X-box binding protein 1) under metabolic stress. Thereafter, a decrease in EDEM2 was confirmed in human and mouse HFpEF hearts. Given that XBP1s (spliced X-box binding protein 1) is a transcription factor, EDEM2 was identified as its new target in cardiomyocytes. EDEM2 knockdown mice manifested lipid droplet accumulation and higher levels of triglycerides and diglycerides in the myocardium, aggravating oxidative stress, hypertrophy, and the onset and progression of HFpEF under metabolic stress. XBP1s ablation mice displayed a similar myocardial lipid disturbance and cardiac phenotypes, which were reversed by EDEM2 overexpression. Mechanistically, the findings obtained from rat cardiomyocytes and human induced pluripotent stem cell–derived cardiomyocytes demonstrated that, in the presence of EDEM2, SEC23A mediated intracellular translocation of ATGL (adipose triglyceride lipase) under fatty acid stimulation, inhibiting ATGL degradation and excessive intracellular lipid droplets. Furthermore, the functional studies supported that EDEM2 prevention of lipid overload occurred in an ATGL-dependent manner. Therapeutically, cardiac XBP1s or EDEM2 restoration mitigated lipid deposition and preserved lipid profiles in the myocardium, thus preventing the development of HFpEF. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate a cardioprotective mechanism regulating myocardial lipid homeostasis. The findings provide a promising therapeutic target to prevent and treat HFpEF, a condition with limited treatment options.

The mechanics of how proteins are generated from mRNA is increasingly well understood. However, much less is known about how protein production is coordinated and orchestrated within the crowded intracellular environment, especially in eukaryotic cells. Recent studies suggest that localized sites exist for the coordinated production of specific proteins. These sites have been termed “translation factories” and roles in protein complex formation, protein localization, inheritance, and translation regulation have been postulated. In this article, we review the evidence supporting the translation of mRNA at these sites, the details of their mechanism of formation, and their likely functional significance. Finally, we consider the key uncertainties regarding these elusive structures in cells.This article is categorized under: Translation Translation > Mechanisms RNA Export and Localization > RNA Localization Translation > Regulation

The endoplasmic reticulum represents the gateway to the secretory pathway. Here, proteins destined for secretion, as well as soluble and membrane proteins that reside in the endomembrane system and plasma membrane, are triaged from proteins that will remain in the cytosol or be targeted to other cellular organelles. This process requires the faithful recognition of specific targeting signals and subsequent delivery mechanisms to then target them to the translocases present at the ER membrane, which can either translocate them into the ER lumen or insert them into the lipid bilayer. This review focuses on the current understanding of the first step in this process representing the targeting phase. Targeting is typically mediated by cleavable N-terminal hydrophobic signal sequences or internal membrane anchor sequences; these can either be captured co-translationally at the ribosome or recognised post-translationally and then delivered to the ER translocases. Location and features of the targeting sequence dictate which of several overlapping targeting pathway substrates will be used. Mutations in the targeting machinery or targeting signals can be linked to diseases.

The Sec61 complex is the major protein translocation channel of the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), where it plays a central role in the biogenesis of membrane and secretory proteins. Whilst Sec61‐mediated protein translocation is typically coupled to polypeptide synthesis, suggestive of significant complexity, an obvious characteristic of this core translocation machinery is its surprising simplicity. Over thirty years after its initial discovery, we now understand that the Sec61 complex is in fact the central piece of an elaborate jigsaw puzzle, which can be partly solved using new research findings. We propose that the Sec61 complex acts as a dynamic hub for co‐translational protein translocation at the ER, proactively recruiting a range of accessory complexes that enhance and regulate its function in response to different protein clients. It is now clear that the Sec61 complex does not have a monopoly on co‐translational insertion, with some transmembrane proteins preferentially utilising the ER membrane complex instead. We also have a better understanding of post‐insertion events, where at least one membrane‐embedded chaperone complex can capture the newly inserted transmembrane domains of multi‐span proteins and co‐ordinate their assembly into a native structure. Having discovered this array of Sec61‐associated components and competitors, our next challenge is to understand how they act together in order to expand the range and complexity of the membrane proteins that can be synthesised at the ER. Furthermore, this diversity of components and pathways may open up new opportunities for targeted therapeutic interventions designed to selectively modulate protein biogenesis at the ER.

Two distinct pathways deliver secretory proteins to the Sec61 protein translocase in the endoplasmic reticulum membrane. The canonical pathway requires the signal recognition particle (SRP) and its cognate receptor (SR), and targets ribosome-associated proteins to the Sec translocase. The SRP-independent pathway requires the Sec translocase-associated ER membrane protein Sec62 and can be uncoupled from translation. Here we show that SR switches translocons to SRP-dependent translocation by displacing Sec62. This activity localizes to the charged linker region between the longin and GTPase domains of SRα. Using truncation variants, crosslinking and translocation assays reveals two elements with distinct functions as follows: one rearranges the translocon, displacing Sec62 from Sec61. A second promotes ribosome binding and is conserved between all eukaryotes. These specific regions in SRα reprogramme the Sec translocon and facilitate recruitment of ribosome-nascent chain complexes. Overall, our study identifies an important function of SR, which mechanistically links two seemingly independent modes of translocation.

The ribosome exit site is a focal point for the interaction of protein-biogenesis factors that guide the fate of nascent polypeptides. These factors include chaperones such as NAC, N-terminal-modifying enzymes like Methionine aminopeptidase (MetAP), and the signal recognition particle (SRP), which targets secretory and membrane proteins to the ER. These factors potentially compete with one another in the short time-window when the nascent chain first emerges at the exit site, suggesting a need for regulation. Here, we show that MetAP contacts the ribosome at the universal adaptor site where it is adjacent to the α subunit of NAC. SRP is also known to contact the ribosome at this site. In the absence of NAC, MetAP and SRP antagonize each other, indicating a novel role for NAC in regulating the access of MetAP and SRP to the ribosome. NAC also functions in SRP-dependent targeting and helps to protect substrates from aggregation before translocation.