From the Cover: Trypanosomal TAC40 constitutes a novel subclass of mitochondrial β-barrel proteins specialized in mitochondrial genome inheritance

Mitochondria cannot form de novo but require mechanisms allowing their inheritance to daughter cells. In contrast to most other eukaryotes Trypanosoma brucei has a single mitochondrion whose single-unit genome is physically connected to the flagellum. Here we identify a β-barrel mitochondrial outer membrane protein, termed tripartite attachment complex 40 (TAC40), that localizes to this connection. TAC40 is essential for mitochondrial DNA inheritance and belongs to the mitochondrial porin protein family. However, it is not specifically related to any of the three subclasses of mitochondrial porins represented by the metabolite transporter voltage-dependent anion channel (VDAC), the protein translocator of the outer membrane 40 (TOM40), or the fungi-specific MDM10, a component of the endoplasmic reticulum–mitochondria encounter structure (ERMES). MDM10 and TAC40 mediate cellular architecture and participate in transmembrane complexes that are essential for mitochondrial DNA inheritance. In yeast MDM10, in the context of the ERMES, is postulated to connect the mitochondrial genomes to actin filaments, whereas in trypanosomes TAC40 mediates the linkage of the mitochondrial DNA to the basal body of the flagellum. However, TAC40 does not colocalize with trypanosomal orthologs of ERMES components and, unlike MDM10, it regulates neither mitochondrial morphology nor the assembly of the protein translocase. TAC40 therefore defines a novel subclass of mitochondrial porins that is distinct from VDAC, TOM40, and MDM10. However, whereas the architecture of the TAC40-containing complex in trypanosomes and the MDM10-containing ERMES in yeast is very different, both are organized around a β-barrel protein of the mitochondrial porin family that mediates a DNA–cytoskeleton linkage that is essential for mitochondrial DNA inheritance.Mitochondria are a hallmark of all eukaroytic cells. They derive from an endosymbiontic event between a free-living bacterium and a presumably prokaryotic host cell. More than 1.5 billion years of evolution resulted in a great diversification of mitochondria. As a consequence, the shape and number of organelles per cell as well as size, content, copy number, and organization of their genomes vary greatly between different taxons (1). However, all eukaryotes must be able to faithfully transmit mitochondria to their offspring (2, 3).Unlike most other eukaryotes, the parasitic protozoa Trypanosoma brucei has a single mitochondrion throughout its life and its cell cycle. Due to the single-unit nature of the mitochondrion, its duplication must be coordinated with the duplication of the nucleus (4). The mitochondrial genome of T. brucei, termed kinetoplast DNA (kDNA), is essential for growth of both the procyclic insect stage and the bloodstream form of the parasite (5). It consists of a disk-shaped single-unit kDNA network that localizes to a distinct region within the mitochondrial matrix (6). The kDNA is physically connected with the cytosolic basal body, the organizing center of the eukaryotic flagellum, via a high-order transmembrane structure termed tripartite attachment complex (TAC) (7) of which only few components have been identified (8–10). Replication of the kDNA network occurs at a defined stage of the cell cycle shortly before the onset of the nuclear S phase. After replication, the kDNA networks need to be correctly positioned so that during cell and mitochondrial division each daughter cell receives a single organelle with a single kDNA network. This process requires an intact TAC and is mediated by the movement of the basal body: one kDNA network remains connected to the basal body of the old flagellum whereas the other one segregates with the basal body of the new flagellum (7, 11).Unlike trypanosomes, Saccharomyces cerevisiae propagates by budding and contains highly dynamic mitochondria that constantly divide and fuse (12, 13). Mitochondrial inheritance in budding yeast therefore requires a mechanism to move mitochondria and their genomes from the mother cell into the growing bud. The protein-associated mitochondrial genomes of S. cerevisiae, termed nucleoids, localize to dozens of globular foci that are distributed all over the organelles. Most actively replicating nucleoids are associated with a protein complex that includes the outer membrane (OM) protein MDM10 as a central unit, as well as the proteins MDM12, MDM34, and MMM1 (14–16). The protein complex forms the endoplasmic reticulum (ER)–mitochondria encounter structure (ERMES) tethering the ER to the mitochondrion (17). The ERMES has also been suggested to connect to cytosolic actin fibers that mediate the movement of mitochondria to the bud of dividing yeast cells (14, 18, 19). Besides its role in mitochondrial inheritance, the ERMES has been implicated in maintenance of mitochondrial morphology and in phospholipid and calcium exchange as well as in the assembly of the protein translocase of the mitochondrial OM (TOM) (20, 21). Some of the proposed ERMES functions are controversial and there is evidence that some of them might be due to secondary effects caused by the drastically altered mitochondrial morphology (22).The central ERMES subunit, the β-barrel protein MDM10 belongs to the mitochondrial porin superfamily, which comprises the three members voltage-dependent anion channel (VDAC), Tom40, and MDM10. Whereas VDAC and Tom40 have so far been found in all eukaryotes, including T. brucei (23, 24), MDM10 is specific to the fungal clade.In this study we identify a mitochondrial OM protein of T. brucei as a novel component of the TAC. We show that the protein defines a novel subclass of the mitochondrial porin superfamily that is specialized in mitochondrial DNA inheritance.     

Eye tracking dysfunction is a putative phenotypic susceptibility marker of schizophrenia and maps to a locus on chromosome 6p in families with multiple occurrence of the disease

The difficulties in defining the borders of the schizophrenia spectrum is one major source of variance in linkage studies of schizophrenia. The employment of biological markers may prove advantageous. Due to empirical evidence, eye tracking dysfunction (ETD) has been discussed to be the most promising marker for genetic liability to schizophrenia. With respect to the recent progress in genomic scans, which have pointed to the short arm of chromosome 6, we carried out a scan of the 6p21–23 region with 16 microsatellite markers to test for linkage between chromosomal markers and ETD as well as schizophrenia. We tested 5 models of inheritance of ETD and found maximum two-point lod scores of 3.51 for D6S271 and 3.44 for D6S282. By including these markers in a multipoint analysis, a lod score of 4.02 was obtained. In the case of schizophrenia, 7 models were tested; however, with non-significant results. Our findings, together with another recent linkage report, point to the possibility of a second susceptibility locus for schizophrenia which may be located centromeric to the HLA region. Also, the evidence of ETD being a susceptibility marker for schizophrenia receives further support.     

Genomic characterization of small cell carcinomas of the uterine cervix

Small cell carcinoma (SCC) of the uterine cervix is a rare and aggressive form of neuroendocrine carcinoma, which resembles small cell lung cancer (SCLC) in its histology and poor survival rate. Here, we sought to define the genetic underpinning of SCCs of the uterine cervix and compare their mutational profiles with those of human papillomavirus (HPV)‐positive head and neck squamous cell carcinomas, HPV‐positive cervical carcinomas, and SCLCs using publicly available data. Using a combination of whole‐exome and targeted massively parallel sequencing, we found that the nine uterine cervix SCCs, which were HPV18‐positive (n = 8) or HPV16‐positive (n = 1), harbored a low mutation burden, few copy number alterations, and other than TP53 in two cases no recurrently mutated genes. The majority of mutations were likely passenger missense mutations, and only few affected previously described cancer‐related genes. Using RNA‐sequencing, we identified putative viral integration sites on 18q12.3 and on 8p22 in two SCCs of the uterine cervix. The overall nonsilent mutation rate of uterine cervix SCCs was significantly lower than that of SCLCs, HPV‐driven cervical adeno‐ and squamous cell carcinomas, or HPV‐positive head and neck squamous cell carcinomas. Unlike SCLCs, which are reported to harbor almost universal TP53 and RB1 mutations and a dominant tobacco smoke‐related signature 4, uterine cervix SCCs rarely harbored mutations affecting these genes (2/9, 22% TP53; 0% RB1) and displayed a dominant aging (67%) or APOBEC mutational signature (17%), akin to HPV‐driven cancers, including cervical adeno‐ and squamous cell carcinomas and head and neck squamous cell carcinomas. Taken together, in contrast to SCLCs, which are characterized by highly recurrent TP53 and RB1 alterations, uterine cervix SCCs were positive for HPV leading to inactivation of the suppressors p53 and RB, suggesting that these SCCs are convergent phenotypes.     

Heritable Genome Editing in a Global Context: National and International Policy Challenges

A central problem for the international governance of heritable germline gene editing is that there are important differences in attitudes and values as well as ethical and health care considerations around the world. These differences are reflected in a complicated and diverse regulatory landscape. Several publications have discussed whether reproductive uses would be legally permissible in individual countries and whether clinical applications could emerge in the context of regulatory gaps and gray areas. Systematic comparative studies that explore issues related to the governance of this technology from different national and international perspectives are needed to address the lack of knowledge in this area. In this research report, we contribute to filling this gap by presenting views of stakeholders in the United Kingdom on challenges to the governance of heritable genome editing. We present findings from a multistakeholder study conducted in the United Kingdom between October 2016 and January 2018 and funded by the Wellcome Trust. This research included interviews, literature analysis, and a workshop. We involved leading U.K. scientists, in vitro fertilization clinicians, and representatives from regulatory bodies, patient organizations, and other civil societal organizations, as well as fertility companies. Part one of this article explores stakeholder perceptions of possible global developments in heritable genome editing and associated risks and governance challenges. Part two presents a range of policy options that were generated during the workshop in relation to the challenges discussed in part one.