4.8 Article

Sestrin mediates detection of and adaptation to low-leucine diets in Drosophila

期刊

NATURE
卷 608, 期 7921, 页码 209-+

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41586-022-04960-2

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH [R01 CA103866, R37 AI47389, 5P01 CA120964-04, R01 AR057352, R01 CA193256, F30 CA228229, T32 GM007753, F31 CA232658, T32 HG002295]
  2. Department of Defense [W81XWH-07-0448]
  3. American Cancer Society postdoctoral fellowship
  4. American Cancer Society Research Scholar Award
  5. Cystinosis Research Foundation
  6. Ludwig Center Graduate Fellowship
  7. Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research at MIT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Flies can sense and detect a diet deficient in essential amino acid leucine through the nutrient sensing of mTORC1 signaling.
Mechanistic target of rapamycin complex1 (mTORC1) regulates cell growth and metabolism in response to multiple nutrients, including the essential amino acid leucine. Recent work in cultured mammalian cells established the Sestrins as leucine-binding proteins that inhibit mTORC1 signalling during leucine deprivation, but their role in the organismal response to dietary leucine remains elusive. Here we find that Sestrin-null flies (Sesn(-/-)) fail to inhibit mTORC1 or activate autophagy after acute leucine starvation and have impaired development and a shortened lifespan on a low-leucine diet. Knock-in flies expressing a leucine-binding-deficient Sestrin mutant (Sesn(L431E)) have reduced, leucine-insensitive mTORC1 activity. Notably, we find that flies can discriminate between food with or without leucine, and preferentially feed and lay progeny on leucine-containing food. This preference depends on Sestrin and its capacity to bind leucine. Leucine regulates mTORC1 activity in glial cells, and knockdown of Sesn in these cells reduces the ability of flies to detect leucine-free food. Thus, nutrient sensing by mTORC1 is necessary for flies not only to adapt to, but also to detect, a diet deficient in an essential nutrient.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据