4.5 Article

Weak mitochondrial targeting sequence determines tissue-specific subcellular localization of glutamine synthetase in liver and brain cells

Journal

JOURNAL OF CELL SCIENCE
Volume 123, Issue 3, Pages 351-359

Publisher

COMPANY BIOLOGISTS LTD
DOI: 10.1242/jcs.060749

Keywords

Glutamine synthetase; Mitochondrial targeting signal; MTS; Uricotelic vertebrates; Hepatocytes; Astrocytes; Mitochondrial membrane potential

Categories

Funding

  1. Tel Aviv University

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Evolution of the uricotelic system for ammonia detoxification required a mechanism for tissue-specific subcellular localization of glutamine synthetase (GS). In uricotelic vertebrates, GS is mitochondrial in liver cells and cytoplasmic in brain. Because these species contain a single copy of the GS gene, it is not clear how tissue-specific subcellular localization is achieved. Here we show that in chicken, which utilizes the uricotelic system, the GS transcripts of liver and brain cells are identical and, consistently, there is no difference in the amino acid sequence of the protein. The N-terminus of GS, which constitutes a 'weak' mitochondrial targeting signal (MTS), is sufficient to direct a chimeric protein to the mitochondria in hepatocytes and to the cytoplasm in astrocytes. Considering that a weak MTS is dependent on a highly negative mitochondrial membrane potential (Delta Psi) for import, we examined the magnitude of.. in hepatocytes and astrocytes. Our results unexpectedly revealed that.. in hepatocytes is considerably more negative than that of astrocytes and that converting the targeting signal into 'strong' MTS abolished the capability to confer tissue-specific subcellular localization. We suggest that evolutional selection of weak MTS provided a tool for differential targeting of an identical protein by taking advantage of tissue-specific differences in Delta Psi.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available