Journal
BIOCHEMICAL JOURNAL
Volume 407, Issue -, Pages 23-30Publisher
PORTLAND PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.1042/BJ20070764
Keywords
complement component C3; crystal structure; domain organization; alpha(2)-macroglobulin (alpha M-2); receptor-binding domain; thiol ester
Categories
Funding
- NCRR NIH HHS [S10 RR15958] Funding Source: Medline
- NIGMS NIH HHS [R01 GM054414, GM54414, P41 GM068944, P41 GM68944] Funding Source: Medline
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Human alpha M-2 (alpha(2)-macroglobulin) and the complement components C3 and C4 are thiol ester-containing proteins that evolved from the same ancestral gene. The recent structure determination of human C3 has allowed a detailed prediction of the location of domains within human alpha 2M to be made. We describe here the expression and characterization of three alpha 2M domains predicted to be involved in the stabilization of the thiol ester in native a,M and in its activation upon bait region proteolysis. The three newly expressed domains are MG2 (macroglobulin domain 2), TED (thiol ester-containing domain) and CUB (complement protein subcomponents (C) under barl r/Cls, (u) under bar rchin embryonic growth factor and bone morphogenetic protein 1) domain. Together with the previously characterized RBD (receptor-binding domain), they represent approx. 42% of the alpha M-2 polypeptide. Their expression as folded domains strongly supports the predicted domain organization of alpha M-2. An X-ray crystal structure of MG2 shows it to have a fibronectin type-3 fold analogous to MGIMG8 of C3. TED is, as predicted, an a-helical domain. CUB is a spliced domain composed of two stretches of polypeptide that flank TED in the primary structure. In intact C3 TED interacts with RBD, where it is in direct contact with the thiol ester, and with MG2 and CUB on opposite, flanking sides. In contrast, these alpha M-2 domains, as isolated species, show negligible interaction with one another, suggesting that the native conformation of alpha M-2, and the consequent thiol ester-stabilizing domain-domain interactions, result from additional restraints imposed by the physical linkage of these domains or by additional domains in the protein.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available