4.6 Article

Kinetic proofreading of ligand-FcεRI interactions may persist beyond LAT phosphorylation

Journal

JOURNAL OF IMMUNOLOGY
Volume 178, Issue 6, Pages 3530-3535

Publisher

AMER ASSOC IMMUNOLOGISTS
DOI: 10.4049/jimmunol.178.6.3530

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. NIBIB NIH HHS [R21 EB005365-03] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIGMS NIH HHS [F32 GM065794, R37 GM 35556, P20 GM 065794, R37 GM035556, R01 GM 49814, R01 GM049814] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cells may discriminate among ligands with different dwell times for receptor binding through a mechanism called kinetic proofreading in which the formation of an activated receptor complex requires a progression of events that is aborted if the ligand dissociates before completion. This mechanism explains how, at equivalent levels of receptor occupancy, a rapidly dissociating ligand can be less effective than a more slowly dissociating analog at generating distal cellular responses. Simple mathematical models predict that kinetic proofreading is limited to the initial complex; once the signal passes to second messengers, the dwell time no longer regulates the signal. This suggests that an assay for kinetic proofreading might be used to determine which activation events occur within the initial signaling complex. In signaling through the high affinity IgE receptor Fc epsilon RI, the transmembrane adaptor called linker for activation of T cells (LAT) is thought to nucleate a distinct secondary complex. Experiments in which the concentrations of two ligands with different dwell times are adjusted to equalize the level of LAT phosphorylation in rat basophilic leukemia 2113 cells show that Erk2 phosphorylation, intracellular Ca2+, and degranulation exhibit kinetic proofreading downstream of LAT phosphorylation. These results suggest that ligand-bound Fc epsilon RI and LAT form a complex that is required for effective signal transmission.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available