4.8 Article

Bleeding due to disruption of a cargo-specific ER-to-Golgi transport complex

Journal

NATURE GENETICS
Volume 34, Issue 2, Pages 220-225

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/ng1153

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. MRC [MC_U120074259] Funding Source: UKRI
  2. Medical Research Council [MC_U120074259] Funding Source: Medline
  3. Medical Research Council [MC_U120074259] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Mutations in LMAN1 (also called ERGIC-53) result in combined deficiency of factor V and factor VIII ( F5F8D), an autosomal recessive bleeding disorder characterized by coordinate reduction of both clotting proteins(1). LMAN1 is a mannose-binding type 1 transmembrane protein localized to the endoplasmic reticulum Golgi intermediate compartment (ERGIC; refs. 2,3), suggesting that F5F8D could result from a defect in secretion of factor V and factor VIII (ref. 4). Correctly folded proteins destined for secretion are packaged in the ER into COPII-coated vesicles(5), which subsequently fuse to form the ERGIC. Secretion of certain abundant proteins suggests a default pathway requiring no export signals (bulk flow; refs. 6,7). An alternative mechanism involves selective packaging of secreted proteins with the help of specific cargo receptors(8-13). The latter model would be consistent with mutations in LMAN1 causing a selective block to export of factor V and factor VIII. But similar to30% of individuals with F5F8D have normal levels of LMAN1, suggesting that mutations in another gene may also be associated with F5F8D(14,15). Here we show that inactivating mutations in MCFD2 cause F5F8D with a phenotype indistinguishable from that caused by mutations in LMAN1. MCFD2 is localized to the ERGIC through a direct, calcium-dependent interaction with LMAN1. These findings suggest that the MCFD2-LMAN1 complex forms a specific cargo receptor for the ER-to-Golgi transport of selected proteins.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available