4.6 Article

Marked differences between metalloproteases meprin A and B in substrate and peptide bond specificity

Journal

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
Volume 276, Issue 16, Pages 13248-13255

Publisher

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M011414200

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. NIDDK NIH HHS [DK19691, DK54625] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIGMS NIH HHS [R01 GM056203] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Meprin A and B are highly regulated, secreted, and cell-surface metalloendopeptidases that are abundantly expressed in the kidney and intestine. Meprin oligomers consist of evolutionarily related alpha and/or beta subunits. The work herein was carried out to identify bioactive peptides and proteins that are susceptible to hydrolysis by mouse meprins and kinetically characterize the hydrolysis. Gastrin-releasing peptide fragment 14-27 and gastrin 17, regulatory molecules of the gastrointestinal tract, were found to be the best peptide substrates for meprin A and B, respectively. Peptide libraries and a variety of naturally occurring peptides revealed that the meprin p subunit has a clear preference for acidic amino acids in the P1 and P1 ' sites of substrates. The meprin alpha subunit selected for small (e,g, serine, alanine) or hydrophobic (e.g, phenylalanine) residues in the P1 and P1 ' sites, and proline was the most preferred amino acid at the P2 ' position. Thus, although the meprin alpha and beta subunits share 55% amino acid identity within the protease domain and are normally localized at the same tissue cell surfaces, they have very different substrate and peptide bond specificities indicating different functions. Homology models of the mouse meprin alpha and beta protease domains, based on the astacin crystal structure, revealed active site differences that can account for the marked differences in substrate specificity of the two subunits.

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