4.5 Article

Molecular control of the cytosolic aconitase/IRP1 switch by extramitochondrial frataxin

期刊

HUMAN MOLECULAR GENETICS
卷 19, 期 7, 页码 1221-1229

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/hmg/ddp592

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Ataxia Foundation
  2. Ataxia UK
  3. Friedreich's Ataxia Research Alliance
  4. Telethon-Italy [GGP06059]
  5. Fondazione Santa Lucia, Rome
  6. Association Francaise de l'Ataxie de Friedreich (AFAF)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The inability to produce normal levels of the mitochondrial protein frataxin causes the hereditary degenerative disorder Friedreich's Ataxia (FRDA), a syndrome characterized by progressive gait instability, cardiomyopathy and high incidence of diabetes. Frataxin is an iron-binding protein involved in the biogenesis of iron-sulfur clusters (ISC), prosthetic groups allowing essential cellular functions such as oxidative phosphorylation, enzyme catalysis and gene regulation. Although several evidence suggest that frataxin acts as an iron-chaperone within the mitochondrial compartment, we have recently demonstrated the existence of a functional extramitochondrial pool of mature frataxin in various human cell types. Here, we show that a similar proteolytic process generates both mature mitochondrial and extramitochondrial frataxin. To address the physiological function of human extramitochondrial frataxin, we searched for ISC-dependent interaction partners. We demonstrate that the extramitochondrial form of frataxin directly interacts with cytosolic aconitase/iron regulatory protein-1 (IRP1), a bifunctional protein alternating between an enzymatic and a RNA-binding function through the 'iron-sulfur switch' mechanism. Importantly, we found that the cytosolic aconitase defect and consequent IRP1 activation occurring in FRDA cells are reversed by the action of extramitochondrial frataxin. These results provide new insight into the control of cytosolic aconitase/IRP1 switch and expand current knowledge about the molecular pathogenesis of FRDA.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据