4.4 Article

Mammalian ER mannosidase I resides in quality control vesicles, where it encounters its glycoprotein substrates

期刊

MOLECULAR BIOLOGY OF THE CELL
卷 26, 期 2, 页码 172-184

出版社

AMER SOC CELL BIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1091/mbc.E14-06-1152

关键词

-

资金

  1. Israel Science Foundation [1070/10]
  2. German-Israeli Project Cooperation (Deutsch-Israelische Projektkooperation) [K 5-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Endoplasmic reticulum alpha 1,2 mannosidase I (ERManI), a central component of ER quality control and ER-associated degradation (ERAD), acts as a timer enzyme, modifying N-linked sugar chains of glycoproteins with time. This process halts glycoprotein folding attempts when necessary and targets terminally misfolded glycoproteins to ERAD. Despite the importance of ERManI in maintenance of glycoprotein quality control, fundamental questions regarding this enzyme remain controversial. One such question is the subcellular localization of ERManI, which has been suggested to localize to the ER membrane, the ER-derived quality control compartment (ERQC), and, surprisingly, recently to the Golgi apparatus. To try to clarify this controversy, we applied a series of approaches that indicate that ERManI is located, at the steady state, in quality control vesicles (QCVs) to which ERAD substrates are transported and in which they interact with the enzyme. Both endogenous and exogenously expressed ERManI migrate at an ER-like density on iodixanol gradients, suggesting that the QCVs are derived from the ER. The QCVs are highly mobile, displaying dynamics that are dependent on microtubules and COP-II but not on COP-I vesicle machinery. Under ER stress conditions, the QCVs converge in a juxtanuclear region, at the ERQC, as previously reported. Our results also suggest that ERManI is turned over by an active autophagic process. Of importance, we found that membrane disturbance, as is common in immunofluorescence methods, leads to an artificial appearance of ERManI in a Golgi pattern.

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

4.4
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