4.6 Article

LQT1-associated Mutations Increase KCNQ1 Proteasomal Degradation Independently of Derlin-1

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 284, 期 8, 页码 5250-5256

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M806459200

关键词

-

资金

  1. Agence Nationale de la Recherche [ANR/A05045GS, ANR/08GEN000602]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mutations in the potassium channel KCNQ1 that determine retention of the mutated proteins in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) are associated with the autosomal dominant negative Romano-Ward LQT1 cardiac syndrome. In the present study, we have analyzed the consequences and the potential molecular mechanisms involved in the ER retention of three Romano-Ward mutations located in KCNQ1 N terminus (Y111C, L114P, and P117L). We showed that the mutant KCNQ1 proteins exhibited reduced expression levels with respect to wild-type (WT)-KCNQ1. Radiolabeling pulse-chase experiments revealed that the lower expression levels did not result from reduced rate of synthesis. Instead, using a combination of Western blot and pulse-chase experiments, we showed that the mutant channel Y111C-KCNQ1, used as a model, was ubiquitinated and degraded in the proteasome more rapidly (t(1/2) = 82 min) than WT-KCNQ1 channel (t(1/2) = 113 min). On the other hand, KCNQ1 degradation did not appear to involve the GTP-dependent pathway. We also showed that KCNE1 stabilized both wildtype and Y111C proteins. To identify potential actors involved in KCNQ1 degradation, we studied the implication of the ER-resident protein Derlin-1 in KCNQ1 degradation. We showed that although KCNQ1 and Derlin-1 share the same molecular complex and co-immunoprecipitate when co-expressed in HEK293FT cells, Derlin-1 did not affect KCNQ1 steady state expression and degradation. These data were confirmed in T84 cells that express endogenous KCNQ1 and Derlin-1. Small interfering RNA knock-down of Derlin-1 did not modify KCNQ1 expression level, and no interaction between endogenous KCNQ1 and Derlin-1 could be detected.

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

4.6
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