4.6 Article

Oligomeric Structure of the Human Reduced Folate Carrier IDENTIFICATION OF HOMO-OLIGOMERS AND DOMINANT-NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON CARRIER EXPRESSION AND FUNCTION

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 284, 期 5, 页码 3285-3293

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M807206200

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [CA53535]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The ubiquitously expressed reduced folate carrier (RFC) is the major transport system for folate cofactors in mammalian cells and tissues. Previous considerations of RFC structure and mechanism were based on the notion that RFC monomers were sufficient to mediate transport of folate and antifolate substrates. The present study examines the possibility that human RFC (hRFC) exists as higher order homo-oligomers. By chemical cross-linking, transiently expressed hRFC in hRFC-null HeLa (R5) cells with the homobifunctional cross-linker 1,3-propanediyl bis-methanethiosulfonate and Western blotting, hRFC species with molecular masses of hRFC homo-oligomers were identified. Hemagglutinin- and Myc epitope-tagged hRFC proteins expressed in R5 cells were co-immunoprecipitated from both membrane particulate and surface-enriched membrane fractions, indicating that oligomeric hRFC is expressed at the cell surface. By co-expression of wild type and inactive mutant S138C hRFCs, combined with surface biotinylation and confocal microscopy, a dominant-negative phenotype was demonstrated involving greatly decreased cell surface expression of both mutant and wild type carrier caused by impaired intracellular trafficking. For another hRFC mutant (R373A), expression of oligomeric wild type-mutant hRFC was accompanied by a significant and disproportionate loss of wild type activity unrelated to the level of surface carrier. Collectively, our results demonstrate the existence of hRFC homo-oligomers. They also establish the likely importance of these higher order hRFC structures to intracellular trafficking and carrier function.

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