4.6 Article

Structural Studies of Inositol 1,4,5-Trisphosphate Receptor COUPLING LIGAND BINDING TO CHANNEL GATING

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 285, 期 46, 页码 36092-36099

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M110.140160

关键词

-

资金

  1. Heart and Stroke Foundation of Ontario
  2. Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)
  3. Special Postdoctoral Researchers Program in RIKEN
  4. Ministry of Education, Science, Sports, and Culture of Japan [20370054, 20220007]
  5. Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research [20370054] Funding Source: KAKEN

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The three isoforms of the inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate receptor (IP3R) exhibit distinct IP3 sensitivities and cooperativities in calcium (Ca2+) channel function. The determinants underlying this isoform-specific channel gating mechanism have been localized to the N-terminal suppressor region of IP3R. We determined the 1.9 angstrom crystal structure of the suppressor domain from type 3 IP3R (IP(3)R3(SUP), amino acids 1-224) and revealed structural features contributing to isoform-specific functionality of IP3R by comparing it with our previously determined structure of the type 1 suppressor domain (IP(3)R1(SUP)). The molecular surface known to associate with the ligand binding domain (amino acids 224-604) showed marked differences between IP3R3SUP and IP3R1SUP. Our NMR and biochemical studies showed that three spatially clustered residues (Glu-20, Tyr-167, and Ser-217 in IP(3)R1 and Glu-19, Trp-168, and Ser-218 in IP(3)R3) within the N-terminal suppressor domains of IP(3)R1SUP and IP(3)R3(SUP) interact directly with their respective C-terminal fragments. Together with the accompanying paper (Yamazaki, H., Chan, J., Ikura, M., Michikawa, T., and Mikoshiba, K. (2010) J. Biol. Chem. 285, 36081-36091), we demonstrate that the single aromatic residue in this region (Tyr-167 in IP(3)R1 and Trp-168 in IP(3)R3) plays a critical role in the coupling between ligand binding and channel gating.

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