4.6 Article

Molecular Analysis of an Alternative N-Glycosylation Machinery by Functional Transfer from Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae to Escherichia coli

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 289, 期 4, 页码 2170-2179

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M113.524462

关键词

Bacteria; Glucose; Glycosylation; Glycosyltransferases; Post-translational Modification; Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae

资金

  1. Swiss National Science Foundation [CRSII3_12733, 3100170-105541]
  2. ETH Zurich

向作者/读者索取更多资源

N-Linked protein glycosylation is a frequent post-translational modification that can be found in all three domains of life. In a canonical, highly conserved pathway, an oligosaccharide is transferred by a membrane-bound oligosaccharyltransferase from a lipid donor to asparagines in the sequon NX(S/T) of secreted polypeptides. The -proteobacterium Actinobacillus pleuropneumoniae encodes an unusual pathway for N-linked protein glycosylation. This pathway takes place in the cytoplasm and is mediated by a soluble N-glycosyltransferase (NGT) that uses nucleotide-activated monosaccharides to glycosylate asparagine residues. To characterize the process of cytoplasmic N-glycosylation in more detail, we studied the glycosylation in A. pleuropneumoniae and functionally transferred the glycosylation system to Escherichia coli. N-Linked glucose specific human sera were used for the analysis of the glycosylation process. We identified autotransporter adhesins as the preferred protein substrate of NGT in vivo, and in depth analysis of the modified sites in E. coli revealed a surprisingly relaxed peptide substrate specificity. Although NX(S/T) is the preferred acceptor sequon, we detected glycosylation of alternative sequons, including modification of glutamine and serine residues. We also demonstrate the use of NGT to glycosylate heterologous proteins. Therefore, our study could provide the basis for a novel route for the engineering of N-glycoproteins in bacteria.

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