4.6 Article

The Lhs1/GRP170 Chaperones Facilitate the Endoplasmic Reticulum-associated Degradation of the Epithelial Sodium Channel

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 288, 期 25, 页码 18366-18380

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M113.469882

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [K01DK090195, DK65161, GM75061, DK79307]
  2. United States Department of Veterans Affairs
  3. University of Pittsburgh George O'Brien Kidney Research Center
  4. American Heart Association [10BGIA3890010]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The epithelial sodium channel, ENaC, plays a critical role in maintaining salt and water homeostasis, and not surprisingly defects in ENaC function are associated with disease. Like many other membrane-spanning proteins, this trimeric protein complex folds and assembles inefficiently in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), which results in a substantial percentage of the channel being targeted for ER-associated degradation (ERAD). Because the spectrum of factors that facilitates the degradation of ENaC is incomplete, we developed yeast expression systems for each ENaC subunit. We discovered that a conserved Hsp70-like chaperone, Lhs1, is required for maximal turnover of the ENaC alpha subunit. By expressing Lhs1 ATP binding mutants, we also found that the nucleotide exchange properties of this chaperone are dispensable for ENaC degradation. Consistent with the precipitation of an Lhs1-alpha ENaC complex, Lhs1 holdase activity was instead most likely required to support the ERAD of alpha ENaC. Moreover, a complex containing the mammalian Lhs1 homolog GRP170 and alpha ENaC co-precipitated, and GRP170 also facilitated ENaC degradation in human, HEK293 cells, and in a Xenopus oocyte expression system. In both yeast and higher cell types, the effect of Lhs1 on the ERAD of alpha ENaC was selective for the unglycosylated form of the protein. These data establish the first evidence that Lhs1/Grp170 chaperones can act as mediators of ERAD substrate selection.

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