4.6 Article

Complex of Fas-associated Factor 1 (FAF1) with Valosin-containing Protein (VCP)-Npl4-Ufd1 and Polyubiquitinated Proteins Promotes Endoplasmic Reticulum-associated Degradation (ERAD)

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 288, 期 10, 页码 6998-7011

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M112.417576

关键词

-

资金

  1. Center for Cell Signaling Research and Drug Discovery Research Grant at Ewha Womans University from the National Core Research Center program, [R15-2006-020]
  2. Global Research Laboratory Program [2012045441]
  3. Bio and Medical Technology Development Program of the National Research Foundation of Korea [2012035580]
  4. Functional Proteomics Center
  5. Korea Ministry of Science and Technology, and an institutional grant from the Korea Institute of Science and Technology
  6. Korea Institute of Science and Technology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fas-associated factor 1 (FAF1) is a ubiquitin receptor containing multiple ubiquitin-related domains including ubiquitin-associated (UBA), ubiquitin-like (UBL) 1, UBL2, and ubiquitin regulatory X (UBX). We previously showed that N-terminal UBA domain recognizes Lys(48)-ubiquitin linkage to recruit polyubiquitinated proteins and that a C-terminal UBX domain interacts with valosin-containing protein (VCP). This study shows that FAF1 interacts only with VCP complexed with Npl4-Ufd1 heterodimer, a requirement for the recruitment of polyubiquitinated proteins to UBA domain. Intriguingly, VCP association to C-terminal UBX domain regulates ubiquitin binding to N-terminal UBA domain without direct interaction between UBA and UBX domains. These interactions are well characterized by structural and biochemical analysis. VCP-Npl4-Ufd1 complex is known as the machinery required for endoplasmic reticulum-associated degradation. We demonstrate here that FAF1 binds to VCP-Npl4-Ufd1 complex via UBX domain and polyubiquitinated proteins via UBA domain to promote endoplasmic reticulum-associated degradation.

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