4.5 Article

SNX9 regulates tubular invagination of the plasma membrane through interaction with actin cytoskeleton and dynamin 2

期刊

JOURNAL OF CELL SCIENCE
卷 121, 期 8, 页码 1252-1263

出版社

COMPANY OF BIOLOGISTS LTD
DOI: 10.1242/jcs.016709

关键词

sorting nexin 9 (SNX9); Bin-Amphiphysin-Rvs (BAR); membrane tubulation; clathrin-mediated endocytosis; neural Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome protein (N-WASP); dynamin; actin cytoskeleton

资金

  1. NINDS NIH HHS [R01 NS056049, F31 NS058096] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dynamic membrane remodeling during intracellular trafficking is controlled by the intricate interplay between lipids and proteins. BAR domains are modules that participate in endocytic processes by binding and deforming the lipid bilayer. Sorting nexin 9 (SNX9), which functions in clathrin-mediated endocytosis, contains a BAR domain, however, the properties of this domain are not well understood. Here we show that SNX9 shares many properties with other BAR domain-containing proteins, such as amphiphysin and endophilin. SNX9 is able to deform the plasma membrane, as well as liposomes, into narrow tubules and recruit N-WASP and dynamin 2 to these tubules via its SH3 domain. SNX9-induced tubulation is antagonized by N-WASP and dynamin 2 while it is enhanced by perturbation of actin dynamics. However, SNX9 also has several unique properties. The tubulating activity requires the BAR and PX domains, as well as the low-complexity (LC) domain, which binds the Arp2/3 complex. SNX9 also binds to PtdIns(4)P-5-kinases via its PX domain and its tubulating activity is regulated by phosphoinositides. In addition, the kinase activity of PtdIns(4)P-5-kinases is stimulated by interaction with SNX9, suggesting a positive feedback interaction between SNX9 and PtdIns(4)P-5-kinases. These results suggest that SNX9 functions in the coordination of membrane remodeling and fission via interactions with actin-regulating proteins, endocytic proteins and PtdIns(4,5)P-2-metabolizing enzymes.

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

4.5
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