4.5 Article

E1ΛE4-mediated keratin phosphorylation and ubiquitylation: a mechanism for keratin depletion in HPV16-infected epithelium

期刊

JOURNAL OF CELL SCIENCE
卷 123, 期 16, 页码 2810-2822

出版社

COMPANY BIOLOGISTS LTD
DOI: 10.1242/jcs.061978

关键词

E1(Lambda)E4; Human papilloma virus; Keratin

资金

  1. Division of Virology at NIMR
  2. UK Medical Research Council
  3. Medical Research Council [MC_U117584278] Funding Source: researchfish
  4. MRC [MC_U117584278] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The keratin IF network of epidermal keratinocytes provides a protective barrier against mechanical insult, it is also a major player in absorbing stress in these cells. The human papilloma virus (HPV) type 16 E1 boolean AND E4 protein accumulates in the upper layers of HPV16-infected epithelium and is known to associate with and reorganise the keratin IF network in cells in culture. Here, we show that this function is conserved amongst a number of HPV alpha-group E1 boolean AND E4 proteins and that the differentiation-dependent keratins are also targeted. Using time-lapse microscopy, HPV16 E1 boolean AND E4 was found to effect a dramatic cessation of keratin IF network dynamics by associating with both soluble and insoluble keratin. Network disruption was accompanied by keratin hyperphosphorylation at several sites, including K8 S73, which is typically phosphorylated in response to stress stimuli. Keratin immunoprecipitated from E1 boolean AND E4-expressing cells was also found to be ubiquitylated, indicating that it is targeted for proteasomal degradation. Interestingly, the accumulation of hyperphosphorylated, ubiquitylated E1 boolean AND E4-keratin structures was found to result in an impairment of proteasomal function. These observations shed new light on the mechanism of keratin IF network reorganisation mediated by HPV16 E1 boolean AND E4 and provide an insight into the depletion of keratin co-incident with E1 boolean AND E4 accumulation observed in HPV-infected epithelium.

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