4.8 Article

Generation of functionally distinct isoforms of PTBP3 by alternative splicing and translation initiation

期刊

NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH
卷 43, 期 11, 页码 5586-5600

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/nar/gkv429

关键词

-

资金

  1. Wellcome Trust [092900]
  2. BBSRC [BB/J001457/1, BB/J00152X/1]
  3. Cambridge Australia Trust studentship
  4. MRC studentship
  5. University of Cambridge
  6. Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council [BBS/E/B/000C0407, BB/J00152X/1, BBS/E/B/000C0409, BB/J001457/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  7. BBSRC [BB/J001457/1, BBS/E/B/000C0409, BBS/E/B/000C0407, BB/J00152X/1] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Polypyrimidine tract binding protein (PTBP1) is a widely expressed RNA binding protein that acts as a regulator of alternative splicing and of cytoplasmic mRNA functions. Vertebrates contain two closely-related paralogs with > 75% amino acid sequence identity. Early replacement of PTBP1 by PTBP2 during neuronal differentiation causes a concerted set of splicing changes. By comparison, very little is known about the molecular functions or physiological roles of PTBP3, although its expression and conservation throughout the vertebrates suggest a role in haematopoietic cells. To begin to understand its functions we have characterized the mRNA and protein isoform repertoire of PTBP3. Combinatorial alternative splicing events at the 5' end of the gene allow for the generation of eight mRNA and three major protein isoforms. Individual mRNAs generate up to three protein isoforms via alternative translation initiation by re-initiation and leaky scanning using downstream AUG codons. The N-terminally truncated PTBP3 isoforms lack nuclear localization signals and/or most of the RRM1 domain and vary in their RNA binding properties and nuclear/cytoplasmic distribution, suggesting that PTBP3 may have major post-transcriptional cytoplasmic roles. Our findings set the stage for understanding the non-redundant physiological roles of PTBP3.

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

4.8
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