4.8 Article

Structural basis of substrate recognition by a bacterial deubiquitinase important for dynamics of phagosome ubiquitination

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1514568112

关键词

type IV secretion; ubiquitination; Legionella; phagosome; deubiquitinase

资金

  1. DOE [DE-AC02-06CH11357]
  2. National Institutes of Health [2R01GM103401, R56AI103168, K02AI085403, R21AI105714]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Manipulation of the host's ubiquitin network is emerging as an important strategy for counteracting and repurposing the post-translational modification machineries of the host by pathogens. Ubiquitin E3 ligases encoded by infectious agents are well known, as are a variety of viral deubiquitinases (DUBs). Bacterial DUBs have been discovered, but little is known about the structure and mechanism underlying their ubiquitin recognition. In this report, we found that members of the Legionella pneumophila SidE effector family harbor a DUB module important for ubiquitin dynamics on the bacterial phagosome. Structural analysis of this domain alone and in complex with ubiquitin vinyl methyl ester (Ub-VME) reveals unique molecular contacts used in ubiquitin recognition. Instead of relying on the Ile44 patch of ubiquitin, as commonly used in eukaryotic counterparts, the SdeA(Dub) module engages Gln40 of ubiquitin. The architecture of the active-site cleft presents an open arrangement with conformational plasticity, permitting deubiquitination of three of the most abundant polyubiquitin chains, with a distinct preference for Lys63 linkages. We have shown that this preference enables efficient removal of Lys63 linkages from the phagosomal surface. Remarkably, the structure reveals by far the most parsimonious use of molecular contacts to achieve deubiquitination, with less than 1,000 angstrom(2) of accessible surface area buried upon complex formation with ubiquitin. This type of molecular recognition appears to enable dual specificity toward ubiquitin and the ubiquitin-like modifier NEDD8.

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