4.6 Review

Modular evolution of phosphorylation-based signalling systems

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2012.0106

关键词

protein kinase; protein phosphatase; interaction domain; phosphorylation; domain linkage; coevolution

类别

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes for Health Research [MOP-6849, MOP-57793, MOP-13466]
  2. Genome Canada
  3. Ontario Research Fund
  4. Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Phosphorylation sites are formed by protein kinases ('writers'), frequently exert their effects following recognition by phospho-binding proteins ('readers') and are removed by protein phosphatases ('erasers'). This writer-reader-eraser toolkit allows phosphorylation events to control a broad range of regulatory processes, and has been pivotal in the evolution of new functions required for the development of multi-cellular animals. The proteins that comprise this system of protein kinases, phospho-binding targets and phosphatases are typically modular in organization, in the sense that they are composed of multiple globular domains and smaller peptide motifs with binding or catalytic properties. The linkage of these binding and catalytic modules in new ways through genetic recombination, and the selection of particular domain combinations, has promoted the evolution of novel, biologically useful processes. Conversely, the joining of domains in aberrant combinations can subvert cell signalling and be causative in diseases such as cancer. Major inventions such as phosphotyrosine (pTyr)-mediated signalling that flourished in the first multi-cellular animals and their immediate predecessors resulted from stepwise evolutionary progression. This involved changes in the binding properties of interaction domains such as SH2 and their linkage to new domain types, and alterations in the catalytic specificities of kinases and phosphatases. This review will focus on the modular aspects of signalling networks and the mechanism by which they may have evolved.

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