4.6 Article

Crosslinking Constraints and Computational Models as Complementary Tools in Modeling the Extracellular Domain of the Glycine Receptor

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 9, 期 7, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0102571

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIH grant [R01 NS053788]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The glycine receptor (GlyR), a member of the pentameric ligand-gated ion channel superfamily, is the major inhibitory neurotransmitter-gated receptor in the spinal cord and brainstem. In these receptors, the extracellular domain binds agonists, antagonists and various other modulatory ligands that act allosterically to modulate receptor function. The structures of homologous receptors and binding proteins provide templates for modeling of the ligand-binding domain of GlyR, but limitations in sequence homology and structure resolution impact on modeling studies. The determination of distance constraints via chemical crosslinking studies coupled with mass spectrometry can provide additional structural information to aid in model refinement, however it is critical to be able to distinguish between intra-and inter-subunit constraints. In this report we model the structure of GlyBP, a structural and functional homolog of the extracellular domain of human homomeric alpha 1 GlyR. We then show that intra-and intersubunit Lys-Lys crosslinks in trypsinized samples of purified monomeric and oligomeric protein bands from SDS-polyacrylamide gels may be identified and differentiated by MALDI-TOF MS studies of limited resolution. Thus, broadly available MS platforms are capable of providing distance constraints that may be utilized in characterizing large complexes that may be less amenable to NMR and crystallographic studies. Systematic studies of state-dependent chemical crosslinking and mass spectrometric identification of crosslinked sites has the potential to complement computational modeling efforts by providing constraints that can validate and refine allosteric models.

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