4.8 Article

Kelch-like 3 and Cullin 3 regulate electrolyte homeostasis via ubiquitination and degradation of WNK4

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1304592110

关键词

proteomics; Gordon syndrome; Kir1.1

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [P01-DK017433, P30-DK079310, UL1-RR024139, P30-DA018343]
  2. Leducq Transatlantic Network on Hypertension
  3. Uehara Memorial Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pseudohypoaldosteronism type II (PHAII) is a rare Mendelian syndrome featuring hypertension and hyperkalemia resulting from constitutive renal salt reabsorption and impaired K+ secretion. Recently, mutations in Kelch-like 3 (KLHL3) and Cullin 3 (CUL3), components of an E3 ubiquitin ligase complex, were found to cause PHAII, suggesting that loss of this complex's ability to target specific substrates for ubiquitination leads to PHAII. By MS and coimmunoprecipitation, we show that KLHL3 normally binds to WNK1 and WNK4, members of WNK (with no lysine) kinase family that have previously been found mutated in PHAII. We show that this binding leads to ubiquitination, including polyubiquitination, of at least 15 specific sites in WNK4, resulting in reduced WNK4 levels. Dominant disease-causing mutations in KLHL3 and WNK4 both impair WNK4 binding, ubiquitination, and degradation. WNK4 normally induces clearance of the renal outer medullary K+ channel (ROMK) from the cell surface. We show that WT but not mutant KLHL3 inhibits WNK4-induced reduction of ROMK level. We show that PHAII-causing mutations in WNK4 lead to a marked increase in WNK4 protein levels in the kidney in vivo. These findings demonstrate that CUL3-RING (really interesting new gene) ligases that contain KLHL3 target ubiquitination of WNK4 and thereby regulate WNK4 levels, which in turn regulate levels of ROMK. These findings reveal a specific role of CUL3 and KLHL3 in electrolyte homeostasis and provide a molecular explanation for the effects of disease-causing mutations in both KLHL3 and WNK4.

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