4.8 Article

Structural basis of the C1q/C1s interaction and its central role in assembly of the C1 complex of complement activation

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1311113110

关键词

structural biology; innate immunity

资金

  1. Medical Research Council UK Grant [G1000191/1]
  2. Wellcome Trust Grant [087848]
  3. Hungarian Scientific Research Fund Grants [NK77978, NK100834]
  4. MRC [G0501425, G0801952, G1000191, G0700859] Funding Source: UKRI
  5. Medical Research Council [G1000191] Funding Source: researchfish

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Complement component C1, the complex that initiates the classical pathway of complement activation, is a 790-kDa assembly formed from the target-recognition subcomponent C1q and the modular proteases C1r and C1s. The proteases are elongated tetramers that become more compact when they bind to the collagen-like domains of C1q. Here, we describe a series of structures that reveal how the subcomponents associate to form C1. A complex between C1s and a collagen-like peptide containing the C1r/C1s-binding motif of C1q shows that the collagen binds to a shallow groove via a critical lysine side chain that contacts Ca2+-coordinating residues. The data explain the Ca2+-dependent binding mechanism, which is conserved in C1r and also in mannan-binding lectin-associated serine proteases, the serine proteases of the lectin pathway activation complexes. In an accompanying structure, C1s forms a compact ring-shaped tetramer featuring a unique head-to-tail interaction at its center that replicates the likely arrangement of C1r/C1s polypeptides in the C1 complex. Additional structures reveal how C1s polypeptides are positioned to enable activation by C1r and interaction with the substrate C4 inside the cage-like assembly formed by the collagenous stems of C1q. Together with previously determined structures of C1r fragments, the results reported here provide a structural basis for understanding the early steps of complement activation via the classical pathway.

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