4.8 Article

Pivotal role for the ubiquitin Y59-E51 loop in lysine 48 polyubiquitination

出版社

NATL ACAD SCIENCES
DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1407849111

关键词

receptor ubiquitin; E3 ubiquitin ligase; E2 ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme

资金

  1. Jiangsu Special Medical Expert award
  2. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [1F30DK095572-01]
  3. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [MOP-14606]
  4. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  5. NIH [5R21CA161807-02, 5R01GM074830-07, GM61051, CA095634]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Lysine 48 (K48)-polyubiquitination is the predominant mechanism for mediating selective protein degradation, but the underlying molecular basis of selecting ubiquitin (Ub) K48 for linkage-specific chain synthesis remains elusive. Here, we present biochemical, structural, and cell-based evidence demonstrating a pivotal role for the Ub Y59-E51 loop in supporting K48-polyubiquitination. This loop is established by a hydrogen bond between Ub Y59's hydroxyl group and the backbone amide of Ub E51, as substantiated by NMR spectroscopic analysis. Loop residues Y59 and R54 are specifically required for the receptor activity enabling K48 to attack the donor Ub-E2 thiol ester in reconstituted ubiquitination catalyzed by Skp1-Cullin1-F-box (SCF)(beta TrCP) E3 ligase and Cdc34 E2-conjugating enzyme. When introduced into mammalian cells, loop-disruptive mutant Ub(R54A/Y59A) diminished the production of K48-polyubiquitin chains. Importantly, conditional replacement of human endogenous Ub by Ub(R54A/Y59A) or Ub(K48R) yielded profound apoptosis at a similar extent, underscoring the global impact of the Ub Y59-E51 loop in cellular K48-polyubiquitination. Finally, disulfide cross-linking revealed interactions between the donor Ub-bound Cdc34 acidic loop and the Ub K48 site, as well as residues within the Y59-E51 loop, suggesting a mechanism in which the Ub Y59-E51 loop helps recruit the E2 acidic loop that aligns the receptor Ub K48 to the donor Ub for catalysis.

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