4.6 Article

Cyclin-dependent Kinase 1 and Aurora Kinase choreograph mitotic storage and redistribution of a growth factor receptor

期刊

PLOS BIOLOGY
卷 19, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3001029

关键词

-

资金

  1. American Heart Association Postdoctoral Award [16POST27250075]
  2. National Science Foundation (NSF) [1656571]
  3. Swarthmore College
  4. Direct For Biological Sciences
  5. Division Of Integrative Organismal Systems [1656571] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study delineates the role of mitotic kinases in receptor trafficking during asymmetric division, with CDK1 and Aurora Kinase regulating degradation and recycling pathways. Mitotic receptor storage may facilitate rapid reestablishment of signaling competence in nascent daughter cells, but mutations affecting the release of stored components could alter daughter cell fate or promote oncogenesis.
Endosomal trafficking of receptors and associated proteins plays a critical role in signal processing. Until recently, it was thought that trafficking was shut down during cell division. Thus, remarkably, the regulation of trafficking during division remains poorly characterized. Here we delineate the role of mitotic kinases in receptor trafficking during asymmetric division. Targeted perturbations reveal that Cyclin-dependent Kinase 1 (CDK1) and Aurora Kinase promote storage of Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptors (FGFRs) by suppressing endosomal degradation and recycling pathways. As cells progress through metaphase, loss of CDK1 activity permits differential degradation and targeted recycling of stored receptors, leading to asymmetric induction. Mitotic receptor storage, as delineated in this study, may facilitate rapid reestablishment of signaling competence in nascent daughter cells. However, mutations that limit or enhance the release of stored signaling components could alter daughter cell fate or behavior thereby promoting oncogenesis.

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