4.6 Review

Molecular Interactions Driving Intermediate Filament Assembly

期刊

CELLS
卷 10, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/cells10092457

关键词

X-ray crystallography; assembly; chemical analytical cross-linking; intermediate filament; keratin; vimentin; lamin; cryoelectron microscopy

资金

  1. CELSA Alliance [18/044]
  2. EU H2020 program project EU_FT-ICR_MS [731077]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

IFs play a crucial role in normal cell physiology and are linked to numerous diseases, highlighting the importance of understanding their molecular structure. While progress has been made in studying the IF structure, many mysteries and challenges remain. In addition to X-ray crystallography, chemical cross-linking and cryoelectron microscopy are expected to lead to major advancements in the field in the near future.
Given the role of intermediate filaments (IFs) in normal cell physiology and scores of IF-linked diseases, the importance of understanding their molecular structure is beyond doubt. Research into the IF structure was initiated more than 30 years ago, and some important advances have been made. Using crystallography and other methods, the central coiled-coil domain of the elementary dimer and also the structural basis of the soluble tetramer formation have been studied to atomic precision. However, the molecular interactions driving later stages of the filament assembly are still not fully understood. For cytoplasmic IFs, much of the currently available insight is due to chemical cross-linking experiments that date back to the 1990s. This technique has since been radically improved, and several groups have utilized it recently to obtain data on lamin filament assembly. Here, we will summarize these findings and reflect on the remaining open questions and challenges of IF structure. We argue that, in addition to X-ray crystallography, chemical cross-linking and cryoelectron microscopy are the techniques that should enable major new advances in the field in the near future.

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