4.7 Article

Alterations in calmodulin-cardiac ryanodine receptor molecular recognition in congenital arrhythmias

期刊

出版社

SPRINGER BASEL AG
DOI: 10.1007/s00018-022-04165-w

关键词

Calcium; Calmodulin; Molecular dynamics; Allostery; Arrhythmia

资金

  1. Italian Ministry of University and Research (PRIN2017) [201744NR8S]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mutations associated with lethal arrhythmia in Calmodulin alter protein-protein interaction with Ryanodine receptor 2. Mutants show common alterations in recognition and faster dissociation rate than wild-type CaM. CaM's N-terminal lobe interacts with the target through allosteric interactions initiated by Ca2+.
Calmodulin (CaM), a ubiquitous and highly conserved Ca2+-sensor protein involved in the regulation of over 300 molecular targets, has been recently associated with severe forms of lethal arrhythmia. Here, we investigated how arrhythmia-associated mutations in CaM localized at the C-terminal lobe alter the molecular recognition with Ryanodine receptor 2 (RyR2), specifically expressed in cardiomyocytes. We performed an extensive structural, thermodynamic, and kinetic characterization of the variants D95V/H in the EF3 Ca2+-binding motif and of the D129V and D131H/E variants in the EF4 motif, and probed their interaction with RyR2. Our results show that the specific structural changes observed for individual CaM variants do not extend to the complex with the RyR2 target. Indeed, some common alterations emerge at the protein-protein interaction level, suggesting the existence of general features shared by the arrhythmia-associated variants. All mutants showed a faster rate of dissociation from the target peptide than wild-type CaM. Integration of spectroscopic data with exhaustive molecular dynamics simulations suggests that, in the presence of Ca2+, functional recognition involves allosteric interactions initiated by the N-terminal lobe of CaM, which shows a lower affinity for Ca2+ compared to the C-terminal lobe in the isolated protein.

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

4.7
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