4.6 Article

Fe-S clusters masquerading as zinc finger proteins

期刊

JOURNAL OF INORGANIC BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 230, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jinorgbio.2022.111756

关键词

Zinc finger; Iron-sulfur cluster; Metalloprotein; Bioinformatics; Spectroscopy; Metal cofactors

资金

  1. NSF [CHE-1708732, CHE-2106417]
  2. NIH [GM066706]
  3. AFPE

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Metal ions are commonly found as protein co-factors in biology. The distribution and utilization of metals in biology has evolved over time. Zinc finger proteins are a common class of metal co-factored proteins, but there have been cases where proteins annotated as zinc finger proteins actually contain Fe-S clusters. Researchers can differentiate the metal co-factors using bioinformatics and specific methods.
Metal ions are commonly found as protein co-factors in biology, and it is estimated that over a quarter of all proteins require a metal cofactor. The distribution and utilization of metals in biology has changed over time. As the earth evolved, the atmosphere became increasingly oxygen rich which affected the bioavailability of certain metals such as iron, which in the oxidized ferric form is significantly less soluble than its reduced ferrous counterpart. Additionally, proteins that utilize metal cofactors for structural purposes grew in abundance, necessitating the use of metal co-factors that are not redox active, such as zinc. One common class of Zn co factored proteins are zinc finger proteins (ZFs). ZFs bind zinc utilizing cysteine and histidine ligands to promote structure and function. Bioinformatics has annotated 5% of the human genome as ZFs; however, many of these proteins have not been studied empirically. In recent years, examples of annotated ZFs that instead harbor Fe-S clusters have been reported. In this review we highlight four examples of mis-annotated ZFs: mitoNEET, CPSF30, nsp12, and Fep1 and describe methods that can be utilized to differentiate the metal-cofactor.

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