4.6 Article

Novel Insights into the PKC-dependent Regulation of the Oxidoreductase p66Shc

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 291, 期 45, 页码 23557-23568

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M116.752766

关键词

cell death; phosphotyrosine binding (PTB) domain; PKC; reactive oxygen species (ROS); redox signaling; p66shc; phosphorylation

资金

  1. Jubilaumsfond der Oesterreichischen Nationalbank (OeNB) [13273]
  2. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [W1101]
  3. Austrian Federal Ministries BMVIT/BMWFJ (via FFG)
  4. Tiroler Zukunftsstiftung/Standortagentur Tirol (SAT)
  5. Osterreichische Krebshilfe Tirol

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dysfunctional mitochondria contribute to the development of many diseases and pathological conditions through the excessive production of reactive oxygen species (ROS), and, where studied, ablation of p66Shc (p66) was beneficial. p66 translocates to the mitochondria and oxidizes cytochrome c to yield H2O2, which in turn initiates cell death. PKC-mediated phosphorylation of serine 36 in p66 has been implicated as a key regulatory step preceding mitochondrial translocation, ROS production, and cell death, and PKC thus may provide a target for therapeutic intervention. We performed a reassessment of PKC regulation of the oxidoreductase activity of p66. Although our experiments did not substantiate Ser(36) phosphorylation by PKC, they instead provided evidence for Ser(139) and Ser(213) as PKC phosphorylation sites regulating the pro-oxidant and pro-apoptotic function of p66. Mutation of another predicted PKC phosphorylation site also located in the phosphotyrosine binding domain, threonine 206, had no phenotype. Intriguingly, p66 with Thr(206) and Ser(213) mutated to glutamic acid showed a gain-of-function phenotype with significantly increased ROS production and cell death induction. Taken together, these data argue for a complex mechanism of PKC-dependent regulation of p66 activation involving Ser(139) and a motif surrounding Ser(213).

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