4.4 Review

Strength in numbers: effect of protein crowding on the shape of cell membranes

期刊

BIOCHEMICAL SOCIETY TRANSACTIONS
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

PORTLAND PRESS LTD
DOI: 10.1042/BST20210883

关键词

-

资金

  1. Novo Nordisk Foundation [NNF20OC0065357, NNF18SA0035142]
  2. INTERACTIONS, Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant [847523]
  3. Marie Curie Actions (MSCA) [847523] Funding Source: Marie Curie Actions (MSCA)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Continuous reshaping of the plasma membrane is critical for cellular functions. Recent studies have shown that protein crowding can bend membranes by generating spontaneous vesicle formation and tubular morphologies. However, the in vivo impact of protein crowding is still under investigation.
Continuous reshaping of the plasma membrane into pleomorphic shapes is critical for a plethora of cellular functions. How the cell carries out this enigmatic control of membrane remodeling has remained an active research field for decades and several molecular and biophysical mechanisms have shown to be involved in overcoming the energy barrier associated with membrane bending. The reported mechanisms behind membrane bending have been largely concerned with structural protein features, however, in the last decade, reports on the ability of densely packed proteins to bend membranes by protein- protein crowding, have challenged prevailing mechanistic views. Crowding has now been shown to generate spontaneous vesicle formation and tubular morphologies on cell-and model membranes, demonstrating crowding as a relevant player involved in the bending of membranes. Still, current research is largely based on unnatural overexpression of proteins in non-native domains, and together with efforts in modeling, this has led to questioning the in vivo impact of crowding. In this review, we examine this previously overlooked mechanism by summarizing recent advances in the understanding of protein- protein crowding and its prevalence in cellular membrane-shaping processes.

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

4.4
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