4.6 Article

Little involvement of recycled-amino acids from proteasomal proteolysis in de novo protein synthesis

期刊

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2022.09.113

关键词

Proteasome; Proteolysis; Aminopeptidase; Myoblast; Amino acid

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) KAKENHI [JP20K19478, JP21H04857]
  2. Nakatomi Foundation, Japan
  3. Sumitomo Foundation, Japan
  4. [22J00078]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The proteasome and aminopeptidases are thought to be involved in protein synthesis through intracellular energy production by recycled-amino acid metabolism, thereby maintaining myoblast integrity.
Myoblast integrity is essential for skeletal muscle regeneration. Many intracellular proteins are degraded by the proteasome and converted to amino acids by aminopeptidases through the protein degradation pathway. Although we previously reported its importance for myoblast integrity, the involved mecha-nism remains unclear. In this study, we focused on the reusability of proteolytic products to elucidate the regulatory mechanism of protein synthesis mediated by the proteasome and aminopeptidases. Protea-some inhibition decreased protein synthesis, but recycled-amino acids derived from proteasomal pro-teolysis were not reused for de novo protein synthesis in C2C12 myoblasts. On the other hand, proteasome and aminopeptidase inhibition decreased intracellular ATP levels in C2C12 myoblasts. Therefore, it was indicated that amino acids produced by these proteolytic systems may be reutilized for ATP production through its metabolism, not for de novo protein synthesis. These findings suggested the proteasome and aminopeptidases are thought to be involved in protein synthesis through intracellular energy production by recycled-amino acid metabolism, thereby maintaining myoblast integrity.(c) 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

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