4.7 Article

PEX5 regulates autophagy via the mTORC1-TFEB axis during starvation

期刊

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s12276-017-0007-8

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) - Korean government [2014M3A9D8034463, 2015R1A2A1A15054674, 2011-0030130, 2017R1A2B2008840]
  2. GIST Research Institute(GRI) grant - GIST
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea [2015R1A2A1A15054674, 2011-0030130, 2014M3A9D8034463, 2017R1A2B2008840] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Defects in the PEX5 gene impair the import of peroxisomal matrix proteins, leading to nonfunctional peroxisomes and other associated pathological defects such as Zellweger syndrome. Although PEX5 regulates autophagy process in a stress condition, the mechanisms controlling autophagy by PEX5 under nutrient deprivation are largely unknown. Herein, we show a novel function of PEX5 in the regulation of autophagy via Transcription Factor EB (TFEB). Under serum-starved conditions, when PEX5 is depleted, the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTORC1) inhibitor TSC2 is downregulated, which results in increased phosphorylation of the mTORC1 substrates, including 70S6K, S6K, and 4E-BP-1. mTORC1 activation further suppresses the nuclear localization of TFEB, as indicated by decreased mRNA levels of TFEB, LIPA, and LAMP1. Interestingly, peroxisomal mRNA and protein levels are also reduced by TFEB inactivation, indicating that TFEB might control peroxisome biogenesis at a transcriptional level. Conversely, pharmacological inhibition of mTOR resulting from PEX5 depletion during nutrient starvation activates TFEB by promoting nuclear localization of the protein. In addition, mTORC1 inhibition recovers the damaged-peroxisome biogenesis. These data suggest that PEX5 may be a critical regulator of lysosomal gene expression and autophagy through the mTOR-TFEB-autophagy axis under nutrient deprivation.

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