4.7 Article

Comprehensive Analysis of the Human SH3 Domain Family Reveals a Wide Variety of Non-canonical Specificities

期刊

STRUCTURE
卷 25, 期 10, 页码 1598-+

出版社

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.str.2017.07.017

关键词

-

资金

  1. Canadian Institutes of Health Research [MOP-84324, MOP-93684]
  2. AbbVie
  3. Bayer Pharma AG
  4. Boehringer Ingelheim
  5. Canada Foundation for Innovation
  6. Eshelman Institute for Innovation
  7. Genome Canada through Ontario Genomics Institute [OGI-055]
  8. Innovative Medicines Initiative (EU/EFPIA) (ULTRA-DD grant) [115766]
  9. Janssen
  10. Merck
  11. Novartis Pharma AG
  12. Ontario Ministry of Research, Innovation and Science (MRIS)
  13. Pfizer
  14. Sao Paulo Research Foundation-FAPESP
  15. Takeda
  16. Wellcome Trust
  17. US Department of Energy, Office of Biological and Environmental Research [DE-AC02-06CH11357]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

SH3 domains are protein modules that mediate protein-protein interactions in many eukaryotic signal transduction pathways. The majority of SH3 domains studied thus far act by binding to proline-rich sequences in partner proteins, but a growing number of studies have revealed alternative recognition mechanisms. We have comprehensively surveyed the specificity landscape of human SH3 domains in an unbiased manner using peptide-phage display and deep sequencing. Based on similar to 70,000 unique binding peptides, we obtained 154 specificity profiles for 115 SH3 domains, which reveal that roughly half of the SH3 domains exhibit non-canonical specificities and collectively recognize a wide variety of peptide motifs, most of which were previously unknown. Crystal structures of SH3 domains with two distinct non-canonical specificities revealed novel peptide-binding modes through an extended surface outside of the canonical proline-binding site. Our results constitute a significant contribution toward a complete understanding of the mechanisms underlying SH3-mediated cellular responses.

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