4.8 Article

The peroxisomal AAA-ATPase Pex1/Pex6 unfolds substrates by processive threading

期刊

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS
卷 9, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/s41467-017-02474-4

关键词

-

资金

  1. U.C. Office of the President, Multicampus Research Programs and Initiatives grant [MR-15-328599]
  2. Program for Breakthrough Biomedical Research - Sandler Foundation
  3. Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences, of the U.S. Department of Energy [DE-AC02-05CH11231]
  4. NIH [S10 OD016268]
  5. Miller Institute for Basic Research in Science, University of California, Berkeley
  6. National Institute Of General Medical Sciences [K99GM121880]
  7. Howard Hughes Medical Institute
  8. US National Institutes of Health [R01-GM094497]
  9. US National Science Foundation CAREER Program [NSF-MCB-1150288]
  10. Pew Scholars program
  11. Searle Scholars program
  12. NIH grant [DP2 EB020402-01]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Pex1 and Pex6 form a heterohexameric motor essential for peroxisome biogenesis and function, and mutations in these AAA-ATPases cause most peroxisome-biogenesis disorders in humans. The tail-anchored protein Pex15 recruits Pex1/Pex6 to the peroxisomal membrane, where it performs an unknown function required for matrix-protein import. Here we determine that Pex1/Pex6 from S. cerevisiae is a protein translocase that unfolds Pex15 in a pore-loop-dependent and ATP-hydrolysis-dependent manner. Our structural studies of Pex15 in isolation and in complex with Pex1/Pex6 illustrate that Pex15 binds the N-terminal domains of Pex6, before its C-terminal disordered region engages with the pore loops of the motor, which then processively threads Pex15 through the central pore. Furthermore, Pex15 directly binds the cargo receptor Pex5, linking Pex1/Pex6 to other components of the peroxisomal import machinery. Our results thus support a role of Pex1/Pex6 in mechanical unfolding of peroxins or their extraction from the peroxisomal membrane during matrix-protein import.

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

4.8
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