4.5 Article

Syntaxin 16 and syntaxin 5 are required for efficient retrograde transport of several exogenous and endogenous cargo proteins

期刊

JOURNAL OF CELL SCIENCE
卷 120, 期 8, 页码 1457-1468

出版社

COMPANY BIOLOGISTS LTD
DOI: 10.1242/jcs.03436

关键词

protein toxin; Shiga toxin; cholera toxin; ricin; retrograde transport; membrane traffic; SNARE; endosome; Golgi

资金

  1. Wellcome Trust [080566, 080566/Z/06/Z] Funding Source: Medline
  2. Wellcome Trust [080566/Z/06/Z] Funding Source: Wellcome Trust

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Retrograde transport allows proteins and lipids to leave the endocytic pathway to reach other intracellular compartments, such as trans-Golgi network (TGN)/Golgi membranes, the endoplasmic reticulum and, in some instances, the cytosol. Here, we have used RNA interference against the SNARE proteins syntaxin 5 and syntaxin 16, combined with recently developed quantitative trafficking assays, morphological approaches and cell intoxication analysis to show that these SNARE proteins are not only required for efficient retrograde transport of Shiga toxin, but also for that of an endogenous cargo protein - the mannose 6-phosphate receptor - and for the productive trafficking into cells of cholera toxin and ricin. We have found that the function of syntaxin 16 was specifically required for, and restricted to, the retrograde pathway. Strikingly, syntaxin 5 RNA interference protected cells particularly strongly against Shiga toxin. Since our trafficking analysis showed that apart from inhibiting retrograde endosome-to-TGN transport, the silencing of syntaxin 5 had no additional effect on Shiga toxin endocytosis or trafficking from TGN/Golgi membranes to the endoplasmic reticulum, we hypothesize that syntaxin 5 also has trafficking-independent functions. In summary, our data demonstrate that several cellular and exogenous cargo proteins use elements of the same SNARE machinery for efficient retrograde transport between early/recycling endosomes and TGN/Golgi membranes.

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

4.5
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