4.7 Article

Archaeal N-terminal protein maturation commonly involves N-terminal acetylation: A large-scale proteomics survey

期刊

JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR BIOLOGY
卷 362, 期 5, 页码 915-924

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS LTD- ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmb.2006.07.086

关键词

N-terminal acetylation; methionine cleavage; integral membrane protein; mass spectrometry; archaea

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present the first large-scale survey of N-terminal protein maturation in archaea based on 873 proteomically identified N-terminal peptides from the two haloarchaea Halobacterium salinarum and Natronomonas pharaonis. The observed protein maturation pattern can be attributed to the combined action of methionine aminopeptidase and N-terminal acetyltransferase and applies to cytosolic proteins as well as to a large fraction of integral membrane proteins. Both N-terminal maturation processes primarily depend on the amino acid in penultimate position, in which serine and threonine residues are over represented. Removal of the initiator methionine occurs in two-thirds of the haloarchaeal proteins and requires a small penultimate residue, indicating that methionine aminopeptidase specificity is conserved across all domains of life. While N-terminal acetylation is rare in bacteria, our proteomic data show that acetylated N termini are common in archaea affecting about 15% of the proteins and revealing a distinct archaeal N-terminal acetylation pattern. Haloarchaeal N-terminal acetyltransferase reveals narrow substrate specificity, which is limited to cleaved N termini starting with serine or alanine residues. A comparative analysis of 140 ortholog pairs with identified N-terminal peptide showed that acetylatable N-terminal residues are predominantly conserved amongst the two haloarchaea. Only few exceptions from the general N-terminal acetylation pattern were observed, which probably represent protein-specific modifications as they were confirmed by ortholog comparison. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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