4.6 Article

Human ESCRT-II complex and its role in human immunodeficiency virus type 1 release

期刊

JOURNAL OF VIROLOGY
卷 80, 期 19, 页码 9465-9480

出版社

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/JVI.01049-06

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. NHLBI NIH HHS [HL29622] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIAID NIH HHS [R01 AI051174, R37 AI051174, AI51174] Funding Source: Medline
  3. NIDDK NIH HHS [R01 DK070947, DK070947] Funding Source: Medline
  4. NIGMS NIH HHS [P01 GM066521, GM066521] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The budding of many enveloped RNA viruses, including human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1), requires some of the same cellular machinery as vesicle formation at the multivesicular body (MVB). In Saccharomyces cerevisiae, the ESCRT-II complex performs a central role in MVB protein sorting and vesicle formation, as it is recruited by the upstream ESCRT-I complex and nucleates assembly of the downstream ESCRT-III complex. Here, we report that the three subunits of human ESCRT-II, EAP20, EAP30, and EAP45, have a number of properties in common with their yeast orthologs. Specifically, EAP45 bound ubiquitin via its N-terminal GRAM-like ubiquitin-binding in EAP45 (GLUE) domain, both EAP45 and EAP30 bound the C-terminal domain of TSG101/ESCRT-I, and EAP20 bound the N-terminal half of CHMP6/ESCRT-III. Consistent with its expected role in MVB vesicle formation, (i) human ESCRT-II localized to endosomal membranes in a VPS4-dependent fashion and (ii) depletion of EAP20/ESCRT-II and CHMP6/ESCRT-III inhibited lysosomal targeting and downregulation of the epidermal growth factor receptor, albeit to a lesser extent than depletion of TSG101/ESCRT-1. Nevertheless, HIV-1 release and infectivity were not reduced by efficient small interfering RNA depletion of EAP20/ESCRT-II or CHMP6/ESCRT-III. These observations indicate that there are probably multiple pathways for protein sorting/MVB vesicle formation in human cells and that HIV-1 does not utilize an ESCRT-II-dependent pathway to leave the cell.

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

4.6
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