4.6 Article

Recognition of phosphodegron motifs in human cyclin E by the SCFFbw7 ubiquitin ligase

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 279, 期 48, 页码 50110-50119

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M409226200

关键词

-

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [CA102742] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIA NIH HHS [AG11095, R01 AG011085] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Turnover of cyclin E is controlled by SCFFbw7. Three isoforms of Fbw7 are produced by alternative splicing. Whereas Fbw7alpha and -gamma are nuclear and the beta-isoform is cytoplasmic in 293T cells, all three isoforms induce cyclin E destruction in an in vivo degradation assay. Cyclin E is phosphorylated on Thr(62), Ser(88), Ser(372), Thr(380), and Ser(384) in vivo. To examine the roles of phosphorylation in cyclin E turnover, a series of alanine point mutations in each of these sites were analyzed for Fbw7-driven degradation. As expected, mutation of the previously characterized residue Thr(380) to alanine led to profound defects of cyclin E turnover, and largely abolished association with Fbw7. Mutation of Thr(62) to alanine led to a dramatic reduction in the extent of Thr(380) phosphorylation, suggesting an indirect effect of this mutation on cyclin E turnover. Nevertheless, phosphopeptides centered at Thr(62) associated with Fbw7, and residual binding of cyclin E-T380A to Fbw7 was abolished upon mutation of Thr(62), suggesting a minor role for this residue in direct association with Fbw7. Mutation of Ser(384) to alanine also rendered cyclin E resistant to degradation by Fbw7, with the largest effects being observed with Fbw7beta. Cyclin E-S384A associated more weakly with Fbw7alpha and -beta isoforms but was not defective in Thr(380) phosphorylation. Analysis of the localization of cyclin E mutant proteins indicated selective accumulation of cyclin ES384A in the nucleus, which may contribute to the inability of cytoplasmic Fbw7beta to promote turnover of this cyclin E mutant protein.

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