4.6 Article

Role of histidine interruption in mitigating the pathological effects of long polyglutamine stretches in SCA1: A molecular approach

期刊

PROTEIN SCIENCE
卷 12, 期 5, 页码 953-962

出版社

COLD SPRING HARBOR LAB PRESS, PUBLICATIONS DEPT
DOI: 10.1110/ps.0224403

关键词

aggregation; beta-hairpin; circular dichroism; histidine interruption; polyglutamines; SCA1; TFE

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Polyglutamine expansions, leading to aggregation, have been implicated in various neurodegenerative disorders. The range of repeats observed in normal individuals in most of these diseases is 19-36, whereas mutant proteins carry 40-81 repeats. In one such disorder, spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA1), it has been reported that certain individuals with expanded polyglutamine repeats in the disease range (Q(12)HQHQ(12)HQHQ(14/15)) but with histidine interruptions were found to be phenotypically normal. To establish the role of histidine, a comparative study of conformational properties of model peptide sequences with (Q(12)HQHQ(12)HQHQ(12)) and without (Q(42)) interruptions is presented here. Q(12)HQHQ(12)HQHQ(12) displays greater solubility and lesser aggregation propensity compared to uninterrupted Q42 as well as much shorter Q(22). The solvent and temperature-driven conformational transitions (P structure <-> random coil --> alpha helix) displayed by these model polyQ stretches is also discussed in the present report. The study strengthens our earlier hypothesis of the importance of histidine interruptions in mitigating the pathogenicity of expanded polyglutamine tract at the SCA1 locus. The relatively lower propensity for aggregation observed in case of histidine interrupted stretches even in the disease range suggests that at a very low concentration, the protein aggregation in normal cells, is possibly not initiated at all or the disease onset is significantly delayed. Our present study also reveals that besides histidine interruption, proline interruption in polyglutamine stretches can lower their aggregation propensity.

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