4.6 Article

Interactions within the coiled-coil domain of RetGC-1 guanylyl cyclase are optimized for regulation rather than for high affinity

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 276, 期 28, 页码 26218-26229

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M010495200

关键词

-

资金

  1. NEI NIH HHS [EY06641] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIGMS NIH HHS [GM50789] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

RetGC-1, a member of the membrane guanylyl cyclase family of proteins, is regulated in photoreceptor cells by a Ca2+-binding protein known as GCAP-1, Proper regulation of RetGC-1 is essential in photoreceptor cells for normal light adaptation and recovery to the dark state. In this study we show that cGMP synthesis by RetGC-1 requires dimerization, because critical functions in the catalytic site must be provided by each of the two polypeptide chains of the dimer, We also show that an intact cy-helical coiled-coil structure is required to provide dimerization strength for the catalytic domain of RetGC-1, However, the dimerization strength of this domain must be precisely optimized for proper regulation by GCAP-1, We found that Arg(838) within the dimerization domain establishes the Ca2+ sensitivity of RetGC-1 by determining the strength of the coiled-coil interaction. Arg(838) substitutions dominantly enhance cGMP synthesis even at the highest Ca2+ concentrations that occur in normal dark-adapted photoreceptor cells, Molecular dynamics simulations suggest that Arg(838) substitutions disrupt a small network of salt bridges to allow an abnormal extension of coiled-coil structure. Substitutions at Arg(838) were first identified by linkage to the retinal degenerative disease, autosomal dominant cone rod dystrophy (adCORD). Consistent with the characteristics of this disease, the Arg(898)-substituted RetGC-1 mutants exhibit a dominant biochemical phenotype, We propose that accelerated cGMP synthesis in humans with adCORD is the primary cause of cone-rod degeneration.

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