4.6 Article

Key residues for the oligomerization of Aβ42 protein in Alzheimer's disease

期刊

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2011.09.097

关键词

A beta fusion protein; Oligomers; Amyloid; Cysteine scanning mutagenesis

资金

  1. Alzheimer's Association [NIRG-09-133555]
  2. American Health Assistance Foundation [A2010362]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Deposition of amyloid fibrils consisting of amyloid beta (A beta) protein as senile plaques in the brain is a pathological hallmark of Alzheimer's disease. However, a growing body of evidence shows that soluble A beta oligomers correlate better with dementia than fibrils, suggesting that A beta oligomers may be the primary toxic species. The structure and oligomerization mechanism of these A beta oligomers are crucial for developing effective therapeutics. Here we investigated the oligomerization of A beta 42 in the context of a fusion protein containing GroES and ubiquitin fused to the N-terminus of A beta sequence. The presence of fusion protein partners, in combination with a denaturing buffer containing 8 M urea at pH 10, is unfavorable for A beta 42 aggregation, thus allowing only the most stable structures to be observed. Transmission electron microscopy showed that A beta 42 fusion protein formed globular oligomers, which bound weakly to thioflavin T and Congo red. SDS-PAGE shows that A beta 42 fusion protein formed SDS-resistant hexamers and tetramers. In contrast, A beta 40 fusion protein remained as monomers on SDS gel, suggesting that the oligomerization of A beta 42 fusion protein is not due to the fusion protein partners. Cysteine scanning mutagenesis at 22 residue positions further revealed that single cysteine substitutions of the C-terminal hydrophobic residues (I31, I32, L34, V39, V40, and I41) led to disruption of hexamer and tetramer formation, suggesting that hydrophobic interactions between these residues are most critical for A beta 42 oligomerization. (C) 2011 Elsevier Inc. 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

4.6
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