4.3 Review

Structural and functional diversity of bacterial membrane fusion proteins

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.bbapap.2008.10.010

关键词

Membrane fusion protein; Multidrug efflux; Membrane transport; Protein-protein interaction; Phylogenetic analysis

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health [1-RO1-AI052293]
  2. Oklahoma Center for the Advancement of Science and Technology [HR05-131]
  3. NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF ALLERGY AND INFECTIOUS DISEASES [R01AI052293] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Membrane Fusion Proteins (MFPs) are functional subunits of multi-component transporters that perform diverse physiological functions in both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. MFPs associate with transporters belonging to Resistance-Nodulation-cell Division (RND), ATP-Binding Cassette (ABC) and Major Facilitator (MF) superfamilies of proteins. Recent studies suggested that MFPs interact with substrates and play an active role in transport reactions. In addition, the MFP-dependent transporters from Gram-negative bacteria recruit the outer membrane channels to expel various substrates across the outer membrane into external medium. This review is focused on the diversity, structure and molecular mechanism of MFPs that function in multidrug efflux. Using phylogenetic approaches we analyzed diversity and representation of multidrug MFPs in sequenced bacterial genomes. in addition to previously characterized MFPs from Gram-negative bacteria. we identified MFPs that associate with RND-, MF- and ABC-type transporters in Gram-positive bacteria. Sequence analyses showed that MFPs vary significantly in size (200-650 amino acid residues) with some of them lacking the signature (x-helical domain of multidrug MFPs. Furthermore, many transport operons contain two- or three genes encoding distinct MFPs. We further discuss the diversity of MFPs in the context of current views on the mechanism and structure of MFP-dependent transporters. (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. 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

4.3
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