			Home About us Contact

Hub Proteins (hub + protein)

Distribution by Scientific Domains

Chemistry	100%

Selected Abstracts

Cardiac ankyrin repeat protein is a marker of skeletal muscle pathological remodelling

FEBS JOURNAL, Issue 3 2009
Lydie Laure
In an attempt to identify potential therapeutic targets for the correction of muscle wasting, the gene expression of several pivotal proteins involved in protein metabolism was investigated in experimental atrophy induced by transient or definitive denervation, as well as in four animal models of muscular dystrophies (deficient for calpain 3, dysferlin, ,-sarcoglycan and dystrophin, respectively). The results showed that: (a) the components of the ubiquitin,proteasome pathway are upregulated during the very early phases of atrophy but do not greatly increase in the muscular dystrophy models; (b) forkhead box protein O1 mRNA expression is augmented in the muscles of a limb girdle muscular dystrophy 2A murine model; and (c) the expression of cardiac ankyrin repeat protein (CARP), a regulator of transcription factors, appears to be persistently upregulated in every condition, suggesting that CARP could be a hub protein participating in common pathological molecular pathway(s). Interestingly, the mRNA level of a cell cycle inhibitor known to be upregulated by CARP in other tissues, p21WAF1/CIP1, is consistently increased whenever CARP is upregulated. CARP overexpression in muscle fibres fails to affect their calibre, indicating that CARP per se cannot initiate atrophy. However, a switch towards fast-twitch fibres is observed, suggesting that CARP plays a role in skeletal muscle plasticity. The observation that p21WAF1/CIP1 is upregulated, put in perspective with the effects of CARP on the fibre type, fits well with the idea that the mechanisms at stake might be required to oppose muscle remodelling in skeletal muscle. [source]

Functional dissection of an intrinsically disordered protein: Understanding the roles of different domains of Knr4 protein in protein,protein interactions

PROTEIN SCIENCE, Issue 7 2010
Adilia Dagkessamanskaia
Abstract Knr4, recently characterized as an intrinsically disordered Saccharomyces cerevisiae protein, participates in cell wall formation and cell cycle regulation. It is constituted of a functional central globular core flanked by a poorly structured N-terminal and large natively unfolded C-terminal domains. Up to now, about 30 different proteins have been reported to physically interact with Knr4. Here, we used an in vivo two-hybrid system approach and an in vitro surface plasmon resonance (BIAcore) technique to compare the interaction level of different Knr4 deletion variants with given protein partners. We demonstrate the indispensability of the N-terminal domain of Knr4 for the interactions. On the other hand, presence of the unstructured C-terminal domain has a negative effect on the interaction strength. In protein interactions networks, the most highly connected proteins or "hubs" are significantly enriched in unstructured regions, and among them the transient hub proteins contain the largest and most highly flexible regions. The results presented here of our analysis of Knr4 protein suggest that these large disordered regions are not always involved in promoting the protein,protein interactions of hub proteins, but in some cases, might rather inhibit them. We propose that this type of regions could prevent unspecific protein interactions, or ensure the correct timing of occurrence of transient interactions, which may be of crucial importance for different signaling and regulation processes. [source]

Identification of transient hub proteins and the possible structural basis for their multiple interactions

PROTEIN SCIENCE, Issue 1 2008
Miho Higurashi
Abstract Proteins that can interact with multiple partners play central roles in the network of protein,protein interactions. They are called hub proteins, and recently it was suggested that an abundance of intrinsically disordered regions on their surfaces facilitates their binding to multiple partners. However, in those studies, the hub proteins were identified as proteins with multiple partners, regardless of whether the interactions were transient or permanent. As a result, a certain number of hub proteins are subunits of stable multi-subunit proteins, such as supramolecules. It is well known that stable complexes and transient complexes have different structural features, and thus the statistics based on the current definition of hub proteins will hide the true nature of hub proteins. Therefore, in this paper, we first describe a new approach to identify proteins with multiple partners dynamically, using the Protein Data Bank, and then we performed statistical analyses of the structural features of these proteins. We refer to the proteins as transient hub proteins or sociable proteins, to clarify the difference with hub proteins. As a result, we found that the main difference between sociable and nonsociable proteins is not the abundance of disordered regions, in contrast to the previous studies, but rather the structural flexibility of the entire protein. We also found greater predominance of charged and polar residues in sociable proteins than previously reported. [source]