DOCSLIB.ORG

The Role of Monoubiquitylation in the Regulation of the Transcription Factor Elk-1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Role of Monoubiquitylation in the Regulation of the Transcription Factor Elk-1 School of Biomedical Sciences The role of monoubiquitylation in the regulation of the transcription factor Elk-1 by Leo Kam Yuen Chow, B.Sc. (Hons) Thesis submitted to the University of Nottingham for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy September 2010 Contents Contents ............................................................................................................................... I Abstract ............................................................................................................................. VI Acknowledgements .......................................................................................................... VII Abbreviations .................................................................................................................. VIII 1. Introduction ................................................................................................................. 1 1.1. The ternary complex factor Elk-1 ............................................................................. 1 1.1.1. Overview ........................................................................................................... 1 1.1.2. Historical perspective ....................................................................................... 2 1.1.3. Domain structure of Elk-1 ................................................................................. 3 1.1.4. Ternary complex formation .............................................................................. 4 1.1.4.1. Serum response element .......................................................................... 4 1.1.4.2. ETS/DNA binding ....................................................................................... 5 1.1.4.3. TCF/SRF interaction .................................................................................. 8 1.1.5. Regulation of Elk-1 by post-translational modifications................................... 9 1.1.5.1. Elk-1 phosphorylation by MAPKs .............................................................. 9 1.1.5.2. The role of Elk-1 phosphorylation .......................................................... 10 1.1.6. Elk-1 target genes and biological function ..................................................... 12 1.2. Ubiquitylation ......................................................................................................... 14 1.2.1. Overview and historical perspective .............................................................. 14 1.2.2. Mechanism of ubiquitylation .......................................................................... 14 1.2.3. Ubiquitin enzymes .......................................................................................... 15 1.2.4. Ubiquitin E3 ligases ......................................................................................... 15 1.2.4.1. RING-domain E3 ligases .......................................................................... 16 1.2.4.2. CRLs regulation by neddylation .............................................................. 18 1.2.4.3. HECT-domain E3s .................................................................................... 19 1.2.5. E2 conjugating enzymes ................................................................................. 20 1.2.6. E1 activating enzymes..................................................................................... 21 1.2.7. Ubiquitylation linkage ..................................................................................... 21 1.2.7.1. Multiple mono- and mono-ubiquitylation .............................................. 22 I 1.2.7.2. Polyubiquitylation ................................................................................... 23 1.2.7.2.1. Lysine 48-linked polyubiquitylation .................................................... 24 1.2.7.2.2. Lysine 63-linked polyubiquitylation .................................................... 24 1.2.7.2.3. Polyubiquitylation via other linkages .................................................. 26 1.2.8. 26S proteasome-mediated proteolysis .......................................................... 27 1.2.9. Deubiquitylation ............................................................................................. 28 1.3. Regulation of ubiquitylation ................................................................................... 30 1.3.1. Regulation of ubiquitylation by phosphorylation ........................................... 30 1.3.1.1. Phosphodegron ....................................................................................... 30 1.3.1.2. Regulation of ubiquitin enzymes by phosphorylation ............................ 32 1.3.2. Regulation of ubiquitylation by subcellular location ...................................... 33 1.3.3. Regulation of ubiquitylation by complex formation ....................................... 34 1.4. Roles of ubiquitylation in transcription .................................................................. 35 1.4.1. Proteolysis-coupled transcription ................................................................... 35 1.4.2. The roles of 26S proteasome in transcription ................................................ 36 1.4.3. Hypothesized mode of proteolysis coupled transcription initiation .............. 38 1.5. Research aims and objectives ................................................................................. 40 2. Materials .................................................................................................................... 41 2.1. Antibodies ............................................................................................................... 41 2.2. Chemicals and commercial kits .............................................................................. 42 2.3. Bacterial Strains ...................................................................................................... 43 2.4. Plasmid Constructs ................................................................................................. 44 2.5. Oligonucleotides ..................................................................................................... 47 3. Methods ..................................................................................................................... 48 3.1. Nucleic Acid Techniques ......................................................................................... 48 3.1.1. DNA extraction ................................................................................................ 48 3.1.1.1. Small scale DNA preparation .................................................................. 48 3.1.1.2. Large scale DNA preparation .................................................................. 48 3.1.2. Restriction digestion of DNA ........................................................................... 49 3.1.3. Alkaline phosphatase treatment of DNA ........................................................ 49 3.1.4. Ligation of DNA ............................................................................................... 49 3.1.5. Oligonucleotide 32P [γ] ATP labelling ............................................................... 50 II 3.1.6. Production of [32P]-labelled double stranded oligonucleotides .................... 50 3.1.7. Site-Directed Mutagenesis.............................................................................. 51 3.2. Bacterial Techniques ............................................................................................... 51 3.2.1. Preparation of competent cells ...................................................................... 51 3.2.2. Transformation of competent cells with plasmid DNA .................................. 52 3.3. Gel Electrophoresis ................................................................................................. 52 3.3.1. Agarose gel electrophoresis ........................................................................... 52 3.3.1.1. DNA agarose gel ...................................................................................... 52 3.3.1.2. Extraction of DNA from agarose gels ...................................................... 53 3.3.2. Polyacrylamide gels ........................................................................................ 53 3.3.2.1. Non-denaturing polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis ............................. 53 3.3.2.2. SDS polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis ................................................. 54 3.4. Protein Techniques ................................................................................................. 55 3.4.1. Protein extraction ........................................................................................... 55 3.4.1.1. Preparation of whole cell extracts .......................................................... 55 3.4.1.2. Preparation of HeLa cytosolic extracts from suspension culture ........... 55 3.4.1.3. Preparation of nuclear extracts .............................................................. 56 3.4.2. Transfer of proteins to Polyvinylidene Fluoride membrane........................... 56 3.4.3. Western blotting ............................................................................................. 57 3.4.4. Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assay (EMSA) .................................................. 57 3.4.5. Fast Performance Liquid Chromatography (FPLC) .......................................... 58 3.4.6. Dialysis ...........................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Supporting Information
    Supporting Information Figure S1. The functionality of the tagged Arp6 and Swr1 was confirmed by monitoring cell growth and sensitivity to hydeoxyurea (HU). Five-fold serial dilutions of each strain were plated on YPD with or without 50 mM HU and incubated at 30°C or 37°C for 3 days. Figure S2. Localization of Arp6 and Swr1 on chromosome 3. The binding of Arp6-FLAG (top), Swr1-FLAG (middle), and Arp6-FLAG in swr1 cells (bottom) are compared. The position of Tel 3L, Tel 3R, CEN3, and the RP gene are shown under the panels. Figure S3. Localization of Arp6 and Swr1 on chromosome 4. The binding of Arp6-FLAG (top), Swr1-FLAG (middle), and Arp6-FLAG in swr1 cells (bottom) in the whole chromosome region are compared. The position of Tel 4L, Tel 4R, CEN4, SWR1, and RP genes are shown under the panels. Figure S4. Localization of Arp6 and Swr1 on the region including the SWR1 gene of chromosome 4. The binding of Arp6- FLAG (top), Swr1-FLAG (middle), and Arp6-FLAG in swr1 cells (bottom) are compared. The position and orientation of the SWR1 gene is shown. Figure S5. Localization of Arp6 and Swr1 on chromosome 5. The binding of Arp6-FLAG (top), Swr1-FLAG (middle), and Arp6-FLAG in swr1 cells (bottom) are compared. The position of Tel 5L, Tel 5R, CEN5, and the RP genes are shown under the panels. Figure S6. Preferential localization of Arp6 and Swr1 in the 5′ end of genes. Vertical bars represent the binding ratio of proteins in each locus.
    [Show full text]
  • Atherosclerosis-Susceptible and Atherosclerosis-Resistant Pigeon Aortic Cells Express Different Genes in Vivo
    University of New Hampshire University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station Publications New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station 7-1-2013 Atherosclerosis-susceptible and atherosclerosis-resistant pigeon aortic cells express different genes in vivo Janet L. Anderson University of New Hampshire, [email protected] C. M. Ashwell University of New Hampshire - Main Campus S. C. Smith University of New Hampshire - Main Campus R. Shine University of New Hampshire - Main Campus E. C. Smith University of New Hampshire - Main Campus See next page for additional authors Follow this and additional works at: https://scholars.unh.edu/nhaes Part of the Poultry or Avian Science Commons Recommended Citation J. L. Anderson, C. M. Ashwell, S. C. Smith, R. Shine, E. C. Smith and R. L. Taylor, Jr. Atherosclerosis- susceptible and atherosclerosis-resistant pigeon aortic cells express different genes in vivo Poultry Science (2013) 92 (10): 2668-2680 doi:10.3382/ps.2013-03306 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in New Hampshire Agricultural Experiment Station Publications by an authorized administrator of University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Authors Janet L. Anderson, C. M. Ashwell, S. C. Smith, R. Shine, E. C. Smith, and Robert L. Taylor Jr. This article is available at University of New Hampshire Scholars' Repository: https://scholars.unh.edu/nhaes/207 Atherosclerosis-susceptible and atherosclerosis-resistant pigeon aortic cells express different genes in vivo J.
    [Show full text]
  • (1,3)-Β-D-Glucan Synthase Gene Family in Hordeum Vulgare
    lJ Ítìr¡ 1 t¡ The Putative ( 1,3)-9-l-Glucan Synthase Gene Family in Hordeum vulgare Submitted by Michael Scott Schober This thesis is submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Discipline of Plant and Pest Science School of Agriculture and Wine Faculty of Sciences University of Adelaide,'Waite Campus Glen Osmond, South Australia, 5064, Australia January,2006 Statement of Authorship This thesis contains no material that has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university and that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, this thesis contains no material previously published or written by another person, except where due reference being made in the text of the thesis. I give consent to this copy of my thesis, when deposited in the University Libraries, being available for photocopying and loan. Michael Scott Schober January 2006 ll Table of Contents STATEMENT or AutgonsulP ll TABLE OF CONTENTS iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS vi PUBLTCATIONS vii ABBREVIATIONS viii ABSTRACT ix CHAPTER 1 General Introduction I 1.I INTRODUCTION 2 1.2 (1,3)-p-D-GLUCAN 4 1.2.1 StructuralProperties 4 1.2.2 Cellular Locations and Associated Functions 6 1.2.2.1 Cell Plate Formation 6 1,2.2.2 Plasmodesmata and Sieve Plate Pores 7 1.2.2.3 ReproductiveTissues 9 1.3 STRESSRELATED(1,3)-B-o-GLUCANDEPOSITION ll I .3. 1 Abiotic stress ll l.3.l.l Wounding ll 1.3.1.2 Metaltoxicity t2 1.3.2 Blotic Stress 12 1.3.2.1 Viral infection t2 1.3.2.2 Bacterialinfection 13 1.3.2.3 Nematode infection l3 1.3.2.4 Fungal Infection
    [Show full text]
  • Proteasomes: Unfoldase-Assisted Protein Degradation Machines
    Biol. Chem. 2020; 401(1): 183–199 Review Parijat Majumder and Wolfgang Baumeister* Proteasomes: unfoldase-assisted protein degradation machines https://doi.org/10.1515/hsz-2019-0344 housekeeping functions such as cell cycle control, signal Received August 13, 2019; accepted October 2, 2019; previously transduction, transcription, DNA repair and translation published online October 29, 2019 (Alves dos Santos et al., 2001; Goldberg, 2007; Bader and Steller, 2009; Koepp, 2014). Consequently, any disrup- Abstract: Proteasomes are the principal molecular tion of selective protein degradation pathways leads to a machines for the regulated degradation of intracellular broad array of pathological states, including cancer, neu- proteins. These self-compartmentalized macromolecu- rodegeneration, immune-related disorders, cardiomyo- lar assemblies selectively degrade misfolded, mistrans- pathies, liver and gastrointestinal disorders, and ageing lated, damaged or otherwise unwanted proteins, and (Dahlmann, 2007; Motegi et al., 2009; Dantuma and Bott, play a pivotal role in the maintenance of cellular proteo- 2014; Schmidt and Finley, 2014). stasis, in stress response, and numerous other processes In eukaryotes, two major pathways have been identi- of vital importance. Whereas the molecular architecture fied for the selective removal of unwanted proteins – the of the proteasome core particle (CP) is universally con- ubiquitin-proteasome-system (UPS), and the autophagy- served, the unfoldase modules vary in overall structure, lysosome pathway (Ciechanover, 2005; Dikic, 2017). UPS subunit complexity, and regulatory principles. Proteas- constitutes the principal degradation route for intracel- omal unfoldases are AAA+ ATPases (ATPases associated lular proteins, whereas cellular organelles, cell-surface with a variety of cellular activities) that unfold protein proteins, and invading pathogens are mostly degraded substrates, and translocate them into the CP for degra- via autophagy.
    [Show full text]
  • Proteomics Answers Which Yeast Genes Are Specific for Baking
    bioengineering Article Proteomics Answers Which Yeast Genes Are Specific for Baking, Brewing, and Ethanol Production Svetlana Davydenko 1, Tatiana Meledina 2, Alexey Mittenberg 3 , Sergey Shabelnikov 3, Maksim Vonsky 4 and Artyom Morozov 2,* 1 Innovation & Research Department, Baltika Breweries—Part of the Carlsberg Group, 6-th Verkhnij ln. 3, 194292 St. Petersburg, Russia; [email protected] 2 Faculty of Biotechnologies (BioTech), ITMO University, Lomonosova st. 9, 191002 St. Petersburg, Russia; [email protected] 3 Proteomics and Mass Spectrometry Group, Cell Technologies Center, Institute of Cytology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Tikhoretsky av. 4, 194064 St. Petersburg, Russia; [email protected] (A.M.); [email protected] (S.S.) 4 Department of State Standards and Reference Materials in the Area of Bioanalytical and Medical Measurements, D.I. Mendeleyev Institute for Metrology VNIIM, Moskovsky pr. 19, 190005 St. Petersburg, Russia; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +7-965-026-59-03 Received: 29 September 2020; Accepted: 16 November 2020; Published: 18 November 2020 Abstract: Yeast strains are convenient models for studying domestication processes. The ability of yeast to ferment carbon sources from various substrates and to produce ethanol and carbon dioxide is the core of brewing, winemaking, and ethanol production technologies. The present study reveals the differences among yeast strains used in various industries. To understand this, we performed a proteomic study of industrial Saccharomyces cerevisiae strains followed by a comparative analysis of available yeast genetic data. Individual protein expression levels in domesticated strains from different industries indicated modulation resulting from response to technological environments. The innovative nature of this research was the discovery of genes overexpressed in yeast strains adapted to brewing, baking, and ethanol production, typical genes for specific domestication were found.
    [Show full text]
  • University of California, San Diego
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO Characterizing Postranslational Regulatory Mechanisms of the Ubiquitin Proteasome System A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Chemistry by Frankie Robert Gonzales Committee in charge: Professor Gentry Patrick, Chair Professor Elizabeth Komives, Co-Chair Professor Gourisankar Ghosh Professor Judy Kim Professor Dong-Er Zhang Professor Brian Zid 2017 Copyright Frankie Robert Gonzales, 2017 All rights reserved The dissertation of Frankie Robert Gonzales is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm and electronically: Co-Chair Chair University of California, San Diego 2017 iii DEDICATION I dedicate this work to my mom who has supported me in every aspect of my life. And to the countless educators who have taken special interest in my and helped advance me and my career far further than I had ever expected. Mitch Markowitz, Dr. Jennifer Whiles- Lillig, and Dr. Betsy Komives have been among these mentors who have propped me up and I owe my entire educational path and career to them. iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Signature Page ................................................................................................................... iii Dedication .......................................................................................................................... iv Table of Contents .................................................................................................................v
    [Show full text]
  • 12) United States Patent (10
    US007635572B2 (12) UnitedO States Patent (10) Patent No.: US 7,635,572 B2 Zhou et al. (45) Date of Patent: Dec. 22, 2009 (54) METHODS FOR CONDUCTING ASSAYS FOR 5,506,121 A 4/1996 Skerra et al. ENZYME ACTIVITY ON PROTEIN 5,510,270 A 4/1996 Fodor et al. MICROARRAYS 5,512,492 A 4/1996 Herron et al. 5,516,635 A 5/1996 Ekins et al. (75) Inventors: Fang X. Zhou, New Haven, CT (US); 5,532,128 A 7/1996 Eggers Barry Schweitzer, Cheshire, CT (US) 5,538,897 A 7/1996 Yates, III et al. s s 5,541,070 A 7/1996 Kauvar (73) Assignee: Life Technologies Corporation, .. S.E. al Carlsbad, CA (US) 5,585,069 A 12/1996 Zanzucchi et al. 5,585,639 A 12/1996 Dorsel et al. (*) Notice: Subject to any disclaimer, the term of this 5,593,838 A 1/1997 Zanzucchi et al. patent is extended or adjusted under 35 5,605,662 A 2f1997 Heller et al. U.S.C. 154(b) by 0 days. 5,620,850 A 4/1997 Bamdad et al. 5,624,711 A 4/1997 Sundberg et al. (21) Appl. No.: 10/865,431 5,627,369 A 5/1997 Vestal et al. 5,629,213 A 5/1997 Kornguth et al. (22) Filed: Jun. 9, 2004 (Continued) (65) Prior Publication Data FOREIGN PATENT DOCUMENTS US 2005/O118665 A1 Jun. 2, 2005 EP 596421 10, 1993 EP 0619321 12/1994 (51) Int. Cl. EP O664452 7, 1995 CI2O 1/50 (2006.01) EP O818467 1, 1998 (52) U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Proteasomes and Their Associated Atpases: a Destructive Combination
    Journal of Structural Biology 156 (2006) 72–83 www.elsevier.com/locate/yjsbi Review Proteasomes and their associated ATPases: A destructive combination David M. Smith a, Nadia Benaroudj b, Alfred Goldberg a,¤ a Harvard Medical School, Department of Cell Biology, 240 Longwood Avenue, Boston, MA 02115, USA b Pasteur Institute, Unit of Bacterial Genetics and DiVerentiation, 25-28 rue du Dr. Roux, 75724 Paris Cedex 15, France Received 24 February 2006; received in revised form 19 April 2006; accepted 19 April 2006 Available online 8 May 2006 Abstract Protein degradation by 20S proteasomes in vivo requires ATP hydrolysis by associated hexameric AAA ATPase complexes such as PAN in archaea and the homologous ATPases in the eukaryotic 26S proteasome. This review discusses recent insights into their multistep mechanisms and the roles of ATP. We have focused on the PAN complex, which oVers many advantages for mechanistic and structural studies over the more complex 26S proteasome. By single-particle EM, PAN resembles a “top-hat” capping the ends of the 20S protea- some and resembles densities in the base of the 19S regulatory complex. The binding of ATP promotes formation of the PAN–20S com- plex, which induces opening of a gate for substrate entry into the 20S. PAN’s C-termini, containing a conserved motif, docks into pockets in the 20S’s ring and causes gate opening. Surprisingly, once substrates are unfolded, their translocation into the 20S requires ATP- binding but not hydrolysis and can occur by facilitated diVusion through the ATPase in its ATP-bound form. ATP therefore serves multiple functions in proteolysis and the only step that absolutely requires ATP hydrolysis is the unfolding of globular proteins.
    [Show full text]
  • Molecular Architecture and Assembly of the Eukaryotic Proteasome
    BI82CH15-Hochstrasser ARI 2 May 2013 11:36 Molecular Architecture and Assembly of the Eukaryotic Proteasome Robert J. Tomko, Jr. and Mark Hochstrasser Department of Molecular Biophysics and Biochemistry, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut 06520; email: [email protected], [email protected] Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2013. 82:415–45 Keywords First published online as a Review in Advance on proteasome, ubiquitin, assembly, ATPase, deubiquitylation, March 13, 2013 proteolysis The Annual Review of Biochemistry is online at biochem.annualreviews.org Abstract This article’s doi: The eukaryotic ubiquitin-proteasome system is responsible for most 10.1146/annurev-biochem-060410-150257 aspects of regulatory and quality-control protein degradation in cells. Copyright c 2013 by Annual Reviews. Its substrates, which are usually modified by polymers of ubiquitin, All rights reserved are ultimately degraded by the 26S proteasome. This 2.6-MDa Annu. Rev. Biochem. 2013.82:415-445. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org protein complex is separated into a barrel-shaped proteolytic 20S by Yale University - SOCIAL SCIENCE LIBRARY on 11/04/13. For personal use only. core particle (CP) of 28 subunits capped on one or both ends by a 19S regulatory particle (RP) comprising at least 19 subunits. The RP coordinates substrate recognition, removal of substrate polyubiquitin chains, and substrate unfolding and translocation into the CP for degradation. Although many atomic structures of the CP have been determined, the RP has resisted high-resolution analysis. Recently, however, a combination of cryo-electron microscopy, biochemical analysis, and crystal structure determination of several RP subunits has yielded a near-atomic-resolution view of much of the complex.
    [Show full text]
  • Localisation of 26S Proteasomes with Different Subunit Composition in Insect Muscles Undergoing Programmed Cell Death
    Cell Death and Differentiation (2000) 7, 1210 ± 1217 ã 2000 Macmillan Publishers Ltd All rights reserved 1350-9047/00 $15.00 www.nature.com/cdd Localisation of 26S proteasomes with different subunit composition in insect muscles undergoing programmed cell death PLoÈw*,1, RA Hastings2, SP Dawson2, M Sass1, MA Billett2, eclosion at which point they begin to atrophy as a result of a RJ Mayer2 and SE Reynolds3 decline in the circulating titre of the insect moulting hormone (20-hydroxyecdysone). Atrophy involves the loss of muscle 1 Department of General Zoology, EoÈtvoÈs University, Budapest, Hungary mass, without change in either morphology or physiological 2 School of Biomedical Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK function. A further decline in ecdysteroids just before 3 School of Biology and Biochemistry, University of Bath, Bath, UK emergence commits the ISMs to die during the 36 h following * Corresponding author: P LoÈw, Department of General Zoology, EoÈtvoÈs adult eclosion.1 University, Budapest, P.O.Box 330, H-1445, Hungary. Muscle proteins to be eliminated are labelled by ubiquitin Tel: +36-1-266-9833 ext. 2213; Fax: +36-1-266-7884 E-mail: [email protected] and digested by a multicatalytic enzyme complex, the 26S proteasome.2 This proteolytic machine consists of a 20S Received 24.4.00; revised 3.7.00; accepted 19.7.00 proteasome core and two regulatory 19S `caps', one at Edited by RA Lockshin either end of that core. Two juxtaposed rings of seven b- type subunits flanked on both the top and bottom by a ring of seven a-type subunits form the barrel-shaped 20S core Abstract complex.
    [Show full text]
  • First Comprehensive Proteome Analysis of Lysine Crotonylation In
    www.nature.com/scientificreports OPEN First comprehensive proteome analysis of lysine crotonylation in seedling leaves of Nicotiana Received: 12 January 2017 Accepted: 25 April 2017 tabacum Published: xx xx xxxx Hangjun Sun1, Xiaowei Liu1, Fangfang Li1, Wei Li2, Jing Zhang2, Zhixin Xiao3, Lili Shen1, Ying Li1, Fenglong Wang1 & Jinguang Yang1 Histone crotonylation is a new lysine acylation type of post-translational modification (PTM) enriched at active gene promoters and potential enhancers in yeast and mammalian cells. However, lysine crotonylation in nonhistone proteins and plant cells has not yet been studied. In the present study, we performed a global crotonylation proteome analysis of Nicotiana tabacum (tobacco) using high- resolution LC-MS/MS coupled with highly sensitive immune-affinity purification. A total of 2044 lysine modification sites distributed on 637 proteins were identified, representing the most abundant lysine acylation proteome reported in the plant kingdom. Similar to lysine acetylation and succinylation in plants, lysine crotonylation was related to multiple metabolism pathways, such as carbon metabolism, the citrate cycle, glycolysis, and the biosynthesis of amino acids. Importantly, 72 proteins participated in multiple processes of photosynthesis, and most of the enzymes involved in chlorophyll synthesis were modified through crotonylation. Numerous crotonylated proteins were implicated in the biosynthesis, folding, and degradation of proteins through the ubiquitin-proteasome system. Several crotonylated proteins related to chromatin organization are also discussed here. These data represent the first report of a global crotonylation proteome and provide a promising starting point for further functional research of crotonylation in nonhistone proteins. Post-translational modification (PTM) is a covalent modification process resulting from the proteolytic cleavage or addition of a functional group to one amino acid.
    [Show full text]
  • The Conformational Landscape of the AAA+-Atpase of the 26S Proteasome Studied by Cryo-Electron Microscopy
    TECHNISCHE UNIVERSITÄT MÜNCHEN Fakultät für Chemie Max-Planck-Institut für Biochemie Abteilung für Molekulare Strukturbiologie The conformational landscape of the AAA+-ATPase of the 26S proteasome studied by cryo-electron microscopy Marc Alexander Wehmer Vollständiger Abdruck der von der Fakultät für Chemie der Technischen Universität München zur Erlangung des akademischen Grades eines Doktors der Naturwissenschaften genehmigten Dissertation. Vorsitzender: Prof. Dr. Johannes Buchner Prüfer der Dissertation: 1. Hon.-Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Baumeister 2. Prof. Dr. Sevil Weinkauf 3. Prof. Dr. Bernd Reif (mündliche Prüfung) Prof. Dr. Friedrich Förster (schriftliche Beurteilung) Die Dissertation wurde am 28.06.2017 bei der Technischen Universität München eingereicht und durch die Fakultät für Chemie am 04.09.2017 angenommen. Table of Contents Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................................ i Summary ....................................................................................................................................................... iii Zusammenfassung......................................................................................................................................... iv 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Protein homeostasis ......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]