Literature DB >> 25286318

The intrinsically disordered regions of the Drosophila melanogaster Hox protein ultrabithorax select interacting proteins based on partner topology.

Hao-Ching Hsiao1, Kim L Gonzalez1, Daniel J Catanese2, Kristopher E Jordy2, Kathleen S Matthews2, Sarah E Bondos3.   

Abstract

Interactions between structured proteins require a complementary topology and surface chemistry to form sufficient contacts for stable binding. However, approximately one third of protein interactions are estimated to involve intrinsically disordered regions of proteins. The dynamic nature of disordered regions before and, in some cases, after binding calls into question the role of partner topology in forming protein interactions. To understand how intrinsically disordered proteins identify the correct interacting partner proteins, we evaluated interactions formed by the Drosophila melanogaster Hox transcription factor Ultrabithorax (Ubx), which contains both structured and disordered regions. Ubx binding proteins are enriched in specific folds: 23 of its 39 partners include one of 7 folds, out of the 1195 folds recognized by SCOP. For the proteins harboring the two most populated folds, DNA-RNA binding 3-helical bundles and α-α superhelices, the regions of the partner proteins that exhibit these preferred folds are sufficient for Ubx binding. Three disorder-containing regions in Ubx are required to bind these partners. These regions are either alternatively spliced or multiply phosphorylated, providing a mechanism for cellular processes to regulate Ubx-partner interactions. Indeed, partner topology correlates with the ability of individual partner proteins to bind Ubx spliceoforms. Partners bind different disordered regions within Ubx to varying extents, creating the potential for competition between partners and cooperative binding by partners. The ability of partners to bind regions of Ubx that activate transcription and regulate DNA binding provides a mechanism for partners to modulate transcription regulation by Ubx, and suggests that one role of disorder in Ubx is to coordinate multiple molecular functions in response to tissue-specific cues.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25286318      PMCID: PMC4186791          DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0108217

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  PLoS One        ISSN: 1932-6203            Impact factor:   3.240


  92 in total

1.  Combining peptide recognition specificity and context information for the prediction of the 14-3-3-mediated interactome in S. cerevisiae and H. sapiens.

Authors:  Simona Panni; Luisa Montecchi-Palazzi; Lars Kiemer; Andrea Cabibbo; Serena Paoluzi; Elena Santonico; Christiane Landgraf; Rudolf Volkmer-Engert; Angela Bachi; Luisa Castagnoli; Gianni Cesareni
Journal:  Proteomics       Date:  2010-12-06       Impact factor: 3.984

2.  Novel insights through the integration of structural and functional genomics data with protein networks.

Authors:  Declan Clarke; Nitin Bhardwaj; Mark B Gerstein
Journal:  J Struct Biol       Date:  2012-02-11       Impact factor: 2.867

3.  SCOP: a structural classification of proteins database for the investigation of sequences and structures.

Authors:  A G Murzin; S E Brenner; T Hubbard; C Chothia
Journal:  J Mol Biol       Date:  1995-04-07       Impact factor: 5.469

4.  Cooperative binding of an Ultrabithorax homeodomain protein to nearby and distant DNA sites.

Authors:  P A Beachy; J Varkey; K E Young; D P von Kessler; B I Sun; S C Ekker
Journal:  Mol Cell Biol       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 4.272

Review 5.  Hub promiscuity in protein-protein interaction networks.

Authors:  Ashwini Patil; Kengo Kinoshita; Haruki Nakamura
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2010-04-26       Impact factor: 5.923

6.  Regulatory R region of the CFTR chloride channel is a dynamic integrator of phospho-dependent intra- and intermolecular interactions.

Authors:  Zoltan Bozoky; Mickael Krzeminski; Ranjith Muhandiram; James R Birtley; Ateeq Al-Zahrani; Philip J Thomas; Raymond A Frizzell; Robert C Ford; Julie D Forman-Kay
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2013-11-04       Impact factor: 11.205

7.  Alternative splicing modulates Ubx protein function in Drosophila melanogaster.

Authors:  Hilary C Reed; Tim Hoare; Stefan Thomsen; Thomas A Weaver; Robert A H White; Michael Akam; Claudio R Alonso
Journal:  Genetics       Date:  2009-12-28       Impact factor: 4.562

8.  Tissue-specific splicing of disordered segments that embed binding motifs rewires protein interaction networks.

Authors:  Marija Buljan; Guilhem Chalancon; Sebastian Eustermann; Gunter P Wagner; Monika Fuxreiter; Alex Bateman; M Madan Babu
Journal:  Mol Cell       Date:  2012-06-29       Impact factor: 17.970

9.  Flexible nets: disorder and induced fit in the associations of p53 and 14-3-3 with their partners.

Authors:  Christopher J Oldfield; Jingwei Meng; Jack Y Yang; Mary Qu Yang; Vladimir N Uversky; A Keith Dunker
Journal:  BMC Genomics       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 3.969

10.  The interwinding nature of protein-protein interfaces and its implication for protein complex formation.

Authors:  Kei Yura; Steven Hayward
Journal:  Bioinformatics       Date:  2009-09-29       Impact factor: 6.937

View more
  8 in total

Review 1.  Flexibility and Disorder in Gene Regulation: LacI/GalR and Hox Proteins.

Authors:  Sarah E Bondos; Liskin Swint-Kruse; Kathleen S Matthews
Journal:  J Biol Chem       Date:  2015-09-04       Impact factor: 5.157

2.  Inhibitory activities of short linear motifs underlie Hox interactome specificity in vivo.

Authors:  Manon Baëza; Séverine Viala; Marjorie Heim; Amélie Dard; Bruno Hudry; Marilyne Duffraisse; Ana Rogulja-Ortmann; Christine Brun; Samir Merabet
Journal:  Elife       Date:  2015-04-14       Impact factor: 8.140

3.  The Drosophila Hox gene Ultrabithorax acts in both muscles and motoneurons to orchestrate formation of specific neuromuscular connections.

Authors:  Christian Hessinger; Gerhard M Technau; Ana Rogulja-Ortmann
Journal:  Development       Date:  2016-12-02       Impact factor: 6.868

4.  Mechanisms of Specificity for Hox Factor Activity.

Authors:  Arya Zandvakili; Brian Gebelein
Journal:  J Dev Biol       Date:  2016-05-09

Review 5.  Interactions by Disorder - A Matter of Context.

Authors:  Katrine Bugge; Inna Brakti; Catarina B Fernandes; Jesper E Dreier; Jeppe E Lundsgaard; Johan G Olsen; Karen Skriver; Birthe B Kragelund
Journal:  Front Mol Biosci       Date:  2020-06-16

6.  Rethinking gene regulatory networks in light of alternative splicing, intrinsically disordered protein domains, and post-translational modifications.

Authors:  Karl J Niklas; Sarah E Bondos; A Keith Dunker; Stuart A Newman
Journal:  Front Cell Dev Biol       Date:  2015-02-26

7.  Evidence for a Strong Correlation Between Transcription Factor Protein Disorder and Organismic Complexity.

Authors:  Inmaculada Yruela; Christopher J Oldfield; Karl J Niklas; A Keith Dunker
Journal:  Genome Biol Evol       Date:  2017-05-01       Impact factor: 3.416

8.  Multi-level and lineage-specific interactomes of the Hox transcription factor Ubx contribute to its functional specificity.

Authors:  Gianluca Sigismondo; Katrin Domsch; Julie Carnesecchi; Clara Eva Paula Baader; Mahmoud-Reza Rafiee; Jeroen Krijgsveld; Ingrid Lohmann
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2020-03-13       Impact factor: 14.919

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.