Literature DB >> 25692603

Phosphatase specificity and pathway insulation in signaling networks.

Michael A Rowland1, Brian Harrison1, Eric J Deeds2.   

Abstract

Phosphatases play an important role in cellular signaling networks by regulating the phosphorylation state of proteins. Phosphatases are classically considered to be promiscuous, acting on tens to hundreds of different substrates. We recently demonstrated that a shared phosphatase can couple the responses of two proteins to incoming signals, even if those two substrates are from otherwise isolated areas of the network. This finding raises a potential paradox: if phosphatases are indeed highly promiscuous, how do cells insulate themselves against unwanted crosstalk? Here, we use mathematical models to explore three possible insulation mechanisms. One approach involves evolving phosphatase KM values that are large enough to prevent saturation by the phosphatase's substrates. Although this is an effective method for generating isolation, the phosphatase becomes a highly inefficient enzyme, which prevents the system from achieving switch-like responses and can result in slow response kinetics. We also explore the idea that substrate degradation can serve as an effective phosphatase. Assuming that degradation is unsaturatable, this mechanism could insulate substrates from crosstalk, but it would also preclude ultrasensitive responses and would require very high substrate turnover to achieve rapid dephosphorylation kinetics. Finally, we show that adaptor subunits, such as those found on phosphatases like PP2A, can provide effective insulation against phosphatase crosstalk, but only if their binding to substrates is uncoupled from their binding to the catalytic core. Analysis of the interaction network of PP2A's adaptor domains reveals that although its adaptors may isolate subsets of targets from one another, there is still a strong potential for phosphatase crosstalk within those subsets. Understanding how phosphatase crosstalk and the insulation mechanisms described here impact the function and evolution of signaling networks represents a major challenge for experimental and computational systems biology.
Copyright © 2015 Biophysical Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25692603      PMCID: PMC4336360          DOI: 10.1016/j.bpj.2014.12.011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biophys J        ISSN: 0006-3495            Impact factor:   4.033


  66 in total

Review 1.  Classic and contemporary approaches to modeling biochemical reactions.

Authors:  William W Chen; Mario Niepel; Peter K Sorger
Journal:  Genes Dev       Date:  2010-09-01       Impact factor: 11.361

2.  Structure-based kinetic models of modular signaling protein function: focus on Shp2.

Authors:  Dipak Barua; James R Faeder; Jason M Haugh
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2007-01-05       Impact factor: 4.033

3.  Substrate competition as a source of ultrasensitivity in the inactivation of Wee1.

Authors:  Sun Young Kim; James E Ferrell
Journal:  Cell       Date:  2007-03-23       Impact factor: 41.582

Review 4.  Rule-based modeling: a computational approach for studying biomolecular site dynamics in cell signaling systems.

Authors:  Lily A Chylek; Leonard A Harris; Chang-Shung Tung; James R Faeder; Carlos F Lopez; William S Hlavacek
Journal:  Wiley Interdiscip Rev Syst Biol Med       Date:  2013-09-30

5.  Scaffold-mediated nucleation of protein signaling complexes: elementary principles.

Authors:  Jin Yang; William S Hlavacek
Journal:  Math Biosci       Date:  2011-06-12       Impact factor: 2.144

6.  AP-1 regulates cyclin D1 and c-MYC transcription in an AKT-dependent manner in response to mTOR inhibition: role of AIP4/Itch-mediated JUNB degradation.

Authors:  Raffi Vartanian; Janine Masri; Jheralyn Martin; Cheri Cloninger; Brent Holmes; Nicholas Artinian; Alex Funk; Teresa Ruegg; Joseph Gera
Journal:  Mol Cancer Res       Date:  2010-12-06       Impact factor: 5.852

7.  Substrate specificity of protein tyrosine phosphatases 1B, RPTPα, SHP-1, and SHP-2.

Authors:  Lige Ren; Xianwen Chen; Rinrada Luechapanichkul; Nicholas G Selner; Tiffany M Meyer; Anne-Sophie Wavreille; Richard Chan; Caterina Iorio; Xiang Zhou; Benjamin G Neel; Dehua Pei
Journal:  Biochemistry       Date:  2011-02-18       Impact factor: 3.162

8.  The JNK cascade as a biochemical switch in mammalian cells: ultrasensitive and all-or-none responses.

Authors:  Christoph P Bagowski; Jaya Besser; Christian R Frey; James E Ferrell
Journal:  Curr Biol       Date:  2003-02-18       Impact factor: 10.834

9.  The RhoGEF GEF-H1 is required for oncogenic RAS signaling via KSR-1.

Authors:  Jane Cullis; David Meiri; Maria Jose Sandi; Nikolina Radulovich; Oliver A Kent; Mauricio Medrano; Daphna Mokady; Josee Normand; Jose Larose; Richard Marcotte; Christopher B Marshall; Mitsuhiko Ikura; Troy Ketela; Jason Moffat; Benjamin G Neel; Anne-Claude Gingras; Ming-Sound Tsao; Robert Rottapel
Journal:  Cancer Cell       Date:  2014-02-10       Impact factor: 31.743

10.  Molecular machines or pleiomorphic ensembles: signaling complexes revisited.

Authors:  Bruce J Mayer; Michael L Blinov; Leslie M Loew
Journal:  J Biol       Date:  2009-10-16
View more
  12 in total

1.  Intrinsic limits of information transmission in biochemical signalling motifs.

Authors:  Ryan Suderman; Eric J Deeds
Journal:  Interface Focus       Date:  2018-10-19       Impact factor: 3.906

2.  Phosphatase POPX2 interferes with cell cycle by interacting with Chk1.

Authors:  Pu Rum Kim; Yen Ling Koon; Raphael Tze Chuen Lee; Farouq Azizan; Dylan Hong Zheng Koh; Keng-Hwee Chiam; Cheng-Gee Koh
Journal:  Cell Cycle       Date:  2020-01-16       Impact factor: 4.534

3.  Phosphatase PP2A enhances MCL-1 protein half-life in multiple myeloma cells.

Authors:  Anne Slomp; Laura M Moesbergen; Eric Eldering; Marie José Kersten; Monique C Minnema; Victor Peperzak
Journal:  Cell Death Dis       Date:  2021-03-03       Impact factor: 8.469

4.  Crosstalk and the Dynamical Modularity of Feed-Forward Loops in Transcriptional Regulatory Networks.

Authors:  Michael A Rowland; Ahmed Abdelzaher; Preetam Ghosh; Michael L Mayo
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2017-04-25       Impact factor: 4.033

5.  A Mathematical Model of the Phosphoinositide Pathway.

Authors:  Daniel V Olivença; Inna Uliyakina; Luis L Fonseca; Margarida D Amaral; Eberhard O Voit; Francisco R Pinto
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2018-03-02       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  Robustness of Nutrient Signaling Is Maintained by Interconnectivity Between Signal Transduction Pathways.

Authors:  Niek Welkenhuysen; Barbara Schnitzer; Linnea Österberg; Marija Cvijovic
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2019-01-21       Impact factor: 4.566

7.  The Evolution of Tau Phosphorylation and Interactions.

Authors:  Nataliya I Trushina; Lidia Bakota; Armen Y Mulkidjanian; Roland Brandt
Journal:  Front Aging Neurosci       Date:  2019-09-18       Impact factor: 5.750

8.  Crosstalk and ultrasensitivity in protein degradation pathways.

Authors:  Abhishek Mallela; Maulik K Nariya; Eric J Deeds
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2020-12-28       Impact factor: 4.475

9.  Fractional response analysis reveals logarithmic cytokine responses in cellular populations.

Authors:  Karol Nienałtowski; Rachel E Rigby; Jarosław Walczak; Karolina E Zakrzewska; Edyta Głów; Jan Rehwinkel; Michał Komorowski
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2021-07-07       Impact factor: 14.919

10.  Identification of PTPN1 as a novel negative regulator of the JNK MAPK pathway using a synthetic screening for pathway-specific phosphatases.

Authors:  Jiyoung Moon; Jain Ha; Sang-Hyun Park
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-10-11       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.