Structural View of the Ran–Importin β Interaction at 2.3 Å Resolution

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Structure of the Rho Family GTP-Binding Protein Cdc42 in Complex with the Multifunctional Regulator RhoGDI  Gregory R. Hoffman, Nicolas Nassar, Richard.
Advertisements

Structure of the Protein Phosphatase 2A Holoenzyme
Ross Alexander Robinson, Xin Lu, Edith Yvonne Jones, Christian Siebold 
A Fence-like Coat for the Nuclear Pore Membrane
Volume 8, Issue 3, Pages (September 2001)
Tsan Xiao, Par Towb, Steven A. Wasserman, Stephen R. Sprang  Cell 
Volume 11, Issue 6, Pages (June 2003)
Structure of an LDLR-RAP Complex Reveals a General Mode for Ligand Recognition by Lipoprotein Receptors  Carl Fisher, Natalia Beglova, Stephen C. Blacklow 
Volume 3, Issue 9, Pages (September 1995)
Volume 13, Issue 10, Pages (October 2005)
Modular Recognition of RNA by a Human Pumilio-Homology Domain
Crystal Structure of an Ephrin Ectodomain
Chaperone-Assisted Crystallography with DARPins
Volume 93, Issue 4, Pages (May 1998)
Structure of RGS4 Bound to AlF4−-Activated Giα1: Stabilization of the Transition State for GTP Hydrolysis  John J.G. Tesmer, David M. Berman, Alfred G.
Yvonne Groemping, Karine Lapouge, Stephen J. Smerdon, Katrin Rittinger 
Volume 13, Issue 4, Pages (February 2004)
Volume 12, Issue 1, Pages (March 2004)
Volume 16, Issue 7, Pages (July 2008)
Volume 12, Issue 5, Pages (May 2004)
Crystal Structures of Ral-GppNHp and Ral-GDP Reveal Two Binding Sites that Are Also Present in Ras and Rap  Nathan I. Nicely, Justin Kosak, Vesna de Serrano,
Ross Alexander Robinson, Xin Lu, Edith Yvonne Jones, Christian Siebold 
Volume 4, Issue 5, Pages (November 1999)
Volume 16, Issue 10, Pages (October 2008)
Volume 91, Issue 7, Pages (December 1997)
Stacy D Benson, Jaana K.H Bamford, Dennis H Bamford, Roger M Burnett 
Volume 23, Issue 6, Pages (December 2005)
Crystal Structure of Recombinant Human Interleukin-22
Volume 11, Issue 6, Pages (June 2003)
Structural Analysis of Ligand Stimulation of the Histidine Kinase NarX
Moosa Mohammadi, Joseph Schlessinger, Stevan R Hubbard  Cell 
Andrew H. Huber, W.James Nelson, William I. Weis  Cell 
Volume 37, Issue 2, Pages (January 2010)
Crystal Structure of an Ephrin Ectodomain
Daniel Peisach, Patricia Gee, Claudia Kent, Zhaohui Xu  Structure 
Qian Steven Xu, Rebecca B. Kucera, Richard J. Roberts, Hwai-Chen Guo 
Volume 10, Issue 4, Pages (April 2002)
Volume 91, Issue 5, Pages (November 1997)
Volume 12, Issue 7, Pages (July 2004)
Antonina Roll-Mecak, Chune Cao, Thomas E. Dever, Stephen K. Burley 
Yi Mo, Benjamin Vaessen, Karen Johnston, Ronen Marmorstein 
Volume 6, Issue 6, Pages (December 2000)
Volume 8, Issue 5, Pages (November 2001)
Volume 101, Issue 4, Pages (May 2000)
Volume 6, Issue 1, Pages (July 2000)
David Jeruzalmi, Mike O'Donnell, John Kuriyan  Cell 
A Putative Mechanism for Downregulation of the Catalytic Activity of the EGF Receptor via Direct Contact between Its Kinase and C-Terminal Domains  Meytal.
Structural Basis for FGF Receptor Dimerization and Activation
Volume 74, Issue 5, Pages (May 1998)
Volume 15, Issue 6, Pages (December 2001)
Structural Basis of Rab Effector Specificity
Volume 4, Issue 5, Pages (May 1996)
Structure of the Rho Family GTP-Binding Protein Cdc42 in Complex with the Multifunctional Regulator RhoGDI  Gregory R. Hoffman, Nicolas Nassar, Richard.
David Jeruzalmi, Mike O'Donnell, John Kuriyan  Cell 
Tertiary Structure of Destrin and Structural Similarity between Two Actin-Regulating Protein Families  H Hatanaka, K Ogura, K Moriyama, S Ichikawa, I.
Jeffrey J. Wilson, Rhett A. Kovall  Cell 
Solution Structure of a TBP–TAFII230 Complex
NSF N-Terminal Domain Crystal Structure
Crystal Structure of the Human Myeloid Cell Activating Receptor TREM-1
Volume 127, Issue 2, Pages (October 2006)
Volume 91, Issue 5, Pages (November 1997)
Volume 100, Issue 4, Pages (February 2000)
Stacy D Benson, Jaana K.H Bamford, Dennis H Bamford, Roger M Burnett 
Pingwei Li, Gerry McDermott, Roland K. Strong  Immunity 
Crystal Structure of the Extracellular Domain of a Human FcγRIII
Structure of the Histone Acetyltransferase Hat1
Three protein kinase structures define a common motif
Rachelle Gaudet, Andrew Bohm, Paul B Sigler  Cell 
The Structure of T. aquaticus DNA Polymerase III Is Distinct from Eukaryotic Replicative DNA Polymerases  Scott Bailey, Richard A. Wing, Thomas A. Steitz 
Volume 95, Issue 2, Pages (October 1998)
Presentation transcript:

Structural View of the Ran–Importin β Interaction at 2.3 Å Resolution Ingrid R Vetter, Andreas Arndt, Ulrike Kutay, Dirk Görlich, Alfred Wittinghofer  Cell  Volume 97, Issue 5, Pages 635-646 (May 1999) DOI: 10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80774-6

Figure 1 Primary, Secondary, and Tertiary Structure of Impβ (A) Sequence alignment and secondary structure assignment (DSSP, Kabsch and Sander 1983) of Impβ from various species, aligned with transportin and, where possible, the regulatory subunit of phosphatase 2A and Impα. Each repeat consists of the helices A (marked in red) and B (green); additional helices are light blue (α helix B2′) and dark blue (310 helices). Residues conserved in at least 5 of the 7 import receptors (including transportin) are highlighted in bold. Also shown is the HEAT repeat consensus motif (Andrade and Bork 1995). The GenBank accession numbers of the Impβ sequences shown are as follows: Drosophila, spO18388; S. pombe, spO13846; Oryza sativa, dbjBAA34862 (isoform 2); Oryza sativa, dbjBAA34861 (isoform 1), S. cerevisiae, spQ06142; human transportin, gi1613834; PP2A human (PDB code 1b3u), spP30153; Impβ, S. cerevisiae (PDB code 1bk5), spQ02821. (B and C) Ribbon representation of the complex of RanGppNHp with ImpβN, highlighting the ImpβN fold, where the helices have the same color code as in (A); the stalk is in purple, and loops are in yellow, Ran is in gray, and the nucleotide is a ball-and-stick model. In (C), helix A1 and B1 are shown in light red and light green for clarity (MOLSCRIPT; Kraulis 1991). The 90° rotation of the complex is indicated. Cell 1999 97, 635-646DOI: (10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80774-6)

Figure 2 Comparison of the Impβ Structure with Other Structures (A) Superimposition of the ImpβN (red) with the phosphatase subunit (blue) (Groves et al. 1999) using HEAT repeats 6–9 (residues 204–334) from the latter and 8–10 (residues 322–461) from the former (MOLSCRIPT; Kraulis 1991). (B) Superimposition (Cα plot) of the ten repeats of ImpβN (blue) with three HEAT repeats from PP2A (residues as above) (green) and arm repeats 2–9 of Impα (purple). The rms deviation between ten ImpβN repeats (Cα atoms, repeat 1 as reference) is 0.77–1.32 Å. Between repeat 1 from ImpβN and eight repeats from Impα and PP2A repeats, respectively, the rmsd is 0.6–082 Å and 1–2.1 Å. Figure produced with “O” (Jones and Kjeldgaard 1997). Cell 1999 97, 635-646DOI: (10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80774-6)

Figure 3 Structural Details of Ran in the RanGppNHp–ImpβN Complex (A) Conformational changes of the switch I and switch II regions of Ran: RanGDP is in blue, RanGppNHp in the RanBD1 complex is in green (Vetter et al. 1999a), and RanGppNHp in the ImpβN complex is in red. (B) The inhibition of the intrinsic GTPase of RanGTP in the RanGppNHp–ImpβN complex (red) is probably due to relocalization of the catalytic Gln69 away from the its position in the RanGppNHp–RanBD1 structure (green), as explained in the text. The catalytic water (blue sphere) is from the Ran–ImpβN structure; Mg2+ occupies the standard position between β,γ-phosphate in both structures (MOLSCRIPT, Raster3D, Merritt and Murphy 1994). Superimposition uses Ran residues (Cα) from 9–176. Cell 1999 97, 635-646DOI: (10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80774-6)

Figure 4 Structure of the Complex (A) Schematic representation of the structure of the complex, indicating the contacts of residues on Impβ with those of Ran. Interactions found in only one of the two molecules have an additional A,B identifier on the residue number. Open circles in ImpβN indicate the position of the B helices of the repeats with their numbers in red. (B) Ribbon representation of the complex with Ran in red, Impβ in green, superimposed with RanGDP in blue to highlight the potential clashes in switch I and the C-terminal end. GppNHp and Mg2+ are shown as black ball-and-stick models. (C) Electrostatic surface potential of Impβ and RanGppNHp in and close to the interface (GRASP; Nicholls et al. 1991). The 180° rotation of Ran is indicated. Cell 1999 97, 635-646DOI: (10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80774-6)

Figure 5 Flexibility of Impβ B factor representation of the two Impβ molecules in the asymmetric unit of the crystal with a color code, where red indicates high B factors and blue indicates low B factors. This indicates the different flexibilities in the two molecules, both inside and outside the Ran interface. Cell 1999 97, 635-646DOI: (10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80774-6)

Figure 6 Model of the Ternary Ran–RanBD1–Impβ Complex, Obtained by Superimposition of RanGppNHp from Both Complexes The Ran–Impβ complex is shown as surface and RanBD1 as a yellow worm plot, with side chains of the N-terminal end only. The C-terminal end of Ran (in green) embraces RanBD1. The outline of Ran in the Ran–Impβ complex is indicated by the green line. The most N-terminal acidic end of RanBD1 was not visible in the Ran–RanBD1 complex and is not shown here. It would be located close to the hole located in the middle of the Ran–Impβ interface (GRASP). Cell 1999 97, 635-646DOI: (10.1016/S0092-8674(00)80774-6)