LIR motif consensus and structural determinants of LIR–ATG8 interactions. LIR motif consensus and structural determinants of LIR–ATG8 interactions. (A)

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Volume 18, Issue 2, Pages (February 2010)
Advertisements

Interactions between Autophagy Receptors and Ubiquitin-like Proteins Form the Molecular Basis for Selective Autophagy  Vladimir Rogov, Volker Dötsch,
Characterizing Class I WW domains defines key specificity determinants and generates mutant domains with novel specificities  Jeremy Kasanov, Gregorio.
Ross Alexander Robinson, Xin Lu, Edith Yvonne Jones, Christian Siebold 
Characterizing Class I WW domains defines key specificity determinants and generates mutant domains with novel specificities  Jeremy Kasanov, Gregorio.
Natalie Zeytuni, Raz Zarivach  Structure 
Volume 124, Issue 1, Pages (January 2006)
Structure-Based Reassessment of the Caveolin Signaling Model: Do Caveolae Regulate Signaling through Caveolin-Protein Interactions?  Brett M. Collins,
R. Elliot Murphy, Alexandra B. Samal, Jiri Vlach, Jamil S. Saad 
Volume 23, Issue 3, Pages (March 2015)
The FKBP8‐ATG8 interaction is dependent on an intact LIR docking site (LDS)‏ The FKBP8‐ATG8 interaction is dependent on an intact LIR docking site (LDS)
Volume 8, Issue 2, Pages (August 2001)
Yvonne Groemping, Karine Lapouge, Stephen J. Smerdon, Katrin Rittinger 
Volume 16, Issue 10, Pages (October 2008)
Volume 19, Issue 7, Pages (May 2017)
Volume 18, Issue 2, Pages (February 2010)
Volume 18, Issue 11, Pages (November 2010)
Volume 24, Issue 1, Pages (October 2006)
Structure of CheA, a Signal-Transducing Histidine Kinase
Volume 11, Issue 5, Pages (May 2003)
Ross Alexander Robinson, Xin Lu, Edith Yvonne Jones, Christian Siebold 
Volume 4, Issue 5, Pages (November 1999)
Volume 16, Issue 10, Pages (October 2008)
Structure of Bax  Motoshi Suzuki, Richard J. Youle, Nico Tjandra  Cell 
Volume 128, Issue 6, Pages (March 2007)
Structure and Site-Specific Recognition of Histone H3 by the PHD Finger of Human Autoimmune Regulator  Suvobrata Chakravarty, Lei Zeng, Ming-Ming Zhou 
Volume 124, Issue 5, Pages (March 2006)
Structure of DDB1 in Complex with a Paramyxovirus V Protein: Viral Hijack of a Propeller Cluster in Ubiquitin Ligase  Ti Li, Xiujuan Chen, Kenneth C.
Andrew H. Huber, W.James Nelson, William I. Weis  Cell 
Structural Basis for Protein Recognition by B30.2/SPRY Domains
Volume 18, Issue 6, Pages (June 2010)
Structure and Mechanism of Yeast RNA Triphosphatase
Structure of the Catalytic Domain of Human DOT1L, a Non-SET Domain Nucleosomal Histone Methyltransferase  Jinrong Min, Qin Feng, Zhizhong Li, Yi Zhang,
Volume 14, Issue 2, Pages (April 2004)
Volume 44, Issue 6, Pages (December 2011)
Crystal Structure of the p53 Core Domain Bound to a Full Consensus Site as a Self- Assembled Tetramer  Yongheng Chen, Raja Dey, Lin Chen  Structure  Volume.
Crystallographic Analysis of the Recognition of a Nuclear Localization Signal by the Nuclear Import Factor Karyopherin α  Elena Conti, Marc Uy, Lore Leighton,
Volume 14, Issue 11, Pages (November 2006)
Meigang Gu, Kanagalaghatta R. Rajashankar, Christopher D. Lima 
Tianjun Zhou, Liguang Sun, John Humphreys, Elizabeth J. Goldsmith 
Volume 3, Issue 6, Pages (June 1999)
Shiqian Qi, Do Jin Kim, Goran Stjepanovic, James H. Hurley  Structure 
Volume 52, Issue 3, Pages (November 2013)
Jeffrey J. Wilson, Rhett A. Kovall  Cell 
Structure of the BRCT Repeats of BRCA1 Bound to a BACH1 Phosphopeptide
Hartmut Scheel, Kay Hofmann  Current Biology 
Volume 94, Issue 2, Pages (July 1998)
The C-terminal membrane-proximal region of MARCH8 interacts with TfR.
Domain architecture of selective autophagy cargo receptors known to date. Domain architecture of selective autophagy cargo receptors known to date. The.
The interaction of gecko toe pads with the substrate in the presence and absence of water. The interaction of gecko toe pads with the substrate in the.
Annoted amino acid sequence of Aedes aegypti gliotactin (Gli).
Volume 18, Issue 3, Pages (March 2011)
Overview of HEAT-motif-containing proteins.
Alignment of the deduced amino acid sequences of the myosin light chain 2 (MLC2) proteins. Alignment of the deduced amino acid sequences of the myosin.
Jia-Wei Wu, Amy E. Cocina, Jijie Chai, Bruce A. Hay, Yigong Shi 
RAD51 interacts with SUMO-1 through its SIM
LC8 is structurally variable but conserved in sequence.
Motif sequence logo and surface analysis of LC8.
Structure of an IκBα/NF-κB Complex
Protein–Protein Communication: Structural Model of the Repression Complex Formed by CytR and the Global Regulator CRP  Birgitte H Kallipolitis, Mads Nørregaard-Madsen,
TRIM–SLR interactions and the TRIMosome.
Structural insights based on chimeric Alp4-GCP2 analysis.
Three protein kinase structures define a common motif
Rachelle Gaudet, Andrew Bohm, Paul B Sigler  Cell 
Volume 18, Issue 11, Pages (November 2010)
Volume 7, Issue 6, Pages (June 2001)
Crystal Structure of Escherichia coli RNase D, an Exoribonuclease Involved in Structured RNA Processing  Yuhong Zuo, Yong Wang, Arun Malhotra  Structure 
Joshua J. Sims, Robert E. Cohen  Molecular Cell 
Volume 4, Issue 4, Pages (October 1999)
Volume 95, Issue 2, Pages (October 1998)
Presentation transcript:

LIR motif consensus and structural determinants of LIR–ATG8 interactions. LIR motif consensus and structural determinants of LIR–ATG8 interactions. (A) Surface representation of LC3B bound to the p62-LIR peptide (top left), yeast Atg8 bound to the Atg19-LIR peptide (top right), GABARAP-L1 bound to the NBR1-LIR peptide (bottom left) and LC3C bound to the NDP52-LIR peptide (non-canonical LIR-motif) (bottom right). The hydrophobic pockets (HP1 and HP2) of LC3B, Atg8 and GABARAP-L1 as well as the hydrophobic patch of LC3C are indicated in bright yellow. The amino acids (yellow) of the different LIR peptides that bind in the pockets are shown as well as the amino acids (red) that interact with basic residues of the ATG8 proteins (blue). (B) Ribbon diagram of LC3B with the N-terminal arm (blue) and the Ubl domain (gray). The bound p62-LIR peptide is depicted in red. Amino acids D337 and D338 in the p62-LIR peptide interact with the basic residues R10 and R11 in the N-terminal arm of LC3B. Amino acids W340 and L343 in the p62-LIR peptide binding to hydrophobic pockets in LC3B are also indicated. (C) Sequence logos that are a graphical representation of amino acid residues as stacks at each position in multiple sequence alignments of LIR motifs. The overall height of the stack indicates the sequence conservation at that position, whereas the height of symbols within the stack indicates the relative frequency of each amino at that position. The sequence logos were created on the basis of 42 verified LIR motifs (upper panel) and were split into 22 W-type LIRs (middle panel) and 15 F-type LIRs (lower panel). The analysis of these 42 LIRs (33 of which are published, see supplementary material Table S1) confirms the core consensus sequence [W/F/Y]xx[L/I/V], in which alternative letters are placed in square brackets with a solidus between them. Only five LIRs have Tyr (Y) at the aromatic position binding to the HP1 pocket. W-type LIRs prefer Leu (L) in HP2 (13 out of 22). Such a preference is not seen among the 15 F-type LIRs, in which I, L and V are similarly distributed. F-type LIRs have a significantly higher average number of acidic residues than W-type LIRs. The average number of E, D, S, or T in the three positions N-terminal to the core hydrophobic residue (positions X−1 to X−3) is 1.7 and 2.5 for W- and F-type LIRs, respectively. The Seq2Logo-1.0 server (http://www.cbs.dtu.dk/biotools/Seq2Logo-1.0/) was used with Kullback-Leibler logo type and Hobohm1 clustering (threshold 0.63 and 0 weight on prior pseudo counts) (Thomsen and Nielsen, 2012). Åsa Birna Birgisdottir et al. J Cell Sci 2013;126:3237-3247 © 2013. Published by The Company of Biologists Ltd