On the specificity of protein-protein interactions in the context of disorder

被引:35
|
作者
Teilum, Kaare [1 ]
Olsen, Johan G. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
Kragelund, Birthe B. [1 ,2 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Copenhagen, Dept Biol, Linderstrom Lang Ctr Prot Sci, DK-2200 Copenhagen N, Denmark
[2] Univ Copenhagen, Dept Biol, Struct Biol & NMR Lab, DK-2200 Copenhagen N, Denmark
[3] Univ Copenhagen, Dept Biol, REPIN, DK-2200 Copenhagen N, Denmark
关键词
TRANSACTIVATION DOMAIN INTERACTION; NATIVELY UNFOLDED PROTEINS; LIQUID-PHASE-SEPARATION; SHORT LINEAR MOTIF; INTRINSIC DISORDER; BINDING-AFFINITY; PCNA-BINDING; PIP BOX; P53; REGIONS;
D O I
10.1042/BCJ20200828
中图分类号
Q5 [生物化学]; Q7 [分子生物学];
学科分类号
071010 ; 081704 ;
摘要
With the increased focus on intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs) and their large interac-tomes, the question about their specificity - or more so on their multispecificity - arise. Here we recapitulate how specificity and multispecificity are quantified and address through examples if IDPs in this respect differ from globular proteins. The conclusion is that quantitatively, globular proteins and IDPs are similar when it comes to specificity. However, compared with globular proteins, IDPs have larger interactome sizes, a phe-nomenon that is further enabled by their flexibility, repetitive binding motifs and propen-sity to adapt to different binding partners. For IDPs, this adaptability, interactome size and a higher degree of multivalency opens for new interaction mechanisms such as facili-tated exchange through trimer formation and ultra-sensitivity via threshold effects and ensemble redistribution. IDPs and their interactions, thus, do not compromise the defin-ition of specificity. Instead, it is the sheer size of their interactomes that complicates its calculation. More importantly, it is this size that challenges how we conceptually envision, interpret and speak about their specificity.
引用
收藏
页码:2035 / 2050
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Protein-Protein Interactions
    Netterwald, James
    [J]. GENETIC ENGINEERING & BIOTECHNOLOGY NEWS, 2010, 30 (05): : 1 - +
  • [32] Protein-protein interactions
    Chene, Patrick
    [J]. DRUGS OF THE FUTURE, 2007, 32 : 3 - 3
  • [33] PROTEIN-PROTEIN INTERACTIONS
    WAUGH, DF
    [J]. ADVANCES IN PROTEIN CHEMISTRY, 1954, 9 : 325 - 437
  • [34] Protein-protein interactions
    Netterwald, James
    [J]. Genetic Engineering and Biotechnology News, 2010, 30 (05):
  • [35] Role of intrinsic disorder in protein-protein and protein-nucleic acid interactions
    Dyson, J.
    [J]. FEBS JOURNAL, 2012, 279 : 9 - 9
  • [36] Protein-protein interactions in paralogues: Electrostatics modulates specificity on a conserved steric scaffold
    Ivanov, Stefan M.
    Cawley, Andrew
    Huber, Roland G.
    Bond, Peter J.
    Warwicker, Jim
    [J]. PLOS ONE, 2017, 12 (10):
  • [37] Adding Protein Context to the Human Protein-Protein Interaction Network to Reveal Meaningful Interactions
    Schaefer, Martin H.
    Lopes, Tiago J. S.
    Mah, Nancy
    Shoemaker, Jason E.
    Matsuoka, Yukiko
    Fontaine, Jean-Fred
    Louis-Jeune, Caroline
    Eisfeld, Amie J.
    Neumann, Gabriele
    Perez-Iratxeta, Carol
    Kawaoka, Yoshihiro
    Kitano, Hiroaki
    Andrade-Navarro, Miguel A.
    [J]. PLOS COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY, 2013, 9 (01)
  • [38] Introducing intrinsic disorder reduces electrostatic steering in protein-protein interactions
    Gao, Meng
    Han, Yue
    Zeng, Yifan
    Su, Zhengding
    Huang, Yongqi
    [J]. BIOPHYSICAL JOURNAL, 2021, 120 (15) : 2998 - 3007
  • [39] Aquaporin Protein-Protein Interactions
    Roche, Jennifer Virginia
    Tornroth-Horsefield, Susanna
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR SCIENCES, 2017, 18 (11)
  • [40] Contextualized Protein-Protein Interactions
    Federico, Anthony
    Monti, Stefano
    [J]. PATTERNS, 2021, 2 (01):