 |
PDBsum entry 1wm2
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Protein transport
|
PDB id
|
|
|
|
1wm2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Contents |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Residue conservation analysis
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
DOI no:
|
Eur J Biochem
271:4114-4122
(2004)
|
|
PubMed id:
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Crystal structures of the human SUMO-2 protein at 1.6 A and 1.2 A resolution: implication on the functional differences of SUMO proteins.
|
|
W.C.Huang,
T.P.Ko,
S.S.-L.Li,
A.H.-J.Wang.
|
|
|
|
| |
ABSTRACT
|
|
|
| |
|
The SUMO proteins are a class of small ubiquitin-like modifiers. SUMO is
attached to a specific lysine side chain on the target protein via an isopeptide
bond with its C-terminal glycine. There are at least four SUMO proteins in
humans, which are involved in protein trafficking and targeting. A truncated
human SUMO-2 protein that contains residues 9-93 was expressed in Escherichia
coli and crystallized in two different unit cells, with dimensions of a=b=75.25
A, c=29.17 A and a=b=74.96 A, c=33.23 A, both belonging to the rhombohedral
space group R3. They diffracted X-rays to 1.6 A and 1.2 A resolution,
respectively. The structures were determined by molecular replacement using the
yeast SMT3 protein as a search model. Subsequent refinements yielded R/Rfree
values of 0.169/0.190 and 0.119/0.185, at 1.6 A and 1.2 A, respectively. The
peptide folding of SUMO-2 consists of a half-open beta-barrel and two flanking
alpha-helices with secondary structural elements arranged as
betabetaalphabetabetaalphabeta in the sequence, identical to those of ubiquitin,
SMT3 and SUMO-1. Comparison of SUMO-2 with SUMO-1 showed a surface region near
the C terminus with significantly different charge distributions. This may
explain their distinct intracellular locations. In addition, crystal-packing
analysis suggests a possible trimeric assembly of the SUMO-2 protein, of which
the biological significance remains to be determined.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Selected figure(s)
|
|
|
| |
 |
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Figure 3.
Fig. 3. Tertiary structure of SUMO-2 and comparison with
other proteins.(A) A ribbon representation of the protein fold.
(B) A topology diagram with well-defined backbone hydrogen
bonds. The helices ( 1, 2) and strands
( 1– 5) are
coloured in magenta, blue, green, yellow and red from N to C
terminus. The hydrogen bond distances, with a criterion of less
than 3.2 Å, are observed in the refined model at 1.2
Å, with one exception between Asp16 and Arg36, which is
seen in the 1.6 Å model. The amino acids are shaded in
red, green and blue for acidic, neutral and basic polar
residues, and in yellow for prolines and glycines. In (C) the
polypeptide tracings of two SUMO-2 models from type I (12–89)
and type II (17–88) crystals, shown in green and red, are
superimposed with that of human ubiquitin (1–76), shown in
blue. In (D) the yeast SMT3 crystal structure (20–98) and
human SUMO-1 NMR structure (–2–101), coloured yellow and
cyan, respectively, are compared with the SUMO-2 structure (type
I crystal), shown in red.
|
 |
Figure 4.
Fig. 4. Surface properties of SUMO proteins. The molecular
surface of SUMO-2 (type I crystal) is shown in (A) and (C); that
of the SUMO-1 model is shown in (B) and (D). The charge
potentials in (A) (C) and (D) are calculated using GRASP with a
range of –10 to +10 k[B]T, in which k[B] is Boltzmann constant
and T is Kelvin temperature, and coloured from red to blue.
Neutral areas are shown in white. In (B) the conserved regions
that interact with Ubc9 and Ulp1 are highlighted and coloured in
orange, cyan and magenta, as in Fig. 1. In (E) and (F) the
corresponding amino acids for different surface charges on
SUMO-2 and SUMO-1 are shown. Positively charged, negative
charged and neutral polar residues are coloured blue, red and
magenta, respectively, and nonpolar residues are shown in green.
The views in (C–F) are similar to that of Fig. 3A and those of
(A) and (B) are rotated 180° about the horizontal axis.
|
 |
|
|
|
| |
The above figures are
reprinted
by permission from the Federation of European Biochemical Societies:
Eur J Biochem
(2004,
271,
4114-4122)
copyright 2004.
|
|
| |
Figures were
selected
by the author.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Literature references that cite this PDB file's key reference
|
|
 |
| |
PubMed id
|
 |
Reference
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
Z.Xu,
H.Y.Chan,
W.L.Lam,
K.H.Lam,
L.S.Lam,
T.B.Ng,
and
S.W.Au
(2009).
SUMO proteases: redox regulation and biological consequences.
|
| |
Antioxid Redox Signal,
11,
1453-1484.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
J.Yu,
and
C.Z.Zhou
(2008).
Crystal structure of the dimeric Urm1 from the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae.
|
| |
Proteins,
71,
1050-1055.
|
 |
|
PDB code:
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
N.Sekiyama,
T.Ikegami,
T.Yamane,
M.Ikeguchi,
Y.Uchimura,
D.Baba,
M.Ariyoshi,
H.Tochio,
H.Saitoh,
and
M.Shirakawa
(2008).
Structure of the Small Ubiquitin-like Modifier (SUMO)-interacting Motif of MBD1-containing Chromatin-associated Factor 1 Bound to SUMO-3.
|
| |
J Biol Chem,
283,
35966-35975.
|
 |
|
PDB code:
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
Z.Tang,
C.M.Hecker,
A.Scheschonka,
and
H.Betz
(2008).
Protein interactions in the sumoylation cascade: lessons from X-ray structures.
|
| |
FEBS J,
275,
3003-3015.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
O.Kerscher
(2007).
SUMO junction-what's your function? New insights through SUMO-interacting motifs.
|
| |
EMBO Rep,
8,
550-555.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
X.H.Mascle,
D.Germain-Desprez,
P.Huynh,
P.Estephan,
and
M.Aubry
(2007).
Sumoylation of the transcriptional intermediary factor 1beta (TIF1beta), the Co-repressor of the KRAB Multifinger proteins, is required for its transcriptional activity and is modulated by the KRAB domain.
|
| |
J Biol Chem,
282,
10190-10202.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
Y.K.Lee,
S.N.Thomas,
A.J.Yang,
and
D.K.Ann
(2007).
Doxorubicin down-regulates Kruppel-associated box domain-associated protein 1 sumoylation that relieves its transcription repression on p21WAF1/CIP1 in breast cancer MCF-7 cells.
|
| |
J Biol Chem,
282,
1595-1606.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
A.Rosendorff,
S.Sakakibara,
S.Lu,
E.Kieff,
Y.Xuan,
A.DiBacco,
Y.Shi,
Y.Shi,
and
G.Gill
(2006).
NXP-2 association with SUMO-2 depends on lysines required for transcriptional repression.
|
| |
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A,
103,
5308-5313.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
C.M.Hecker,
M.Rabiller,
K.Haglund,
P.Bayer,
and
I.Dikic
(2006).
Specification of SUMO1- and SUMO2-interacting motifs.
|
| |
J Biol Chem,
281,
16117-16127.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
H.Ding,
Y.Yang,
J.Zhang,
J.Wu,
H.Liu,
and
Y.Shi
(2005).
Structural basis for SUMO-E2 interaction revealed by a complex model using docking approach in combination with NMR data.
|
| |
Proteins,
61,
1050-1058.
|
 |
|
PDB code:
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
S.Chupreta,
S.Holmstrom,
L.Subramanian,
and
J.A.Iñiguez-Lluhí
(2005).
A small conserved surface in SUMO is the critical structural determinant of its transcriptional inhibitory properties.
|
| |
Mol Cell Biol,
25,
4272-4282.
|
 |
|
 |
 |
|
The most recent references are shown first.
Citation data come partly from CiteXplore and partly
from an automated harvesting procedure. Note that this is likely to be
only a partial list as not all journals are covered by
either method. However, we are continually building up the citation data
so more and more references will be included with time.
Where a reference describes a PDB structure, the PDB
code is
shown on the right.
|
');
}
}
 |