 |
PDBsum entry 5w3h
|
|
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
Enzyme class 1:
|
 |
Chain A:
E.C.3.6.5.-
- ?????
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Enzyme class 2:
|
 |
Chain B:
E.C.?
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Note, where more than one E.C. class is given (as above), each may
correspond to a different protein domain or, in the case of polyprotein
precursors, to a different mature protein.
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
J Cell Biol
216:2669-2677
(2017)
|
|
PubMed id:
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Structural differences between yeast and mammalian microtubules revealed by cryo-EM.
|
|
S.C.Howes,
E.A.Geyer,
B.LaFrance,
R.Zhang,
E.H.Kellogg,
S.Westermann,
L.M.Rice,
E.Nogales.
|
|
|
|
| |
ABSTRACT
|
|
|
| |
|
Microtubules are polymers of αβ-tubulin heterodimers essential for all
eukaryotes. Despite sequence conservation, there are significant structural
differences between microtubules assembled in vitro from mammalian or budding
yeast tubulin. Yeast MTs were not observed to undergo compaction at the
interdimer interface as seen for mammalian microtubules upon GTP hydrolysis.
Lack of compaction might reflect slower GTP hydrolysis or a different degree of
allosteric coupling in the lattice. The microtubule plus end-tracking protein
Bim1 binds yeast microtubules both between αβ-tubulin heterodimers, as seen
for other organisms, and within tubulin dimers, but binds mammalian tubulin only
at interdimer contacts. At the concentrations used in cryo-electron microscopy,
Bim1 causes the compaction of yeast microtubules and induces their rapid
disassembly. Our studies demonstrate structural differences between yeast and
mammalian microtubules that likely underlie their differing polymerization
dynamics. These differences may reflect adaptations to the demands of different
cell size or range of physiological growth temperatures.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
');
}
}
 |
|