2019
DOI: 10.1002/pld3.128
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A PEX5 missense allele preferentially disrupts PTS1 cargo import into Arabidopsis peroxisomes

Abstract: The sorting of eukaryotic proteins to various organellar destinations requires receptors that recognize cargo protein targeting signals and facilitate transport into the organelle. One such receptor is the peroxin PEX 5, which recruits cytosolic cargo carrying a peroxisome‐targeting signal ( PTS ) type 1 ( PTS 1) for delivery into the peroxisomal lumen (matrix). In plants and mammals, PEX 5 is also indirectly required f… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 86 publications
(175 reference statements)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, seven TPR motifs of PEX5 form an antiparallel helix-turn-helix unit and have a role in the recognition and binding of the C-terminal "SKL" tripeptides, or variants thereof, of ligand proteins (Sampathkumar et al, 2008). Similarly, the mutation of glycine 8 in PEX5 can disrupt its ligand recognition ability (Patel et al, 2019). This indicates a potentially similar TPR structure formation between ETO1 and PEX5.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, seven TPR motifs of PEX5 form an antiparallel helix-turn-helix unit and have a role in the recognition and binding of the C-terminal "SKL" tripeptides, or variants thereof, of ligand proteins (Sampathkumar et al, 2008). Similarly, the mutation of glycine 8 in PEX5 can disrupt its ligand recognition ability (Patel et al, 2019). This indicates a potentially similar TPR structure formation between ETO1 and PEX5.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite displaying more severe peroxisome‐related physiological defects than pex16‐2 , pex16‐1 had a less pronounced PTS2‐processing defect than pex16‐2 (Figures B, 7C). This difference in PTS2 processing hints that the pex16‐2 lesion might preferentially disrupt PTS2 import (Patel et al ). However, we detected similar GFP‐PTS1 and PTS2‐GFP import defects in pex16‐1 and pex16‐2 (Figure A).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%