2017
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-cellbio-100616-060839
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mechanisms of Tail-Anchored Membrane Protein Targeting and Insertion

Abstract: Proper localization of membrane proteins is essential for the function of biological membranes and for the establishment of organelle identity within a cell. Molecular machineries that mediate membrane protein biogenesis need to not only achieve a high degree of efficiency and accuracy, but also prevent off-pathway aggregation events that can be detrimental to cells. The posttranslational targeting of tail-anchored proteins (TAs) provides tractable model systems to probe these fundamental issues. Recent advanc… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
108
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 103 publications
(113 citation statements)
references
References 99 publications
(213 reference statements)
1
108
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The TMS and its flanking residues of TA proteins, which are found solely in the MOM, are less hydrophobic and have a reduced helical content compared to those of ER TA proteins (a signal that is recognized by the guided entry of TA proteins [GET] pathway). Furthermore, the C‐terminal element (CTE) of such MOM TA protein is less charged than that in tail‐anchors of peroxisome proteins (a signal which is recognized by Pex19) . To prevent the TA proteins from aggregation, various cytosolic factors are ensuring their proper folding and delivery to the ER or peroxisomes …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The TMS and its flanking residues of TA proteins, which are found solely in the MOM, are less hydrophobic and have a reduced helical content compared to those of ER TA proteins (a signal that is recognized by the guided entry of TA proteins [GET] pathway). Furthermore, the C‐terminal element (CTE) of such MOM TA protein is less charged than that in tail‐anchors of peroxisome proteins (a signal which is recognized by Pex19) . To prevent the TA proteins from aggregation, various cytosolic factors are ensuring their proper folding and delivery to the ER or peroxisomes …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Furthermore, the C‐terminal element (CTE) of such MOM TA protein is less charged than that in tail‐anchors of peroxisome proteins (a signal which is recognized by Pex19) . To prevent the TA proteins from aggregation, various cytosolic factors are ensuring their proper folding and delivery to the ER or peroxisomes …”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, human Fis1 50,51 , yeast Fis1p 33 , and human Mff can be localized to both organelles 52 . The parameters that allow TAs to discriminate between peroxisomes, mitochondria, and other organelles are not understood, but may be related to the hydrophobicity of the membrane associated domain, along with the number and specific location of charges within the TA 53,54 . When considering the recent development of a classifier for peroxisome-directed mammalian TAs 54 , the GRAVY hydrophobicity score (1.7) 55 of the YgiM transmembrane domain, denoting more limited hydrophobicity, together with the net charge (+4.1) of the proposed lumenal tail at neutral pH (Protein Calculator v3.4, http://protcalc.sourceforge.net/) do, in fact, predict peroxisomal localization of the YgiM(TA).…”
Section: What Features Of Ygim(ta) Allow Targeting To Peroxisomes?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Consequently, all TA proteins are imported in membranes posttranslationally (Chio et al ., ; Costello et al ., ; ). In addition to mitochondria, TA proteins are components of other membrane‐bound organelles, such as the endoplasmic reticulum (ER), peroxisomes, and in plants, the outer membrane of plastids (Kriechbaumer et al ., ; Chio et al ., ; Costello et al ., ; ). Altogether, TA proteins represent 3–5% of the eukaryotic membrane proteome (Hegde and Keenan, ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…There are multiple pathways that assist in the posttranslational targeting of TA proteins to the ER. They are based on the interaction of TA proteins with (i) the signal recognition particle (SRP‐assisted insertion), (ii) the Hsc70/Hsp40 system of chaperones, (iii) targeting and insertion via the Guided Entry of TA protein (GET) pathway (Abell et al ., ; ; Schuldiner et al ., ; Rabu et al ., ; Brkljacic et al ., ; Colombo and Fasana, ; Chio et al ., ; Costello et al ., ; ) and (iv) the recently discovered SRP‐independent pathway (SND) that can partially substitute for the SRP and GET pathways (Aviram et al ., ; Casson et al ., ). The characteristic feature of the yeast ER proteins is a higher hydrophobicity of the TMD in comparison to the mitochondrial TA proteins, although this feature is not clearly different in human cells (Costello et al ., ; ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%