2017
DOI: 10.15252/msb.20167430
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Systematic protein–protein interaction mapping for clinically relevant human GPCRs

Abstract: G‐protein‐coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the largest family of integral membrane receptors with key roles in regulating signaling pathways targeted by therapeutics, but are difficult to study using existing proteomics technologies due to their complex biochemical features. To obtain a global view of GPCR‐mediated signaling and to identify novel components of their pathways, we used a modified membrane yeast two‐hybrid (MYTH) approach and identified interacting partners for 48 selected full‐length human ligand‐u… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

4
59
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
4

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 66 publications
(66 citation statements)
references
References 91 publications
4
59
0
Order By: Relevance
“…1b). To confirm these predictions for human REEP5, we employed a membrane yeast two-hybrid (MYTH) system, as previously described 27,28 (Fig. 1c); which takes advantage of the ability of ubiquitin fragments (NubG and NubI) reconstitution, N-terminal TF transcription factor tagged (TF-Cub) bait protein and ubiquitin fragments tagged (NubI) prey protein were tested for protein-protein interactions.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1b). To confirm these predictions for human REEP5, we employed a membrane yeast two-hybrid (MYTH) system, as previously described 27,28 (Fig. 1c); which takes advantage of the ability of ubiquitin fragments (NubG and NubI) reconstitution, N-terminal TF transcription factor tagged (TF-Cub) bait protein and ubiquitin fragments tagged (NubI) prey protein were tested for protein-protein interactions.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This approach is bolstered by the fact that surveys of protein-protein interactions have revealed many interactions that, when disrupted, are deleterious. [39][40][41][42][43][44] Moreover, protein interactions can reveal defects in protein folding and stability, which helps to explain why approximately one-third of disease-related variants in proteins with multiple interaction partners disrupt all of the interactions of that protein. 45 Variants of protein-coding genes can also result in pathogenicity by altering splicing.…”
Section: Annotating Every Possible Variant In Disease-related Functiomentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition to the above-mentioned effectors, GPCRs also have numerous other interacting partners. These proteins can be either plasma membrane proteins such as ion channels, transporters, various serine/threonine-specific protein kinases, cytoskeletal proteins, Src homology and PDZ domain-containing proteins, small G proteins or extracellularly located adhesion molecules [32]. Accordingly, AT 1 R was shown to interact with wide spectra of other proteins beside G proteins and β-arrestins, such as AT 1 R-associated protein (ATRAP), phospholipase Cγ, JAK2 or other GPCRs, just to name a few, which may also take important parts in the complex pleiotropic effects of AT 1 R in the target tissues of the reninangiotensin system (RAS) [1].…”
Section: Signal Transducers Of At 1 Rmentioning
confidence: 99%