Enzyme–substrate relationships in the ubiquitin system: approaches for identifying substrates of ubiquitin ligases

Protein ubiquitylation is an important post-translational modification, regulating aspects of virtually every biochemical pathway in eukaryotic cells. Hundreds of enzymes participate in the conjugation and deconjugation of ubiquitin, as well as the recognition, signaling functions, and degradation of ubiquitylated proteins. Regulation of ubiquitylation is most commonly at the level of recognition of substrates by E3 ubiquitin ligases. Characterization of the network of E3–substrate relationships is a major goal and challenge in the field, as this expected to yield fundamental biological insights and opportunities for drug development. There has been remarkable success in identifying substrates for some E3 ligases, in many instances using the standard protein–protein interaction techniques (e.g., two-hybrid screens and co-immunoprecipitations paired with mass spectrometry). However, some E3s have remained refractory to characterization, while others have simply not yet been studied due to the sheer number and diversity of E3s. This review will discuss the range of tools and techniques that can be used for substrate profiling of E3 ligases.     

A creature with a hundred waggly tails: intrinsically disordered proteins in the ribosome

Intrinsic disorder (i.e., lack of a unique 3-D structure) is a common phenomenon, and many biologically active proteins are disordered as a whole, or contain long disordered regions. These intrinsically disordered proteins/regions constitute a significant part of all proteomes, and their functional repertoire is complementary to functions of ordered proteins. In fact, intrinsic disorder represents an important driving force for many specific functions. An illustrative example of such disorder-centric functional class is RNA-binding proteins. In this study, we present the results of comprehensive bioinformatics analyses of the abundance and roles of intrinsic disorder in 3,411 ribosomal proteins from 32 species. We show that many ribosomal proteins are intrinsically disordered or hybrid proteins that contain ordered and disordered domains. Predicted globular domains of many ribosomal proteins contain noticeable regions of intrinsic disorder. We also show that disorder in ribosomal proteins has different characteristics compared to other proteins that interact with RNA and DNA including overall abundance, evolutionary conservation, and involvement in protein–protein interactions. Furthermore, intrinsic disorder is not only abundant in the ribosomal proteins, but we demonstrate that it is absolutely necessary for their various functions.     

Regulating the human HECT E3 ligases

Ubiquitination, the covalent attachment of ubiquitin to proteins, by E3 ligases of the HECT (homologous to E6AP C terminus) family is critical in controlling diverse physiological pathways. Stringent control of HECT E3 ligase activity and substrate specificity is essential for cellular health, whereas deregulation of HECT E3s plays a prominent role in disease. The cell employs a wide variety of regulatory mechanisms to control HECT E3 activity and substrate specificity. Here, we summarize the current understanding of these regulatory mechanisms that control HECT E3 function. Substrate specificity is generally determined by interactions of adaptor proteins with domains in the N-terminal extensions of HECT E3 ligases. These N-terminal domains have also been found to interact with the HECT domain, resulting in the formation of inhibitory conformations. In addition, catalytic activity of the HECT domain is commonly regulated at the level of E2 recruitment and through HECT E3 oligomerization. The previously mentioned regulatory mechanisms can be controlled through protein–protein interactions, post-translational modifications, the binding of calcium ions, and more. Functional activity is determined not only by substrate recruitment and catalytic activity, but also by the type of ubiquitin polymers catalyzed to the substrate. While this is often determined by the specific HECT member, recent studies demonstrate that HECT E3s can be modulated to alter the type of ubiquitin polymers they catalyze. Insight into these diverse regulatory mechanisms that control HECT E3 activity may open up new avenues for therapeutic strategies aimed at inhibition or enhancement of HECT E3 function in disease-related pathways.     

The utility F-box for protein destruction

A signature feature of all living organisms is their utilization of proteins to construct molecular machineries that undertake the complex network of cellular activities. The abundance of a protein element is temporally and spatially regulated in two opposing aspects: de novo synthesis to manufacture the required amount of the protein, and destruction of the protein when it is in excess or no longer needed. One major route of protein destruction is coordinated by a set of conserved molecules, the F-box proteins, which promote ubiquitination in the ubiquitin-proteasome pathway. Here we discuss the functions of F-box proteins in several cellular scenarios including cell cycle progression, synapse formation, plant hormone responses, and the circadian clock. We particularly emphasize the mechanisms whereby F-box proteins recruit specific substrates and regulate their abundance in the context of SCF E3 ligases. For some exceptions, we also review how F-box proteins function through non-SCF mechanisms.     

FHA-RING ubiquitin ligases in cell division cycle control

Despite the common occurrence of forkhead associated (FHA) phosphopeptide-binding domains and really interesting new gene (RING) E3 ubiquitin ligase domains, gene products containing both an N-terminal FHA domain and C-terminal RING domain constitute a highly distinctive intersection. Characterized FHA-RING ligases include the two vertebrate proteins, Checkpoint with FHA and RING (Chfr) and RING finger 8 (Rnf8), as well as three fungal proteins, Defective in mitosis (Dma1), Chf1 and Chf2. These FHA-RING ligases play roles in negative regulation of the cell division cycle, apparently by coupling protein phosphorylation events to specific ubiquitylation of target proteins. Here, the available data on upstream and downstream regulation of and by FHA-RING ligases are reviewed. Received 24 April 2008; received after revision 18 June 2008; accepted 20 June 2008     

Proteases and protein degradation in Escherichia coli.

In E. coli, protein degradation plays important roles in regulating the levels of specific proteins and in eliminating damaged or abnormal proteins. E. coli possess a very large number of proteolytic enzymes distributed in the cytoplasm, the inner membrane, and the periplasm, but, with few exceptions, the physiological functions of these proteases are not known. More than 90% of the protein degradation occurring in the cytoplasm is energy-dependent, but the activities of most E. coli proteases in vitro are not energy-dependent. Two ATP-dependent proteases, Lon and Clp, are responsible for 70-80% of the energy-dependent degradation of proteins in vivo. In vitro studies with Lon and Clp indicate that both proteases directly interact with substrates for degradation. ATP functions as an allosteric effector promoting an active conformation of the proteases, and ATP hydrolysis is required for rapid catalytic turnover of peptide bond cleavage in proteins. Lon and Clp show virtually no homology at the amino acid level, and thus it appears that at least two families of ATP-dependent proteases have evolved independently.     

Sticky-finger interaction sites on cytosolic lipid-binding proteins?

The cytosolic lipid-binding proteins (cLBPs) comprise a large family of small (14-15 kDa) intracellular proteins involved in the transport of small lipids, including fatty acids and retinoids within cells. Their presumed function is to solubilise, protect from chemical damage and deliver to the correct destination lipids for purposes ranging from energy metabolism (e.g. fatty acids) to signalling, gene activation and cellular differentiation (e.g. retinoids and eicosanoids). It is therefore probable that cLBPs interact directly with cellular components (membranes and/or proteins) to collect and deposit their ligands, and some external features of the different cLBPs may be involved in such interactions and determine which cellular component (integral membrane or cytosolic proteins, or membranes of different lipid compositions or domain structures) with which a given cLBP will interact. Here we have focussed on a previously unrecognised feature of cLBPs which descriminates between those for which there is empiral evidence for direct interaction with membranes, and those which do not. This is a group of bulky hydrophobic amino acid side chains (e.g. tryptophans, phenylalanines, leucines) which project directly into solvent adjacent to the portal of entry and exit of the lipid ligands. Such side chains are usually found internal to proteins, but are common at sites of protein:protein or protein:membrane interactions. These 'sticky fingers' could therefore be critical to the nature and specificity of the interactions cLBPs undergo in the web of cross-traffic in lipid movements within cells.