Cargando…

Positional proteomics reveals differences in N‐terminal proteoform stability

To understand the impact of alternative translation initiation on a proteome, we performed a proteome‐wide study on protein turnover using positional proteomics and ribosome profiling to distinguish between N‐terminal proteoforms of individual genes. By combining pulsed SILAC with N‐terminal COFRADI...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gawron, Daria, Ndah, Elvis, Gevaert, Kris, Van Damme, Petra
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4770386/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26893308
http://dx.doi.org/10.15252/msb.20156662
_version_ 1782418254944272384
author Gawron, Daria
Ndah, Elvis
Gevaert, Kris
Van Damme, Petra
author_facet Gawron, Daria
Ndah, Elvis
Gevaert, Kris
Van Damme, Petra
author_sort Gawron, Daria
collection PubMed
description To understand the impact of alternative translation initiation on a proteome, we performed a proteome‐wide study on protein turnover using positional proteomics and ribosome profiling to distinguish between N‐terminal proteoforms of individual genes. By combining pulsed SILAC with N‐terminal COFRADIC, we monitored the stability of 1,941 human N‐terminal proteoforms, including 147 N‐terminal proteoform pairs that originate from alternative translation initiation, alternative splicing or incomplete processing of the initiator methionine. N‐terminally truncated proteoforms were less abundant than canonical proteoforms and often displayed altered stabilities, likely attributed to individual protein characteristics, including intrinsic disorder, but independent of N‐terminal amino acid identity or truncation length. We discovered that the removal of initiator methionine by methionine aminopeptidases reduced the stability of processed proteoforms, while susceptibility for N‐terminal acetylation did not seem to influence protein turnover rates. Taken together, our findings reveal differences in protein stability between N‐terminal proteoforms and point to a role for alternative translation initiation and co‐translational initiator methionine removal, next to alternative splicing, in the overall regulation of proteome homeostasis.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4770386
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47703862016-03-24 Positional proteomics reveals differences in N‐terminal proteoform stability Gawron, Daria Ndah, Elvis Gevaert, Kris Van Damme, Petra Mol Syst Biol Articles To understand the impact of alternative translation initiation on a proteome, we performed a proteome‐wide study on protein turnover using positional proteomics and ribosome profiling to distinguish between N‐terminal proteoforms of individual genes. By combining pulsed SILAC with N‐terminal COFRADIC, we monitored the stability of 1,941 human N‐terminal proteoforms, including 147 N‐terminal proteoform pairs that originate from alternative translation initiation, alternative splicing or incomplete processing of the initiator methionine. N‐terminally truncated proteoforms were less abundant than canonical proteoforms and often displayed altered stabilities, likely attributed to individual protein characteristics, including intrinsic disorder, but independent of N‐terminal amino acid identity or truncation length. We discovered that the removal of initiator methionine by methionine aminopeptidases reduced the stability of processed proteoforms, while susceptibility for N‐terminal acetylation did not seem to influence protein turnover rates. Taken together, our findings reveal differences in protein stability between N‐terminal proteoforms and point to a role for alternative translation initiation and co‐translational initiator methionine removal, next to alternative splicing, in the overall regulation of proteome homeostasis. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-02-18 /pmc/articles/PMC4770386/ /pubmed/26893308 http://dx.doi.org/10.15252/msb.20156662 Text en © 2016 The Authors. Published under the terms of the CC BY 4.0 license This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Articles
Gawron, Daria
Ndah, Elvis
Gevaert, Kris
Van Damme, Petra
Positional proteomics reveals differences in N‐terminal proteoform stability
title Positional proteomics reveals differences in N‐terminal proteoform stability
title_full Positional proteomics reveals differences in N‐terminal proteoform stability
title_fullStr Positional proteomics reveals differences in N‐terminal proteoform stability
title_full_unstemmed Positional proteomics reveals differences in N‐terminal proteoform stability
title_short Positional proteomics reveals differences in N‐terminal proteoform stability
title_sort positional proteomics reveals differences in n‐terminal proteoform stability
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4770386/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26893308
http://dx.doi.org/10.15252/msb.20156662
work_keys_str_mv AT gawrondaria positionalproteomicsrevealsdifferencesinnterminalproteoformstability
AT ndahelvis positionalproteomicsrevealsdifferencesinnterminalproteoformstability
AT gevaertkris positionalproteomicsrevealsdifferencesinnterminalproteoformstability
AT vandammepetra positionalproteomicsrevealsdifferencesinnterminalproteoformstability