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...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
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 |