MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108900682 · doi:10.15252/embj.201592237

A Ubl/ubiquitin switch in the activation of Parkin

2015· article· en· W2108900682 on OpenAlexafffund
Véronique Sauvé, Asparouh Lilov, Marjan Seirafi, Marta Vranas, Shafqat Rasool, Guennadi Kozlov, Tara Sprules, Jimin Wang, Jean‐François Trempe, Kalle Gehring

Bibliographic record

VenueThe EMBO Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAutophagy in Disease and Therapy
Canadian institutionsMcGill Genome CentreMcGill University
FundersCanada Research ChairsCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchParkinson Society Canada
KeywordsBiologyParkinUbiquitinUbiquitin-Protein LigasesGeneticsCell biologyUbiquitin ligaseUbiquitinsComputational biologyGeneInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mutations in Parkin and PINK1 cause an inherited early-onset form of Parkinson's disease. The two proteins function together in a mitochondrial quality control pathway whereby PINK1 accumulates on damaged mitochondria and activates Parkin to induce mitophagy. How PINK1 kinase activity releases the auto-inhibited ubiquitin ligase activity of Parkin remains unclear. Here, we identify a binding switch between phospho-ubiquitin (pUb) and the ubiquitin-like domain (Ubl) of Parkin as a key element. By mutagenesis and SAXS, we show that pUb binds to RING1 of Parkin at a site formed by His302 and Arg305. pUb binding promotes disengagement of the Ubl from RING1 and subsequent Parkin phosphorylation. A crystal structure of Parkin Δ86-130 at 2.54 Å resolution allowed the design of mutations that specifically release the Ubl domain from RING1. These mutations mimic pUb binding and promote Parkin phosphorylation. Measurements of the E2 ubiquitin-conjugating enzyme UbcH7 binding to Parkin and Parkin E3 ligase activity suggest that Parkin phosphorylation regulates E3 ligase activity downstream of pUb binding.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.462
Threshold uncertainty score0.117

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations219
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe EMBO JournalSame topicAutophagy in Disease and TherapyFrench-language works237,207