Molecular basis of interactions between SH3 domain-containing proteins and the proline-rich region of the ubiquitin ligase Itch
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ligase Itch plays major roles in signaling pathways by inducing ubiquitylation-dependent degradation of several substrates. Substrate recognition and binding are critical for the regulation of this reaction. Like closely related ligases, Itch can interact with proteins containing a PP X Y motif via its WW domains. In addition to these WW domains, Itch possesses a proline-rich region (PRR) that has been shown to interact with several Src homology 3 (SH3) domain-containing proteins. We have previously established that despite the apparent surface uniformity and conserved fold of SH3 domains, they display different binding mechanisms and affinities for their interaction with the PRR of Itch. Here, we attempt to determine the molecular bases underlying the wide range of binding properties of the Itch PRR. Using pulldown assays combined with mass spectrometry analysis, we show that the Itch PRR preferentially forms complexes with endophilins, amphyphisins, and pacsins but can also target a variety of other SH3 domain-containing proteins. In addition, we map the binding sites of these proteins using a combination of PRR sub-sequences and mutants. We find that different SH3 domains target distinct proline-rich sequences overlapping significantly. We also structurally analyze these protein complexes using crystallography and molecular modeling. These structures depict the position of Itch PRR engaged in a 1:2 protein complex with β-PIX and a 1:1 complex with the other SH3 domain-containing proteins. Taken together, these results reveal the binding preferences of the Itch PRR toward its most common SH3 domain-containing partners and demonstrate that the PRR region is sufficient for 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".