Cited by 233

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Mutational analysis of the ligand binding domain of the low density lipoprotein receptor.

Esser, V, Limbird, L E, Brown, M S, Goldstein, J L, Russell, D W·1988·Journal of Biological Chemistry

Abstract

The ligand binding domain of the low density lipoprotein (LDL) receptor contains seven imperfect repeats of a 40-amino acid cysteine-rich sequence. Each repeat contains clustered negative charges that have been postulated as ligand-binding sites. The adjacent region of the protein, the growth factor homology region, contains three cysteine-rich repeats (A-C) whose sequence differs from those in the ligand binding domain. To dissect the contribution of these different cysteine-rich repeats to ligand binding, we used oligonucleotide-directed mutagenesis to alter expressible cDNAs for the human LDL receptor which were then introduced into monkey COS cells by transfection. We measured the ability of the mutant receptors to bind LDL, which contains a single protein ligand for the receptor (apoB-100), and beta-migrating very low density lipoprotein (beta-VLDL), which contains apoB-100 plus multiple copies of another ligand (apoE). The results show that repeat 1 is not required for binding of either ligand. Repeats 2 plus 3 and repeats 6 plus 7 are required for maximal binding of LDL, but not beta-VLDL. Repeat 5 is required for binding of both ligands. Repeat A in the growth factor homology region is required for binding of LDL, but not beta-VLDL. Repeat B is not required for ligand binding. These results support a model for the LDL receptor in which various repeats play additive roles in ligand binding, each repeat making a separate contribution to the binding event.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0021-9258(18)37702-0

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 37

  1. Goldstein, 1979, Nature, 279, 679, 10.1038/279679a0 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Helenius, 1983, Trends Biochem. Sci., 8, 245, 10.1016/0968-0004(83)90350-X · DOI
  3. Goldstein, 1985, Annu. Rev. Cell. Biol., 1, 1, 10.1146/annurev.cb.01.110185.000245 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Mahley, 1983, Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 737, 197, 10.1016/0304-4157(83)90001-1 · DOI
  5. Brown, 1978, J. Supramol. Struct., 8, 223, 10.1002/jss.400080302 · DOI
  6. Yamamoto, 1984, Cell, 39, 27, 10.1016/0092-8674(84)90188-0 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Basu, 1977, J. Cell Biol., 74, 119, 10.1083/jcb.74.1.119 · DOI
  8. Weisgraber, 1978, J. Biol. Chem., 253, 9053, 10.1016/S0021-9258(17)34284-9 · DOI
  9. Mahley, 1977, J. Biol. Chem., 252, 7279, 10.1016/S0021-9258(19)66966-8 · DOI
  10. Innerarity, 1984, J. Biol. Chem., 259, 7261, 10.1016/S0021-9258(17)39866-6 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Scott, 1987, Biochem. Soc. Symp., 53, 155
  12. Yang, 1986, Nature, 323, 738, 10.1038/323738a0 · DOI
  13. Hobbs, 1896, J. Biol. Chem., 261, 13114, 10.1016/S0021-9258(18)69278-6 · DOI
  14. Südhof, 1985, Science, 228, 893, 10.1126/science.3873704 · DOI
  15. Doolittle, 1985, Trends Biochem. Sci., 10, 233, 10.1016/0968-0004(85)90140-9 · DOI
  16. Drakenberg, 1983, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 80, 1802, 10.1073/pnas.80.7.1802 · DOI
  17. Sugo, 1984, FEBS Lett., 165, 102, 10.1016/0014-5793(84)80023-X · DOI
  18. Przysiecki, 1987, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 84, 7856, 10.1073/pnas.84.22.7856 · DOI
  19. Stenflo, 1988, J. Biol. Chem., 263, 21, 10.1016/S0021-9258(19)57350-1 · DOI
  20. Davis, 1986, J. Biol. Chem., 261, 2828, 10.1016/S0021-9258(17)35862-3 · DOI
  21. Tolleshaug, 1983, Cell, 32, 941, 10.1016/0092-8674(83)90079-X · DOI
  22. Yamamoto, 1986, Science, 232, 1230, 10.1126/science.3010466 · DOI
  23. Lehrman, 1987, J. Biol. Chem., 262, 401, 10.1016/S0021-9258(19)75941-9 · DOI
  24. Pathak, 1988, J. Cell Biol., 106, 1831, 10.1083/jcb.106.6.1831 · DOI
  25. Gething, 1986, Cell, 46, 939, 10.1016/0092-8674(86)90076-0 · DOI
  26. Goldstein, 1983, Methods Enzymol., 98, 241, 10.1016/0076-6879(83)98152-1 · DOI
  27. Kovanen, 1981, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 78, 1396, 10.1073/pnas.78.3.1396 · DOI
  28. Russell, 1984, Cell, 37, 577, 10.1016/0092-8674(84)90388-X · DOI · Paper page
  29. Beisiegel, 1981, J. Biol. Chem., 256, 11923, 10.1016/S0021-9258(19)68494-2 · DOI · Paper page
  30. van Driel, 1987, J. Biol. Chem., 262, 17443, 10.1016/S0021-9258(18)45399-9 · DOI
  31. van Driel, 1987, J. Biol. Chem., 262, 16127, 10.1016/S0021-9258(18)47706-X · DOI · Paper page
  32. Zoller, 1984, DNA (NY), 3, 479, 10.1089/dna.1.1984.3.479 · DOI
  33. Messing, 1983, Methods Enzymol., 101, 20, 10.1016/0076-6879(83)01005-8 · DOI
  34. Sanger, 1980, J. Mol. Biol., 143, 161, 10.1016/0022-2836(80)90196-5 · DOI
  35. Zoller, 1983, Methods Enzymol., 100, 468, 10.1016/0076-6879(83)00074-9 · DOI
  36. Myers, 1985, Science, 229, 242, 10.1126/science.2990046 · DOI
  37. Südhof, 1985, Science, 228, 815, 10.1126/science.2988123 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Esser, V, Limbird, L. E., Brown, M. S., Goldstein, J. L., & Russell, D. W.
Venue
Journal of Biological Chemistry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1988-09
Volume
263
Issue
26
Pages
13282-13290
ISSN
0021-9258
Cited by
233
References
1
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review