Cited by 63Mass Spectrometry Techniques and ApplicationsUbiquitin and proteasome pathwaysAdvanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications

Comparative Structural Analysis of 20S Proteasome Ortholog Protein Complexes by Native Mass Spectrometry

Open access
Vimer, Shay, Ben-Nissan, Gili, Morgenstern, David, Kumar-Deshmukh, Fanindra, Polkinghorn, Caley, Quintyn, Royston S., Vasil’ev, Yury V., Beckman, Joseph S. +3 more·2020·ACS Central Science

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Ortholog protein complexes are responsible for equivalent functions in different organisms. However, during evolution, each organism adapts to meet its physiological needs and the environmental challenges imposed by its niche. This selection pressure leads to structural diversity in protein complexes, which are often difficult to specify, especially in the absence of high-resolution structures. Here, we describe a multilevel experimental approach based on native mass spectrometry (MS) tools for elucidating the structural preservation and variations among highly related protein complexes. The 20S proteasome, an essential protein degradation machinery, served as our model system, wherein we examined five complexes isolated from different organisms. We show that throughout evolution, from the Thermoplasma acidophilum archaeal prokaryotic complex to the eukaryotic 20S proteasomes in yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) and mammals (rat - Rattus norvegicus, rabbit - Oryctolagus cuniculus and human - HEK293 cells), the proteasome increased both in size and stability. Native MS structural signatures of the rat and rabbit 20S proteasomes, which heretofore lacked high-resolution, three-dimensional structures, highly resembled that of the human complex. Using cryoelectron microscopy single-particle analysis, we were able to obtain a high-resolution structure of the rat 20S proteasome, allowing us to validate the MS-based results. Our study also revealed that the yeast complex, and not those in mammals, was the largest in size and displayed the greatest degree of kinetic stability. Moreover, we also identified a new proteoform of the PSMA7 subunit that resides within the rat and rabbit complexes, which to our knowledge have not been previously described. Altogether, our strategy enables elucidation of the unique structural properties of protein complexes that are highly similar to one another, a framework that is valid not only to ortholog protein complexes, but also for other highly related protein assemblies.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1021/acscentsci.0c00080

Cites

85 of 85 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [42]42. Heinemeyer W.; Ramos P. C.; Dohmen R. J. The ultimate nanoscale mincer: assembly, structure and active sites of the 20S proteasome core. Cell. Mol. Life Sci. 2004, 61 (13), 1562.
  2. [61]61. Ben-Nissan G.; Vimer S.; Tarnavsky M.; Sharon M.. Structural mass spectrometry approaches to study the 20S proteasome. Methods Enzymol. 2019, In press.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Vimer, S., Ben-Nissan, G., Morgenstern, D., Kumar-Deshmukh, F., Polkinghorn, C., Quintyn, R. S., Vasil’ev, Y. V., Beckman, J. S., Elad, N., Wysocki, V. H., & Sharon, M.
Affiliations
  • Weizmann Institute of Science (IL)
  • Weizmann Institute of Science , , ,
  • The Ohio State University (US)
  • ECD for the Masses (United States) (US)
  • Oregon State University (US)
Corresponding author
Sharon, Michal
Venue
ACS Central Science
Published
2020-04-10
Volume
6
Issue
4
Pages
573-588
ISSN
  • 2374-7943 (ISSN-L)
  • 2374-7951
OpenAlex
W3015495420
Cited by
63
References
85
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1
FWCI
3.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • ACS Central Science (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • ChemRxiv (acceptedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (P41GM128577)
  • Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (636752)
  • Israel Science Foundation (300/17)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Mass Spectrometry Techniques and Applications
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Ubiquitin and proteasome pathways
  • Physical Sciences › Chemistry › Spectroscopy › Advanced Proteomics Techniques and Applications
Keywords
20S proteasome, native mass spectrometry, kinetic stability, human proteasome, Thermoplasma acidophilum, cryo-EM structure

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