Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 169

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Acquisition of protease resistance by prion proteins in scrapie-infected cells does not require asparagine-linked glycosylation.

Open access
Taraboulos, A, Rogers, M, Borchelt, D R, McKinley, M P, Scott, M, Serban, D, Prusiner, S B·1990·Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Abstract

The scrapie and cellular isoforms of the prion protein (PrPSc and PrPC) differ strikingly in a number of their biochemical and metabolic properties. The structural features underlying these differences are unknown, but they are thought to result from a posttranslational process. Both PrP isoforms contain complex type oligosaccharides, raising the possibility that differences in the asparagine-linked glycosylation account for the properties that distinguish PrPC and PrPSc. ScN2a and ScHaB cells in culture produce several PrP molecules with relative molecular masses of 26-35 kDa and proteinase K-resistant cores of 19-29 kDa. When the cells were treated with tunicamycin, this heterogeneity was eliminated and a single PrP species of 26 kDa was observed. Several hours after its synthesis, a fraction of this protein became insoluble in detergents and acquired a proteinase K-resistant core, thus displaying two of the biochemical hallmarks of PrPSc. Synthesis in the presence of tunicamycin restricted the proteinase K-resistant cores of PrP to a single species of 19 kDa. No proteinase K-resistant PrP was found in uninfected cells. Expression of a mutated PrP gene lacking both asparagine-linked glycosylation sites in ScN2a cells resulted in the synthesis of 19-kDa proteinase K-resistant PrP molecules. We conclude that asparagine-linked glycosylation is not essential for the synthesis of proteinase K-resistant PrP and that structural differences unrelated to asparagine-linked oligosaccharides must exist between PrPC and PrPSc. Whether unglycosylated PrPSc molecules are associated with scrapie prion infectivity remains to be established.

Overview

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 · 10.1073/pnas.87.21.8262

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cited by

See all 169

Metadata

Authors
Taraboulos, A., Rogers, M., Borchelt, D. R., McKinley, M. P., Scott, M., Serban, D., & Prusiner, S. B.
Venue
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
Published
1990-11
Volume
87
Issue
21
Pages
8262-8266
ISSN
  • 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
  • 1091-6490
OpenAlex
W2091849161
Cited by
169
References
0
FWCI
4.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Acquisition of protease resistance by prion proteins in scrapie-infected cells does not require asparagine-linked glycosylation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1073/pnas.87.21.8262
The paper
Taraboulos, A., Rogers, M., Borchelt, D. R., McKinley, M. P., Scott, M., Serban, D., & Prusiner, S. B. (1990). Acquisition of protease resistance by prion proteins in scrapie-infected cells does not require asparagine-linked glycosylation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.87.21.8262

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.