Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20590526›Full record

ArticleThe Biochemical journal2010

Distribution and paralogue specificity of mammalian deSUMOylating enzymes.

Nagamalleswari Kolli, Jowita Mikolajczyk, Marcin Drag, Debaditya Mukhopadhyay, Nela Moffatt, Mary Dasso, Guy Salvesen, Keith D Wilkinson

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Biochemical journal, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

61 citing papers in PubMed, 105 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. SUMOylation and Viral Infections of the Brain.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

1 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.

Nagamalleswari KolliDepartment of Biochemistry, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322, U.S.A.
Jowita Mikolajczyk
Marcin Drag
Debaditya Mukhopadhyay
Nela Moffatt
Mary Dasso
Guy Salvesen
Keith D Wilkinson
Emory University · USSanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute · USNational Institute of Child Health · HU

Funding

SUMO family Ubiquitin-like Modifiers In Higher EukaryotesZIAHD001902 · NICHD · EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF CHILD HEALTH & HUMAN DEVELOPMENT · PI DASSO, MARY C. · 2009 to 2021
$6.3M
Functions of Ub-like Proteins &Processing ProteasesR01GM066355 · NIGMS · EMORY UNIVERSITY · PI WILKINSON, KEITH D · 2002 to 2009
$2.5M
NIGMS NIH HHS 5R01GM066355NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM066355
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The covalent attachment of SUMO (small ubiquitin-like protein modifier) to target proteins results in modifications in their activity, binding interactions, localization or half-life. The reversal of this modification is catalysed by SENPs (SUMO-specific processing proteases). Mammals contain four SUMO paralogues and six SENP enzymes. In the present paper, we describe a systematic analysis of human SENPs, integrating estimates of relative selectivity for SUMO1 and SUMO2, and kinetic measurements of recombinant C-terminal cSENPs (SENP catalytic domains). We first characterized the reaction of each endogenous SENP and cSENPs with HA-SUMO-VS [HA (haemagglutinin)-tagged SUMO-vinyl sulfones], active-site-directed irreversible inhibitors of SENPs. We found that all cSENPs and endogenous SENP1 react with both SUMO paralogues, whereas all other endogenous SENPs in mammalian cells and tissues display high selectivity for SUMO2-VS. To obtain more quantitative data, the kinetic properties of purified cSENPs were determined using SUMO1- or SUMO2-AMC (7-amino-4-methylcoumarin) as substrate. All enzymes bind their respective substrates with high affinity. cSENP1 and cSENP2 process either SUMO substrate with similar affinity and catalytic efficiency; cSENP5 and cSENP6 show marked catalytic specificity for SUMO2 as measured by Km and kcat, whereas cSENP7 works only on SUMO2. Compared with cSENPs, recombinant full-length SENP1 and SENP2 show differences in SUMO selectivity, indicating that paralogue specificity is influenced by the presence of the variable N-terminal domain of each SENP. Our data suggest that SUMO2 metabolism is more dynamic than that of SUMO1 since most SENPs display a marked preference for SUMO2.

Indexed as

Cell LineEndopeptidasesHumansKineticsProtein BindingProtein TransportSmall Ubiquitin-Related Modifier ProteinsSubstrate SpecificitySUMO-1 ProteinTissue DistributionEndopeptidasesSmall Ubiquitin-Related Modifier ProteinsSUMO-1 ProteinSUMO1 protein, humanSUMO2 protein, human

Identifiers

PMID20590526
PMCPMC3749516
OpenAlexW2056801882

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.