ArticleThe Journal of biological chemistry2024
Docking interactions determine substrate specificity of members of a widespread family of protein phosphatases.
Article in The Journal of biological chemistry, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- PHLPP is neither a Phosphatase nor a Tumor Suppressor.BioEssays : news and reviews in molecular, cellular and developmental biology · 2026Review
- Conserved regions and molecular cloning of Acid and Alkaline phosphatases in Streptomyces sp. MMA-NRC.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- PHLPP2 is a pseudophosphatase that lost activity in the metazoan ancestor.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
How protein phosphatases achieve specificity for their substrates is a major outstanding question. PPM family serine/threonine phosphatases are widespread in bacteria and eukaryotes, where they dephosphorylate target proteins with a high degree of specificity. In bacteria, PPM phosphatases control diverse transcriptional responses by dephosphorylating anti-anti-sigma factors of the STAS domain family, exemplified by Bacillus subtilis phosphatases SpoIIE, which controls cell-fate during endospore formation, and RsbU, which initiates the general stress response. Using a combination of forward genetics, biochemical reconstitution, and AlphaFold2 structure prediction, we identified a conserved, tripartite substrate docking interface comprised of three variable loops on the surface of the PPM phosphatase domains of SpoIIE and RsbU that recognize the three-dimensional structure of the substrate protein. Nonconserved amino acids in these loops facilitate the accommodation of the cognate substrate and prevent dephosphorylation of the noncognate substrate. Together, single-amino acid substitutions in these three elements cause an over 500-fold change in specificity. Our data additionally suggest that substrate-docking interactions regulate phosphatase specificity through a conserved allosteric switch element that controls the catalytic efficiency of the phosphatase by positioning the metal cofactor and substrate. We hypothesize that this is a generalizable mechanistic model for PPM family phosphatase substrate specificity. Importantly, the substrate docking interface with the phosphatase is only partially overlapping with the much more extensive interface with the upstream kinase, suggesting the possibility that kinase and phosphatase specificity evolved independently.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.