This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
The caspase-8 inhibitor c-FLIP exists as two splice variants, c-FLIP(L) and c-FLIP(S), with distinct roles in death receptor signaling. The mechanisms determining their turnover have not been established. We found that in differentiating K562 erythroleukemia cells both c-FLIP isoforms were inducibly degraded by the proteasome, but c-FLIP(S) was more prone to ubiquitylation and had a considerably shorter half-life. Analysis of the c-FLIP(S)-specific ubiquitylation revealed two lysines, 192 and 195, C-terminal to the death effector domains, as principal ubiquitin acceptors in c-FLIP(S) but not in c-FLIP(L). Furthermore the c-FLIP(S)-specific tail of 19 amino acids, adjacent to the two target lysines, was demonstrated to be the key element determining the isoform-specific instability of c-FLIP(S). Molecular modeling in combination with site-directed mutagenesis demonstrated that the C-terminal tail is required for correct positioning and subsequent ubiquitylation of the target lysines. Because the antiapoptotic operation of c-FLIP(S) was not affected by the tail deletion, the antiapoptotic activity and ubiquitin-mediated degradation of c-FLIP(S) are functionally and structurally independent processes. The presence of a small destabilizing sequence in c-FLIP(S) constitutes an important determinant of c-FLIP(S)/c-FLIP(L) ratios by allowing differential degradation of c-FLIP isoforms. The conformation-based predisposition of c-FLIP(S) to ubiquitin-mediated degradation introduces a novel concept to the regulation of the death-inducing signaling complex.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Poukkula et al. (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: