Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
How fibronectin (FN) converts from a compact plasma protein to a fibrillar component of extracellular matrix is not understood. "Functional upstream domain" (FUD), a polypeptide based on F1 adhesin of Streptococcus pyogenes, binds by anti-parallel β-strand addition to discontinuous sets of N-terminal FN type I modules, (2-5)FNI of the fibrin-binding domain and (8-9)FNI of the gelatin-binding domain. Such binding blocks assembly of FN. To learn whether ligation of (2-5)FNI, (8-9)FNI, or the two sets in combination is important for inhibition, we tested "high affinity downstream domain" (HADD), which binds by β-strand addition to the continuous set of FNI modules, (1-5)FNI, comprising the fibrin-binding domain. HADD and FUD were similarly active in blocking fibronectin assembly. Binding of HADD or FUD to soluble plasma FN exposed the epitope to monoclonal antibody mAbIII-10 in the tenth FN type III module ((10)FNIII) and caused expansion of FN as assessed by dynamic light scattering. Soluble N-terminal constructs truncated after (9)FNI or (3)FNIII competed better than soluble FN for binding of FUD or HADD to adsorbed FN, indicating that interactions involving type III modules more C-terminal than (3)FNIII limit β-strand addition to (1-5)FNI within intact soluble FN. Preincubation of FN with mAbIII-10 or heparin modestly increased binding to HADD or FUD. Thus, ligation of FNIII modules involved in binding of integrins and glycosaminoglycans, (10)FNIII and (12-14)FNIII, increases accessibility of (1-5)FNI. Allosteric loss of constraining interactions among (1-5)FNI, (10)FNIII, and (12-14)FNIII likely enables assembly of FN into extracellular fibrils.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Maurer et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: