4.5 Article

QIKS - Quantitative identification of kinase substrates

Journal

PROTEOMICS
Volume 10, Issue 10, Pages 2015-2025

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/pmic.200900749

Keywords

Cell biology; Chemical genetics; Kinase substrate identification; Mitogen-activated protein kinase; Phosphoproteomics; Quantitative proteomics

Funding

  1. Austrian Science Fund [SFB021]
  2. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [Y 444] Funding Source: researchfish
  3. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [Y444] Funding Source: Austrian Science Fund (FWF)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Signaling networks regulate cellular responses to external stimuli through post-translational modifications such as protein phosphorylation. Phosphoproteomics facilitate the large-scale identification of kinase substrates. Yet, the characterization of critical connections within these networks and the identification of respective kinases remain the major analytical challenge. To address this problem, we present a novel approach for the identification of direct kinase substrates using chemical genetics in combination with quantitative phospho-proteomics. Quantitative identification of kinase substrates (QIKS) is a novel-screening platform developed for the proteome-wide substrate-analysis of specific kinases. Here, we aimed to identify substrates of mitogen-activated protein kinase/Erk kinase (Mek1), an essential kinase in the mitogen-activated protein kinase cascade. An ATP analog-sensitive mutant of Mek1 (Mek1-as) was incubated with a cell extract from Mek1 deficient cells. Phosphorylated proteins were analyzed by LC-MS/MS of IMAC-enriched phosphopeptides, labeled differentially for relative quantification. The identification of extracellular regulated kinase 1/2 as the sole cytoplasmic substrates of MEK1 validates the applicability of this approach and suggests that QIKS could be used to identify substrates of a wide variety of kinases.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available