4.0 Article

Purification, crystallization and preliminary crystallographic analysis of the CBS-domain pair of cyclin M2 (CNNM2)

出版社

INT UNION CRYSTALLOGRAPHY
DOI: 10.1107/S1744309112035348

关键词

-

资金

  1. Departamento de Educacion
  2. Universidades e Investigacion del Gobierno Vasco [PI2010-17]
  3. Departamento de Industria, Innovacion, Comercio y Turismo del Gobierno Vasco [ETORTEK IE05-147, IE07-202]
  4. Diputacion Foral de Bizkaia [Exp. 7/13/08/2006/11, 7/13/08/2005/14]
  5. Ministerio Espanol de Ciencia e Innovacion (MICINN) [BFU2010-17857]
  6. MICINN CONSOLIDER-INGENIO Program [CSD2008-00005]
  7. European Community [EUNEFRON 201590]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This work describes the purification and preliminary crystallographic analysis of the CBS-domain pair of the murine CNNM2 magnesium transporter (formerly known as ancient domain protein 2; ACDP2), which consists of a pair of cystathionine beta-synthase (CBS) motifs and has 100% sequence identity to its human homologue. CNNM proteins represent the least-studied members of the eight different types of magnesium transporters identified to date in mammals. In humans, the CNNM family is encoded by four genes: CNNM1-4. CNNM1 acts as a cytosolic copper chaperone, whereas CNNM2 and CNNM4 have been associated with magnesium handling. Interestingly, mutations in the CNNM2 gene cause familial dominant hypomagnesaemia (MIM:607803), a rare human disorder characterized by renal and intestinal magnesium (Mg2+) wasting, which may lead to symptoms of Mg2+ depletion such as tetany, seizures and cardiac arrhythmias. This manuscript describes the preliminary crystallographic analysis of two different crystal habits of a truncated form of the protein containing its regulatory CBS-domain pair, which has been reported to host the pathological mutation T568I in humans. The crystals belonged to space groups P2(1)2(1)2 and I222 (or I2(1)2(1)2(1)) and diffracted X-rays to 2.0 and 3.6 angstrom resolution, respectively, using synchrotron radiation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据