This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Reprints and Permissions Copyright Information Books from ASM Press MicrobeWorld Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Collier, D N Articles by Bassford, P J Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Collier, D N Articles by Bassford, P J, Jr

 Previous Article  |  Next Article 

J Bacteriol. 1990 December; 172(12): 6875-6884

research-article

SecB-independent export of Escherichia coli ribose-binding protein (RBP): some comparisons with export of maltose-binding protein (MBP) and studies with RBP-MBP hybrid proteins.

Department of Microbiology and Immunology, School of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill 27599-7290.

ABSTRACT

The efficient export of the Escherichia coli maltose-binding protein (MBP) is known to be SecB dependent, whereas ribose-binding protein (RBP) export is SecB independent. When the MBP and RBP signal peptides were exchanged precisely at the signal peptidase processing sites, the resultant RBP-MBP and MBP-RBP hybrid proteins both were efficiently exported in SecB+ cells. However, only MBP-RBP was efficiently exported in SecB- cells; RBP-MBP exhibited a significant export defect, a finding that was consistent with previous proposals that SecB specifically interacts with the mature moiety of precursor MBP to promote export. The relatively slow, totally posttranslational export mode exhibited by certain mutant RBP and MBP-RBP species in SecB+ cells was not affected by the loss of SecB. In contrast, MBP and RBP-MBP species with similarly altered signal peptides were totally export defective in SecB- cells. Both export-defective MBP and RBP-MBP interfered with SecB-mediated protein export by depleting cells of functional SecB. In contrast, neither export-defective RBP nor MBP-RBP elicited such an interference effect. These and other data indicated that SecB is unable to interact with precursor RBP or that any interaction between these two proteins is considerably weaker than that of SecB with precursor MBP. In addition, no correlation could be established between a SecB requirement for export and PrlA-mediated suppression of signal peptide export defects. Finally, previous studies have established that wild-type MBP export can be accomplished cotranslationally, whereas wild-type RBP export is strictly a posttranslational process. In this study, cotranslational export was not detected for either MBP-RBP or RBP-MBP. This indicates that the export mode exhibited by a given precursor protein (cotranslational versus posttranslational) is determined by properties of both the signal peptide and the mature moiety.

This article has been cited by other articles:

• Wild, J, Altman, E, Yura, T, Gross, C A (1992). DnaK and DnaJ heat shock proteins participate in protein export in Escherichia coli.. Genes Dev. 6: 1165-1172 [Abstract]