Search

With the increased focus on intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs) and their large interac-tomes, the question about their specificity - or more so on their multispecificity - arise. Here we recapitulate how specificity and multispecificity are quantified and address through examples if IDPs in this respect differ from globular proteins. The conclusion is that quantitatively, globular proteins and IDPs are similar when it comes to specificity. However, compared with globular proteins, IDPs have larger interactome sizes, a phe-nomenon that is further enabled by their flexibility, repetitive binding motifs and propen-sity to adapt to different binding partners. For IDPs, this adaptability, interactome size and a higher degree of multivalency opens for new interaction mechanisms such as facili-tated exchange through trimer formation and ultra-sensitivity via threshold effects and ensemble redistribution. IDPs and their interactions, thus, do not compromise the defin-ition of specificity. Instead, it is the sheer size of their interactomes that complicates its calculation. More importantly, it is this size that challenges how we conceptually envision, interpret and speak about their specificity.

With the increased focus on intrinsically disordered proteins (IDPs) and their large interac-tomes, the question about their specificity - or more so on their multispecificity - arise. Here we recapitulate how specificity and multispecificity are quantified and address through examples if IDPs in this respect differ from globular proteins. The conclusion is that quantitatively, globular proteins and IDPs are similar when it comes to specificity. However, compared with globular proteins, IDPs have larger interactome sizes, a phe-nomenon that is further enabled by their flexibility, repetitive binding motifs and propen-sity to adapt to different binding partners. For IDPs, this adaptability, interactome size and a higher degree of multivalency opens for new interaction mechanisms such as facili-tated exchange through trimer formation and ultra-sensitivity via threshold effects and ensemble redistribution. IDPs and their interactions, thus, do not compromise the defin-ition of specificity. Instead, it is the sheer size of their interactomes that complicates its calculation. More importantly, it is this size that challenges how we conceptually envision, interpret and speak about their specificity.

Replicative DNA polymerases possess a canonical C-terminal proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA)-binding motif termed the PCNA-interacting protein (PIP) box. We investigated the role of the PIP box on the functional interactions of the two DNA polymerases, PabPol B (family B) and PabPol D (family D), from the hyperthermophilic euryarchaeon Pyrococcus abyssi, with its cognate PCNA. The PIP box was essential for interactions of PabPol B with PCNA, as shown by surface plasmon resonance and primer extension studies. In contrast, binding of PabPol D to PCNA was affected only partially by removing the PIP motif. We identified a second palindromic PIP box motif at the N-terminus of the large subunit of PabPol D that was required for the interactions of PabPol D with PCNA. Thus, two PIP motifs were needed for PabPol D for binding to PabPCNA. Moreover, the C-terminus of PabPCNA was essential for stimulation of PabPol D activity but not for stimulation of PabPol B activity. Neither DNA polymerase interacted with the PabPCNA interdomain connecting loop. Our data suggest that distinct processes are involved in PabPol D and PabPol B binding to PCNA, raising the possibility that Archaea require two mechanisms for recruiting replicative DNA polymerases at the replication fork. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Replicative DNA polymerases possess a canonical C-terminal proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA)-binding motif termed the PCNA-interacting protein (PIP) box. We investigated the role of the PIP box on the functional interactions of the two DNA polymerases, PabPol B (family B) and PabPol D (family D), from the hyperthermophilic euryarchaeon Pyrococcus abyssi, with its cognate PCNA. The PIP box was essential for interactions of PabPol B with PCNA, as shown by surface plasmon resonance and primer extension studies. In contrast, binding of PabPol D to PCNA was affected only partially by removing the PIP motif. We identified a second palindromic PIP box motif at the N-terminus of the large subunit of PabPol D that was required for the interactions of PabPol D with PCNA. Thus, two PIP motifs were needed for PabPol D for binding to PabPCNA. Moreover, the C-terminus of PabPCNA was essential for stimulation of PabPol D activity but not for stimulation of PabPol B activity. Neither DNA polymerase interacted with the PabPCNA interdomain connecting loop. Our data suggest that distinct processes are involved in PabPol D and PabPol B binding to PCNA, raising the possibility that Archaea require two mechanisms for recruiting replicative DNA polymerases at the replication fork. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Replicative DNA polymerases possess a canonical C-terminal proliferating cell nuclear antigen (PCNA)-binding motif termed the PCNA-interacting protein (PIP) box. We investigated the role of the PIP box on the functional interactions of the two DNA polymerases, PabPol B (family B) and PabPol D (family D), from the hyperthermophilic euryarchaeon Pyrococcus abyssi, with its cognate PCNA. The PIP box was essential for interactions of PabPol B with PCNA, as shown by surface plasmon resonance and primer extension studies. In contrast, binding of PabPol D to PCNA was affected only partially by removing the PIP motif. We identified a second palindromic PIP box motif at the N-terminus of the large subunit of PabPol D that was required for the interactions of PabPol D with PCNA. Thus, two PIP motifs were needed for PabPol D for binding to PabPCNA. Moreover, the C-terminus of PabPCNA was essential for stimulation of PabPol D activity but not for stimulation of PabPol B activity. Neither DNA polymerase interacted with the PabPCNA interdomain connecting loop. Our data suggest that distinct processes are involved in PabPol D and PabPol B binding to PCNA, raising the possibility that Archaea require two mechanisms for recruiting replicative DNA polymerases at the replication fork. (C) 2009 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.