SCIENTIFIC HUB

Follow the evidence.

SCIENTIFIC LITERATURE · MED

Ubiquitin-dependent proteolysis in yeast cells expressing neurotoxic proteins.

Front Mol Neurosci · 2015-03-12

DOI: 10.3389/fnmol.2015.00008PMID: 25814926

Open accessreview-article; Review; Journal ArticleOriginal source ↗

Research overview

The text below is the source article’s original abstract under a verified reuse license. cc by

Critically impaired protein degradation is discussed to contribute to neurodegenerative disorders, including Parkinson's, Huntington's, Alzheimer's, and motor neuron diseases. Misfolded, aggregated, or surplus proteins are efficiently degraded via distinct protein degradation pathways, including the ubiquitin-proteasome system, autophagy, and vesicular trafficking. These pathways are regulated by covalent modification of target proteins with the small protein ubiquitin and are evolutionary highly conserved from humans to yeast. The yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae is an established model for deciphering mechanisms of protein degradation, and for the elucidation of pathways underlying programmed cell death. The expression of human neurotoxic proteins triggers cell death in yeast, with neurotoxic protein-specific differences. Therefore, yeast cell death models are suitable for analyzing the role of protein degradation pathways in modulating cell death upon expression of disease-causing proteins. This review summarizes which protein degradation pathways are affected in these yeast models, and how they are involved in the execution of cell death. I will discuss to which extent this mimics the situation in other neurotoxic models, and how this may contribute to a better understanding of human disorders.

Scientific assessment

01

Research question

Assess the question within the original study’s scope.

02

Methods & sample

Check the source article for study design and sample details.

03

Key findings

An editorially approved findings summary is not yet published for this record.

04

Limitations

Generalizability, bias and clinical meaning require separate assessment.

Methods, samples and clinical conclusions are not inferred from bibliographic metadata.