Baker A, Kaplan C P, Pool M R
Department of Biochemistry, University of Cambridge, UK.
Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 1996 Nov;71(4):637-702. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-185x.1996.tb01286.x.
The last few years has seen enormous progress in understanding of protein targeting and translocation across biological membranes. Many of the key molecules involved have been identified, isolated, and the corresponding genes cloned, opening up the way for detailed analysis of the structure and function of these molecular machines. It has become clear that the protein translocation machinery of the endoplasmic reticulum is very closely related to that of bacteria, and probably represents an ancient solution to the problem of how to get a protein across a membrane. One of the thylakoid translocation systems looks as if it will also be very similar, and probably represents a pathway inherited from the ancestral endosymbiont. It is interesting that, so far, there is a perfect correlation between thylakoid proteins which are present in photosynthetic prokaryotes and those which use the sec pathway in chloroplasts; conversely, OE16 and 23 which use the delta pH pathway are not found in cyanobacteria. To date, no Sec-related proteins have been found in mitochondria, although these organelles also arose as a result of endosymbiotic events. However, virtually nothing is known about the insertion of mitochondrially encoded proteins into the inner membrane. Is the inner membrane machinery which translocates cytoplasmically synthesized proteins capable of operating in reverse to export proteins from the matrix, or is there a separate system? Alternatively, do membrane proteins encoded by mitochondrial DNA insert independently of accessory proteins? Unlike nuclear-encoded proteins, proteins encoded by mtDNA are not faced with a choice of membrane and, in principle, could simply partition into the inner membrane. The ancestors of mitochondria almost certainly had a Sec system; has this been lost along with many of the proteins once encoded in the endosymbiont genome, or is there still such a system waiting to be discovered? The answer to this question may also shed light on the controversy concerning the sorting of the inter-membrane space proteins cytochrome c1 and cytochrome b2, as the conservative-sorting hypothesis would predict re-export of matrix intermediates via an ancestral (possibly Sec-type) pathway. Whereas the ER and bacterial systems clearly share homologous proteins, the protein import machineries of mitochondria and chloroplasts appear to be analogous rather than homologous. In both cases, import occurs through contact sites and there are separate translocation complexes in each membrane, however, with the exception of some of the chaperone molecules, the individual protein components do not appear to be related. Their similarities may be a case of convergent rather than divergent evolution, and may reflect what appear to be common requirements for translocation, namely unfolding, a receptor, a pore complex and refolding. There are also important differences. Translocation across the mitochondrial inner membrane is absolutely dependent upon delta psi, but no GTP requirement has been identified. In chloroplasts the reverse is the case. The roles of delta psi and GTP, respectively, remain uncertain, but it is tempting to speculate that they may play a role in regulating the import process, perhaps by controlling the assembly of a functional translocation complex. In the case of peroxisomes, much still remains to be learned. Many genes involved in peroxisome biogenesis have been identified but, in most cases, the biochemical function remains to be elucidated. In this respect, understanding of peroxisome biogenesis is at a similar stage to that of the ER 10 years ago. The coming together of genetic and biochemical approaches, as with the other organelles, should provide many of the answers.
在过去几年中,我们对蛋白质靶向及跨生物膜转运的理解取得了巨大进展。许多相关的关键分子已被鉴定、分离,其相应基因也已克隆,这为详细分析这些分子机器的结构和功能开辟了道路。现已明确,内质网的蛋白质转运机制与细菌的极为相似,可能代表了一种古老的解决蛋白质跨膜转运问题的方式。类囊体转运系统之一似乎也非常相似,可能代表了从祖先内共生体继承而来的一条途径。有趣的是,到目前为止,光合原核生物中存在的类囊体蛋白与叶绿体中使用sec途径的蛋白之间存在完美的相关性;相反,使用ΔpH途径的OE16和23在蓝细菌中未被发现。迄今为止,在线粒体中尚未发现与Sec相关的蛋白质,尽管这些细胞器也是内共生事件的产物。然而,对于线粒体编码的蛋白质插入内膜的情况几乎一无所知。转运细胞质中合成蛋白质的内膜机制是否能够反向运作以从基质中输出蛋白质,还是存在一个独立的系统?或者,线粒体DNA编码的膜蛋白是否独立于辅助蛋白进行插入?与核编码蛋白不同,线粒体DNA编码的蛋白不存在膜的选择问题,原则上可以简单地分配到内膜中。线粒体的祖先几乎肯定有一个Sec系统;它是与曾经在内共生体基因组中编码的许多蛋白质一起丢失了,还是仍然存在这样一个有待发现的系统?这个问题的答案也可能有助于阐明关于膜间隙蛋白细胞色素c1和细胞色素b2分选的争议,因为保守分选假说预测基质中间体将通过祖先(可能是Sec型)途径重新输出。虽然内质网和细菌系统显然共享同源蛋白,但线粒体和叶绿体的蛋白质导入机制似乎是类似而非同源的。在这两种情况下,导入都通过接触位点发生,并且每个膜中都有单独的转运复合物,然而,除了一些伴侣分子外,各个蛋白质成分似乎没有关系。它们的相似性可能是趋同进化而非分歧进化的结果,可能反映了转运的一些共同要求,即展开、受体、孔复合物和重新折叠。也存在重要差异。跨线粒体内膜的转运绝对依赖于Δψ,但尚未确定对GTP的需求。在叶绿体中情况则相反。Δψ和GTP各自的作用仍然不确定,但很诱人的推测是它们可能在调节导入过程中发挥作用,也许是通过控制功能性转运复合物的组装。就过氧化物酶体而言,仍有许多有待了解的地方。许多参与过氧化物酶体生物发生的基因已被鉴定,但在大多数情况下,其生化功能仍有待阐明。在这方面,对过氧化物酶体生物发生的理解与10年前内质网的情况处于相似阶段。与其他细胞器一样,遗传和生化方法的结合应该能提供许多答案。