Structure
Smads proteins contain two conserved domains. The Mad Homology domain 1 (MH1 domain) is at the N-terminal and the Mad Homology domain 2 (MH2 domain) is at the C-terminal. Between them there is a linker region which is full of regulatory sites. The MH1 domain has DNA binding activity while the MH2 domain has transcriptional activity. The linker region contains important regulatory peptide motifs including potential phosphorylation sites for mitogen-activated protein kinases(MAPKs), Erk-family MAP kinases, the Ca2+ /calmodulin-dependent protein kinase II (CamKII) and protein kinase C (PKC). Smad7 do not have the MH1 domain. A proline-tyrosine (PY) motif presents at its linker region enables its interaction with the WW domains of the E3 ubiquitin ligase, the Smad ubiquitination-related factors (Smurf2). It resides predominantly in the nucleus at basal state and translocates to the cytoplasm by TGF-β stimulation.
Read more about this topic: Mothers Against Decapentaplegic Homolog 7
Famous quotes containing the word structure:
“Why does philosophy use concepts and why does faith use symbols if both try to express the same ultimate? The answer, of course, is that the relation to the ultimate is not the same in each case. The philosophical relation is in principle a detached description of the basic structure in which the ultimate manifests itself. The relation of faith is in principle an involved expression of concern about the meaning of the ultimate for the faithful.”
—Paul Tillich (1886–1965)
“Agnosticism is a perfectly respectable and tenable philosophical position; it is not dogmatic and makes no pronouncements about the ultimate truths of the universe. It remains open to evidence and persuasion; lacking faith, it nevertheless does not deride faith. Atheism, on the other hand, is as unyielding and dogmatic about religious belief as true believers are about heathens. It tries to use reason to demolish a structure that is not built upon reason.”
—Sydney J. Harris (1917–1986)
“There is no such thing as a language, not if a language is anything like what many philosophers and linguists have supposed. There is therefore no such thing to be learned, mastered, or born with. We must give up the idea of a clearly defined shared structure which language-users acquire and then apply to cases.”
—Donald Davidson (b. 1917)