Assaying ATE1 Activity in Yeast by β-Gal Degradation

  • Anna S. KashinaEmail author
Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB, volume 1337)


In 1980s it was found that addition of N-terminal Arg to proteins induces their ubiquitination and degradation by the N-end rule pathway. While this mechanism applies only to the proteins which also have other features of the N-degron (including a closely adjacent Lys that is accessible for ubiquitination), several test substrates have been found to follow this mechanism very efficiently after ATE1-dependent arginylation. Such property enabled researchers to test ATE1 activity in cells indirectly by assaying for the degradation of such arginylation-dependent substrates. The most commonly used substrate for this assay is E. coli beta galactosidase (beta-Gal) because its activity can be easily measured using standardized colorimetric assays. Here we describe this method, which has served as a quick and easy way to characterize ATE1 activity during identification of arginyltransferases in different species.

Key words

Arginyltransferase Yeast complementation Beta galactosidase N-end rule Ubiquitin Proteasome 


  1. 1.
    Bachmair A, Finley D, Varshavsky A (1986) In vivo half-life of a protein is a function of its amino-terminal residue. Science 234(4773):179–186CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kwon YT, Kashina AS, Varshavsky A (1999) Alternative splicing results in differential expression, activity, and localization of the two forms of arginyl-tRNA-protein transferase, a component of the N-end rule pathway. Mol Cell Biol 19(1):182–193PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hu RG, Brower CS, Wang H, Davydov IV, Sheng J, Zhou J, Kwon YT, Varshavsky A (2006) Arginyltransferase, its specificity, putative substrates, bidirectional promoter, and splicing-derived isoforms. J Biol Chem 281(43):32559–32573CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Varshavsky A (1997) The N-end rule pathway of protein degradation. Genes Cells 2(1):13–28CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Byrd C, Turner GC, Varshavsky A (1998) The N-end rule pathway controls the import of peptides through degradation of a transcriptional repressor. EMBO J 17(1):269–277PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kwon YT, Levy F, Varshavsky A (1999) Bivalent inhibitor of the N-end rule pathway. J Biol Chem 274(25):18135–18139CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Levy F, Johnston JA, Varshavsky A (1999) Analysis of a conditional degradation signal in yeast and mammalian cells. Eur J Biochem 259(1-2):244–252CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Davydov IV, Varshavsky A (2000) RGS4 is arginylated and degraded by the N-end rule pathway in vitro. J Biol Chem 275(30):22931–22941CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Varshavsky A (2000) Recent studies of the ubiquitin system and the N-end rule pathway. Harvey Lect 96:93–116PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wang H, Piatkov KI, Brower CS, Varshavsky A (2009) Glutamine-specific N-terminal amidase, a component of the N-end rule pathway. Mol Cell 34(6):686–695PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Varshavsky A (2005) Ubiquitin fusion technique and related methods. Methods Enzymol 399:777–799CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Animal Biology School of Veterinary MedicineUniversity of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphiaUSA

Personalised recommendations