Disabled-2 (Dab2) is an adaptor protein that regulates the extent of platelet aggregation by two mechanisms. In the first mechanism, Dab2 intracellularly downregulates the integrin αIIbβ3receptor, converting it to a low affinity state for adhesion and aggregation processes. In the second mechanism, Dab2 is released extracellularly and interacts with the pro-aggregatory mediators, the integrin αIIbβ3receptor and sulfatides, blocking their association to fibrinogen and P-selectin, respectively. Our previous research indicated that a 35-amino acid region within Dab2, which we refer to as the sulfatide-binding peptide (SBP), contains two potential sulfatide-binding motifs represented by two consecutive polybasic regions. Using molecular docking, nuclear magnetic resonance, lipid-binding assays, and surface plasmon resonance, this work identifies the critical Dab2 residues within SBP that are responsible for sulfatide binding. Molecular docking suggested that a hydrophilic region, primarily mediated by R42, is responsible for interaction with the sulfatide headgroup, whereas the C-terminal polybasic region contributes to interactions with acyl chains. Furthermore, we demonstrated that, in Dab2 SBP, R42 significantly contributes to the inhibition of platelet P-selectin surface expression. The Dab2 SBP residues that interact with sulfatides resemble those described for sphingolipid-binding in other proteins, suggesting that sulfatide-binding proteins share common binding mechanisms.
Disabled-2: A modular scaffold protein with multifaceted functions in signaling: Functions of Disabled-2
More Like this
-
more » « less
Abstract -
null (Ed.)Abstract Philosophers often enroll disabled bodies and minds as objects of thought in their arguments from marginal cases and in thought experiments: for example, arguments for animal ethics use cognitively disabled people as a contrast case, and Merleau-Ponty uses a blind man with a cane as an exemplar of the relationship of technology to the human, of how technology mediates. However, these philosophers enroll disabled people without engaging significantly in any way with disabled people themselves. Instead, disabled people are treated in philosophy as literal objects—and in many cases, as less than human. (This sense of a categorical difference between disabled and nondisabled people is becoming especially clear during the Covid-19 pandemic, as I write this article.) Philosophical reflection thus makes assumptions—often wrong—about disabled people’s lives, experiences, and relationships to technology. Outside of philosophy as well as in, disabled people are not regarded as experts about our own experiences and lives; our testimony is paternalistically written over. We need better consideration of disabled people as people as we consider the future. Lack of disabled people’s points of view in philosophy colors—and sometimes invalidates—views of technological change.more » « less
-
Grilli, Jacopo (Ed.)A major strategy to prevent the spread of COVID-19 is the limiting of in-person contacts. However, limiting contacts is impractical or impossible for the many disabled people who do not live in care facilities but still require caregivers to assist them with activities of daily living. We seek to determine which interventions can best prevent infections of disabled people and their caregivers. To accomplish this, we simulate COVID-19 transmission with a compartmental model that includes susceptible, exposed, asymptomatic, symptomatically ill, hospitalized, and removed/recovered individuals. The networks on which we simulate disease spread incorporate heterogeneity in the risk levels of different types of interactions, time-dependent lockdown and reopening measures, and interaction distributions for four different groups (caregivers, disabled people, essential workers, and the general population). Of these groups, we find that the probability of becoming infected is largest for caregivers and second largest for disabled people. Consistent with this finding, our analysis of network structure illustrates that caregivers have the largest modal eigenvector centrality of the four groups. We find that two interventions—contact-limiting by all groups and mask-wearing by disabled people and caregivers—most reduce the number of infections in disabled and caregiver populations. We also test which group of people spreads COVID-19 most readily by seeding infections in a subset of each group and comparing the total number of infections as the disease spreads. We find that caregivers are the most potent spreaders of COVID-19, particularly to other caregivers and to disabled people. We test where to use limited infection-blocking vaccine doses most effectively and find that (1) vaccinating caregivers better protects disabled people from infection than vaccinating the general population or essential workers and that (2) vaccinating caregivers protects disabled people from infection about as effectively as vaccinating disabled people themselves. Our results highlight the potential effectiveness of mask-wearing, contact-limiting throughout society, and strategic vaccination for limiting the exposure of disabled people and their caregivers to COVID-19.more » « less
