Skip to main content
. 2023 Nov 21;24(12):e56920. doi: 10.15252/embr.202356920

Figure EV2. UFC1 interaction with UFL1 N‐terminal helix.

Figure EV2

  • A, B
    Model confidence of the AlphaFold2 complex prediction of A UFL1‐DDRGK1‐UFC1 and B UFL1 N‐terminal helix‐UFC1. Left: Predicted local distance difference test (pLDDT); Right: predicted Align Error (pAE) plots of model ranked 1, and models ranked 2–5.
  • C
    Coomassie stain gel shows that UFC1 binds to DDRGK1‐UFL1 but not DDRGK1‐UFL1ΔN, demonstrating that this interaction depends on the presence of the N‐terminal helix of UFL1.
  • D
    Loading control of in vitro ufmylation assay with mutants of DDRGK1‐UFL1 and UFC1 (accompanies Fig 2I).