A prerequisite for understanding protein kinase regulation in the context of complex signaling networks is knowledge of the structure of the kinase domain and the catalytic mechanism of phosphoryl transfer. In this section, we provide a structural and mechanistic framework for understanding kinase function. The kinase domain is typified by a bi-lobal fold comprising two sub-domains, the so-called N- and C-lobes (Figure 1A; Knighton et al., 1991). ATP (black), together with two magnesium ions, binds in the cleft between the N- and C-lobes, positioning its γ-phosphate for transfer onto the serine, threonine, or tyrosine side chain of a protein substrate (red). The glycine-rich loop (green) helps to organize the γ-phosphate for phosphoryl-transfer. Substrate binding and recognition are governed by the αD helix (purple) and activation loop (teal). Finally, the αG helix (pink) mediates a wide array of protein-protein interactions that control kinase domain dimerization (Haling et al., 2014; Levina et al., 2022; Park et al., 2019; Patel et al., 2011), trans-autoinhibition (Patel et al., 2011; Reinhardt et al., 2023), trans-autophosphorylation (Levina et al., 2022; Pirruccello et al., 2006), binding of regulatory subunits (Kim et al., 2007; Lei et al., 2000), substrate recognition (Dar et al., 2005; Komander et al., 2008), and the recruitment of protein phosphatases (Song et al., 2001).

Figure 1

Download asset Open asset

The active conformation of the kinase domain (Figure 1B) is characterized by the assembly of hydrophobic ‘spines’ that have been defined as the catalytic C-spine (yellow) and the regulatory R-spine (red) (Kornev et al., 2008; Kornev et al., 2006), and a conserved salt bridge between a lysine in strand β3 and a glutamate in the αC helix (Figure 1C; Huse and Kuriyan, 2002). The catalytic spine is completed by the adenine moiety of ATP and links nucleotide binding to the orientation of the αC helix (orange) and, thereby, to the correct positioning of the γ-phosphate for phosphoryl-transfer (Endicott et al., 2012). In addition, it ensures the stable formation of the αD helix (purple), required for substrate recognition.

Some kinases, such as Akt/PKB, are regulated by a disorder-to-order transition of their activation loop upon its phosphorylation (Huse and Kuriyan, 2002; Yang et al., 2002b). The phosphorylated activation loop is stabilized by a network of hydrogen bonds such that it docks against the surface of the C-lobe (Figure 1D), thereby creating a surface to which the substrate binds. Mutation of residues that coordinate the phosphate group results in loss of kinase activation and has been implicated in human disease (George et al., 2004). Examples of kinases which are not regulated by phosphorylation of their activation loop include the dystrophia myotonica protein kinases (DMPKs), which exhibit the active conformation constitutively in the absence of phosphorylation (Elkins et al., 2009; Heikkila et al., 2011; Komander et al., 2008; Truebestein et al., 2015; Yamaguchi et al., 2006).

Substrate recognition is achieved by the recognition of a short linear motif containing the phospho-acceptor serine, threonine, or tyrosine residue. In the AGC kinase family, here exemplified by Akt, recognition involves a pair of salt bridges between the kinase domain and the substrate (Figure 1E). A conserved glutamate or aspartate residue at the beginning of helix αD (purple) coordinates the guanidinium group of an arginine side chain at position P-3 in the substrate (red), while a glutamate in the catalytic loop (blue) similarly hydrogen bonds to an arginine in the P-5 position (Yang et al., 2002a). A recent systematic screening of the substrate specificities of all human serine/threonine kinases provides a useful resource for kinase biologists (Johnson et al., 2023). Additional elements outside of the consensus recognition motif that drives the specific interaction of kinase-substrate pairs are particularly well characterized for the mitogen-activated protein kinases (MAPKs) (Miller and Turk, 2018; Sheridan et al., 2008).

Phosphoryl-transfer is intrinsically a dissociative elimination-addition reaction in which nucleophilic attack by the hydroxyl group of the substrate on the phosphorous atom of the terminal γ-phosphate of ATP generates a transition state (Endicott et al., 2012; Lassila et al., 2011). Kinases achieve their remarkable catalytic rate enhancements (up to 3 × 10⁵ fold) in three main ways: positioning of the substrate (described above, Figure 1E), increasing the nucleophilicity of the substrate, and overcoming electrostatic repulsion (Lassila et al., 2011). Crystallographic evidence for a transition state has been obtained in the case of PKA co-crystallized with ADP and aluminum fluoride (Madhusudan et al., 2002). Most recently, the structure of a PKA-product complex obtained by neutron diffraction has revealed the protonation of one of the phosphoryl oxygens on the product peptide and its consequent rotation away from the catalytic site towards the bulk solvent (Gerlits et al., 2019). This finding is consistent with an earlier study suggesting that protonation of the product may trigger its release (Gerlits et al., 2015).

From a mechanistic understanding of the kinase reaction, there are a number of ways to inactivate a protein kinase. The first, and most commonly employed, involves mutation of the lysine in strand β3 that coordinates ATP (Figure 1F). Lysine is more often than not replaced with alanine, though some studies have employed arginine (for the preservation of positive charge) or methionine (close to isosteric with lysine). Some studies have shown, however, that lysine substitutions may display residual activity, significant activation loop autophosphorylation, and altered specificity (Eyers et al., 2005; Haydon et al., 2003). Less commonly employed is the mutation of the aspartate of the DFG (Asp-Phe-Gly) motif in the activation loop to alanine (Figure 1F). Both mutations result in the loss of ATP binding, which invariably leads to loss of kinase activity. These mutations, however, sometimes have unintended consequences that arise from the loss of protein stability (Iyer et al., 2005), for which the experimentalist should be aware. This can lead to protein degradation, exposure of regulatory domains, or changes in subcellular localization (Liljedahl et al., 2001; Lučić et al., 2016; Verbeek et al., 2008). The best way to inactivate a protein kinase is to mutate the catalytic aspartate to asparagine (Figure 1F), since it is isosteric with aspartate and permits native side chain interactions while still inactivating the kinase.

Conversely, many studies make use of phosphomimetic substitutions to constitutively activate a protein kinase. However, it is important to distinguish between the chemical properties of the carboxylic acid side chain of aspartate and glutamate, (which carries a single negative charge at physiological pH), and the native phospho-amino acid (in which the phosphate carries two full negative charges). Additionally, their hydrogen bonding capacities are considerably different and, whilst the aspartate side chain is approximately the same length as phosphoserine, glutamate is one carbon longer and may not be capable of making the same interactions. This is particularly relevant in the case of tyrosine kinases, where it is not possible to faithfully mimic phosphotyrosine, although many studies have employed glutamate substitutions. In the same vein, alanine or phenylalanine substitutions used to prevent kinase activation may have unintended effects that are unrelated to the loss of phosphorylation, due to a deficit in hydrogen bonding intrinsic to the substituted amino acid. When designing site-specific mutations to derive mechanistic insight, consideration of protein structure and function is indispensable, irrespective of the target enzyme.

As intracellular transducers of cellular information, kinases need to be exquisitely responsive to upstream inputs that tune their activity accordingly. This regulatory potential is strongly related to the conformational flexibility previously described that enables kinases to interconvert between an inactive state and an active state, upon which substrate can be phosphorylated with high efficiency. A multitude of signaling inputs can trigger reversible switching between these states. This process of conformational switching requires activating and inhibitory forces, which may come from within the protein kinase itself (cis) or from a second protein (trans). In the trans situation, this may be another protomer of the same molecule (trans-auto) or a different protein altogether. Within this framework, the following regulatory mechanisms and features can be combined to describe the regulation of all protein kinases.

Keeping kinases inactive in the absence of an activating stimulus is critical for high-fidelity, low-noise signal transduction. Nature has evolved a plethora of mechanisms by which to maintain protein kinases in their inactive conformations when their activity is not required. Relief of these inhibitory interactions is coupled to the acquisition of kinase activity at the right time and place in the cell. At the simplest level, a kinase may be autoinhibited by its own activation loop adopting an inactive conformation. This mechanism has been proposed to regulate a number of receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs), including the insulin receptor kinase (IRK), in which the inactive conformation of the activation loop is incompatible with ATP binding (Hubbard et al., 1994; Figure 2A). We will revisit this structure later in the context of activation loop autophosphorylation. The Src family of tyrosine kinases also adopts an autoinhibited conformation in which the activation loop both plugs the catalytic cleft and sequesters the tyrosine which undergoes autophosphorylation (Figure 2B). This conformation, which is promoted by intramolecular assembly of the kinase domain with regulatory Src homology 2 (SH2) and Src homology 3 (SH3) domains (Sicheri et al., 1997; Xu et al., 1997) and stabilized by ADP (von Raußendorf et al., 2017), also maintains the αC helix in an inactive conformation in which the conserved lysine-glutamate salt bridge is broken. A homologous inactive conformation is also adopted by the Tec kinases (von Raußendorf et al., 2017; Wang et al., 2015). Individual members of the Src kinases have evolved additional regulatory mechanisms, including phosphorylation of the C-terminal tail in the case of Src and Hck (Sicheri et al., 1997; Xu et al., 1997) (red mesh, Figure 2B), and binding of the N-terminal myristoyl group to a hydrophobic pocket on the C-lobe of the kinase domain in the case of Abl (Hantschel et al., 2003; Nagar et al., 2003). This latter mechanism has recently been exploited with an allosteric inhibitor of Abl (Schoepfer et al., 2018) to treat chronic myelogenous leukemia caused by the breakpoint cluster region (BCR)-Abl fusion protein (Hughes et al., 2019; Wylie et al., 2017).

Figure 2

Download asset Open asset

Other kinases maintain their inactive conformation by steric occlusion of the substrate binding cleft, a mechanism that is employed in both cis and trans. The Ca²⁺/calmodulin activated kinases (CAMK), for example, are maintained in an inactive conformation by a C-terminal cis-autoinhibitory helix that occupies the catalytic cleft (Figure 2C), thereby blocking substrate access (Goldberg et al., 1996; Rellos et al., 2010; Rosenberg et al., 2005). The nematode Twitchin kinase (Titin kinase in humans), also a CAMK, is similarly autoinhibited by a C-terminal helix (Hu et al., 1994; Mayans et al., 1998). In an analogous fashion, PKA is inhibited in trans by interactions with its regulatory chain (Figure 2D), which presents a pseudosubstrate peptide to the catalytic cleft (Kim et al., 2007). Recently, a homologous pseudosubstrate motif in the cytoplasmic tail of the G protein-coupled receptor Smoothened has been shown to regulate PKA activity in the Hedgehog signaling pathway (Happ et al., 2022). In the CAMKs, binding of Ca²⁺/CaM to the autoinhibitory helix is required to displace it from the catalytic cleft (Goldberg et al., 1996), while binding of cAMP to the PKA regulatory subunit elicits conformational changes that displace it from the catalytic subunit (Kim et al., 2007).

The diversity of inhibitory mechanisms is further exemplified by members of the death-associated protein kinases (DAPKs), which form face-to-face dimers (Figure 2E) that occlude the catalytic clefts of each protomer (Patel et al., 2011; Simon et al., 2016). Binding of Ca²⁺/CaM to the DAPKs is required for kinase activation (Simon et al., 2016). Recently, an analogous, trans-autoinhibited dimer has been reported for the related protein kinase D (PKD) (Reinhardt et al., 2023). Finally, the binding of accessory proteins can regulate kinase activity without occluding the active site (Figure 2F). B-Raf is maintained in an autoinhibited conformation by a dimer of 14-3-3 proteins that binds to two phosphorylated residues in its C-terminus. This creates a cradle that buries the regulatory cysteine-rich domain (CRD) between the 14-3-3 proteins and the B-Raf kinase domain (Park et al., 2019). This protective cradle prevents the back-to-back dimerization of B-Raf that is required to organize its catalytic machinery and drive the phosphorylation of MEK (Park et al., 2019; Rajakulendran et al., 2009; Wan et al., 2004). In summary, a wide array of mechanisms, often employed in combination, serves to acutely regulate the activity of the catalytic domain of protein kinases.

The autoinhibition of protein kinases by their regulatory domains or other protein factors is mirrored by mechanisms that promote their activation. Like inhibition, activation can be accomplished both in cis and trans.

The AGC kinases are characterized by an approximately 50 amino acid C-terminal extension to their kinase domain that contains a number of cis-regulatory elements (Kannan et al., 2007). The tail inserts a series of short linear motifs into regulatory pockets on the kinase domain to stabilize the active conformation (Figure 3A). One such motif is a hydrophobic motif, which, when inserted into a hydrophobic pocket on the N-lobe of the kinase domain, promotes the acquisition of the active conformation of the αC helix and concomitant ordering of the activation loop on the surface of the kinase domain (Pearce et al., 2010; Yang et al., 2002b). Structural and biochemical studies have revealed that the conformation of the tail can be regulated by phosphorylation (Hauge et al., 2007), phosphomimetic amino acids (Takimura et al., 2010; Yang et al., 2002b), additional regulatory domains that co-assemble with the kinase domain (Elkins et al., 2009; Heikkila et al., 2011; Komander et al., 2008; Lodowski et al., 2003; Yamaguchi et al., 2006), or separate protein co-factors that stabilize the interaction of the tail with the kinase domain (Devroe et al., 2004; Parker et al., 2020; Pearce et al., 2010). Recently, a hydrophobic motif was identified in phosphoinositide-dependent kinase 1 (PDK1), the only AGC kinase thought not to contain this regulatory element (Levina et al., 2022). Here, however, the tail has been implicated in the allosteric trans-autoactivation of a second protomer of PDK1 in the context of a phosphatidylinositol-3,4,5-trisphosphate (PIP₃)-bound dimer.

Figure 3

Download asset Open asset

A similar mode of regulation controls the activity of the Aurora kinases, AurA and AurB, also in trans. In AurA, targeting protein for Xklp2 (TPX2) inserts a hydrophobic motif into the same pocket on the kinase domain that the AGC kinases use (Figure 3B; Bayliss et al., 2003). The allosteric activation of AurA by TPX2 leads to its subsequent activation by activation loop autophosphorylation (Eyers et al., 2003). In AurB, the IN-box segment of the inner centromere protein (INCENP) fulfills a similar function (Sessa et al., 2005). Conceptually, the activation of the Aurora kinases in trans by TPX2 and INCENP is the same as the classical allosteric activation of cyclin-dependent kinases by their cognate cyclins (Wood and Endicott, 2018).

Many protein kinases are activated by the phosphorylation of a conserved amino acid in their activation loop. How they acquire this modification, however, varies and is still, in many cases, controversial. Conventionally, activation loop auto-phosphorylation occurs in trans. Such a reaction depends on the transient association of two kinase domains in a dimer and the presentation of the activation loops, as substrates, to the catalytic site of each opposing protomer. Structural evidence for such a mechanism has been obtained for a number of kinases and will be discussed in more detail later. For now, this reaction is illustrated by the kinase PDK1, which forms a transient, face-to-face dimer (Figure 3C) upon binding to membranes containing the lipid second messenger PIP₃ (Levina et al., 2022).

Whether kinases can perform activation loop phosphorylation in cis has long been debated and remains controversial. Contradicting evidence for both cis and trans-phosphorylation mechanisms has, for example, been reported for AurA (Dodson et al., 2013; Zorba et al., 2014), the checkpoint kinase, Chk2 (Cai et al., 2009; Dodson et al., 2013; Oliver et al., 2006), IRAK4 (Cheng et al., 2007; Ferrao et al., 2014), the insulin receptor (IR) kinase (Frattali et al., 1992; Shoelson et al., 1991; Wu et al., 2008; Yamada et al., 1992), and PKR (Dey et al., 2014; Dey et al., 2005; Mayo et al., 2019), among others. We will revisit some of these cases in more detail later. Models of cis-autophosphorylation have been proposed for GSK3ß (Cole et al., 2004), DYRKs (Lochhead et al., 2005), and more recently, PKD (Cobbaut et al., 2018; Reinhardt et al., 2023).

PKD is autoinhibited in trans and activated by cis-autophosphorylation (Figure 3D; Reinhardt et al., 2023). It has previously been argued that kinases lacking an HRD motif in their catalytic loop (so-called non-HRD kinases) are not activated by activation loop phosphorylation (Johnson et al., 1996; Nolen et al., 2004). Nevertheless, the biochemical characterization of PKD, a non-HRD kinase instead containing an HCD motif, shows its activation by phosphorylation. Molecular modeling and mutagenesis in PKD further demonstrated that the missing arginine in the HCD motif is replaced by a different arginine residue in the activation loop, whereby the side chain reaches into exactly the same position as the canonical arginine in HRD kinases (Reinhardt et al., 2023). Although the mechanism of autophosphorylation remains to be determined for PKD, mass spectrometry unambiguously demonstrates that the reaction occurs exclusively in cis (Reinhardt et al., 2023).

Finally, kinase domain dimerization may also lead to allosteric autoactivation. Protein kinase R (PKR), inositol requiring enzyme 1 (IRE1), PKR-like ER kinase (PERK), and NimA-related protein kinase 7 (NEK7), require back-to-back dimerization to induce their activation by autophosphorylation (Cui et al., 2011; Dar et al., 2005; Dey et al., 2005; Lee et al., 2008; Richards et al., 2009). Whether these kinases can accomplish the autophosphorylation of their activation loops in cis or require higher-order oligomerization is, however, still the subject of debate (Belyy et al., 2022; Korennykh et al., 2009; Mayo et al., 2019). As discussed earlier in the context of autoinhibition, B-Raf activation depends on the formation of a back-to-back dimer (Figure 3E; Park et al., 2019; Rajakulendran et al., 2009; Wan et al., 2004). The Raf dimer is critical for the activity of B-Raf against its substrate kinase MEK, which forms a heterodimer with the kinase domain of B-Raf that is homologous to the PDK1 homodimer (Levina et al., 2022). Although the precise mechanisms of PDK1 trans-autophosphorylation (Figure 3C) and trans-phosphorylation of MEK by Raf (Figure 3F) are still not clear, mutagenesis of the αG helix-mediated dimerization interface impairs both PDK1 and MEK activation (Haling et al., 2014; Levina et al., 2022). Finally, kinases of the Inhibitor of kappa B kinase (IKK) family, including IKKε and TANK-binding kinase 1 (TBK1) form constitutive dimers in which the kinase domains are arranged in a back-to-back configuration by a helical stalk domain and a ubiquitin-like domain (Larabi et al., 2013; Tu et al., 2013; Xu et al., 2011). Activation loop autophosphorylation has been proposed to be achieved in an analogous manner to the unfolded protein response (UPR) kinases IRE1 and PERK by higher-order oligomerization (Zhang et al., 2019; Zhao et al., 2019).

In order to obtain a detailed mechanistic understanding of the autophosphorylation reaction, it is important to perform rigorously controlled biochemical experiments and to interpret the results according to the limitations of the chosen method. Here, we provide an overview of the strengths and weaknesses of the most commonly used readouts of protein phosphorylation (Figure 4A).

Figure 4

Download asset Open asset

Cis- and trans-autophosphorylation are commonly discriminated between on the basis of their respective kinetics. In this section, we evaluate the power of enzyme kinetics to discriminate between these reactions, taking into account the limitations of the reductionist experimental setups commonly employed. For simplicity, the scenarios presented do not consider the influence of regulatory elements outside of the kinase domain and assume that ATP and magnesium are present in excess, such that their concentrations can be considered constant during the reaction.

The simplest case is a unimolecular reaction, in which the activation loop is autophosphorylated in cis. If an enzyme converts itself into a product the enzyme is also the substrate and the reaction can happen only once per molecule. It is, therefore, independent of concentration, diffusion, or substrate depletion, and proceeds with a constant catalytic rate until all enzyme has been converted into a product. This results in a linear increase of product over time until the reaction stops and the product remains constant (Figure 5A). For this reaction to be useful in the cell, it must be strictly coupled to an inhibitory mechanism that prevents unregulated signaling.

Figure 5

Download asset Open asset

The second case is autophosphorylation in trans, which is necessarily a bimolecular reaction in which the enzyme converts the substrate into a product. This reaction is dependent on (a) the association of the enzyme and the substrate, which is dictated by their interaction affinities and their respective concentrations, (b) on the intrinsic catalytic rate of the enzyme, and (c) on the dissociation of the product. In a closed system such as an in vitro kinase assay, the reaction conditions change over time as the substrate is turned into a product. Regardless, trans-autophosphorylation reactions can occur in mechanistically distinct ways that influence the kinetics of the reaction.

A cis-autophosphorylation reaction that is dependent on allosteric activation by back-to-back dimerization is a bi-molecular reaction, therefore, concentration-dependent, even if the enzyme and the substrate are the same molecules. We designate the reaction symmetric if the collision of two unphosphorylated molecules results in the phosphorylation of both. If the effect of the allosteric activator is independent of its phosphorylation, the concentration of the activator remains constant, while the substrate is depleted over time. In this case, the reaction is limited by both the intrinsic catalytic rate constant and the substrate concentration. The reaction rate, therefore, decays over time (Figure 5B).

The autophosphorylation of an activation loop in trans requires the formation of a face-to-face dimer in which the phosphorylation site sits within the dimerization interface. Upon phosphorylation, the activation loop is stabilized in the active conformation and is no longer able to engage in such an interaction. This implies that only homo-dimeric collisions are productive and that the reaction rate decays with substrate depletion over time (Figure 5C).

In an asymmetric trans-autophosphorylation reaction, one kinase acts as an enzyme and one as a substrate. In the absence of phosphorylation to begin with, a productive interaction is only possible if one molecule adopts the active conformation while the second presents its activation loop as a substrate. This would presumably occur by stochastic conformational sampling, the efficiency of which limits the reaction by reducing the frequency of productive collisions. Once phosphorylated, the kinase will be stabilized in the active conformation with a consequent gain in catalytic efficiency, which increases the reaction rate until the substrate becomes limiting. This behavior results in sigmoidal kinetics (Figure 5D).

In the context of physiological signal transduction, transient kinase domain dimerization must be associated with a means of locally concentrating reaction partners to overcome the dependence on diffusion which would otherwise be incompatible with rapid signal transduction. Many autoregulated kinases, therefore, encode dedicated dimerization domains. A conceptually interesting scenario is the constitutive dimerization of a kinase domain via a dimerization domain. The dimer can then be regarded as a single molecule, since the two kinases are at near-infinite local concentration, such that their autophosphorylation becomes independent of both concentration and diffusion. Bi-molecular cis- and trans-autophosphorylation are thereby reduced to uni-molecular reactions with linear kinetics that are only limited by the intrinsic catalytic rate (Figure 5E–F).

In summary, kinetic data alone cannot necessarily discriminate between cis- and trans-autophosphorylation. Furthermore, we must take care that our readout is site-specific and keep in mind that what is possible to observe with an isolated kinase domain in solution does not necessarily reflect reality in the cell. In the next section, we will consider what can be learned from the high-resolution structures of kinase dimers determined in the context of a 3-dimensional crystal lattice.

Dimerization of protein kinases, whether for the purposes of autoinhibition or autoactivation, must necessarily be transient and, therefore, the free energy of binding must be low. If the dimer interface is too strong, the kinase will be constitutively trapped in an inhibited or active state, respectively. Therefore, the study of kinase domain dimerization and autophosphorylation is inherently challenging. Structural insights into the nature of dimerization and autophosphorylation have, historically, relied on X-ray crystallography. New advances in cryo-electron microscopy are continually lowering the mass limit of particles accessible for high-resolution structure determination, but individual kinase domains are still at the limits of current technology (Herzik et al., 2019). In silico protein structure prediction tools such as AlphaFold (Jumper et al., 2021; Senior et al., 2020) and Rosetta (Leman et al., 2020) are revolutionizing the field, and are gradually becoming accessible to researchers who are not experienced computational biologists. Crystallography, however, has been extremely successful in deciphering protein structure and has captured many kinases in various dimeric configurations.

Determining a protein structure by crystallography requires the growth of 3-dimensional crystals in which molecules are packed together in a regular, repeating arrangement such that they diffract X-rays in-phase, leading to measurable reflections. When combined with the missing phase information, the intensities of these reflections provide a near-atomic picture of the underlying protein structure. A crystal lattice can be broken down into two parts: (i) the asymmetric unit, which is the minimum non-symmetric unit of the lattice that, with the application of appropriate symmetry operations, can be copied to make (ii) the unit cell, a rhomboid-shaped unit that can be stacked in a repeating array in 3-dimensions. The formation of a crystal lattice requires contacts between (a) the molecules that make up the unit cell and (b) neighboring unit cells. These contacts do not form accidentally, but rely on an empirical combination of solvent molecules that promote the regular packing of molecules together. Since a crystal lattice is entropically unfavorable, the loss of entropy is offset by a combination of enthalpic free energy gain and the gain in entropy caused by the de-solvation of protein surfaces involved in lattice contacts (Rupp, 2009). As such, the underlying structure represents a snapshot of an energetically favorable state under the conditions of crystallization, which has a large potential to misrepresent protein-protein contacts (Krissinel, 2010). This necessitates that interfaces observed in crystal lattices are carefully validated biochemically.

The trans-autophosphorylation reaction requires the exchange of activation loop segments between opposing protomers in a dimer. By definition, the requirement for phosphorylation dictates that these segments are flexible in their unphosphorylated state and, by extension, that the surface to which they dock in their phosphorylated conformation is not occupied. As such, the activation loop is an exchangeable element that can be used to promote interactions with conserved surfaces on neighboring molecules compatible with crystal lattice growth. There are essentially two flavors of such interactions: one is the docking of the activation loop in trans (instead of in cis) with the kinase domain of another protomer, and the second is the binding of the activation loop to the substrate binding surface of a neighbor (trans). In the absence of conformational restraints imposed by regulatory domains that are often missing, the physiological relevance of these interactions can be hard to deduce from the arrangement of molecules in the crystal lattice. This is further complicated by the fact that activation loop exchange, in which the free energy of binding of the activation loop to its own kinase domain (cis) is close to equivalent to that with a neighboring molecule (trans), can be used to drive lattice formation by creating a dyad axis of symmetry. Such packing interactions are illustrated by the structure of the kinase domain of Chk2 (Oliver et al., 2006; Figure 6A). The asymmetric unit contains a single molecule of Chk2, which is related to a second molecule in a neighboring asymmetric unit by a twofold axis of symmetry (surface representation of dimers). The unit cell contains six molecules of Chk2, arranged in three equivalent dimers (Figure 6A, light teal, pink, light blue). The two protomers of the dimer interact via the exchange of their activation loops (teal, red, purple-blue) that generates equivalent interactions of residues 368–394 in trans as are normally found in cis. The exchanged activation loops are stabilized on either side by the N-lobe of a neighboring Chk2 protomer belonging to a different dimer, thereby propagating the lattice in 3-dimensions. The presence of additional compounds from the crystallization solution that mediate specific interactions complicates matters even further. Electron density for two nitrate ions (red) in contact with the activation loop of each protomer was modeled in this structure, while a second magnesium ion (green) was found in a non-physiological location in the N-lobe (Figure 6B).

Figure 6

Download asset Open asset

Activation loop exchanges similar to those described above have been observed in the crystal structures of many kinases, wherein part of the activation loop makes equivalent interactions in trans as in cis (Lawhorn et al., 2015; Lim et al., 2020; Marcotte et al., 2017; Mayo et al., 2019; Oliver et al., 2007; Oliver et al., 2006; Pike et al., 2008; Taylor et al., 2015; Wu et al., 2019). However, the relative orientation of the kinase domains in these dimers is highly variable and most likely reflects a configuration amenable to lattice formation. Whilst many of these dimers have been interpreted to correspond to intermediates on the path to trans-autophosphorylation, equivalent activation loop exchanges have been observed in kinases that do not undergo autophosphorylation, such as DAPK3 (Oliver et al., 2007), for which no physiologically relevant exchange would be required.

Other crystal structures of Chk2, and its yeast homolog, Rad53, offer alternative snapshots. The structure of a longer construct of Chk2, containing its N-terminal regulatory forkhead-associated (FHA) domain (Cai et al., 2009), depicts a dimer in the asymmetric unit, formed by a domain swap between the FHA domains of each protomer (Figure 6C). The intimate association of the kinase domains, coupled with evidence of dimerization in solution and previous biochemical evidence of dimerization-enhanced autophosphorylation (Oliver et al., 2006), led the authors to conclude, logically, that this dimer represented the trans-autophosphorylation intermediate. Unfortunately, confirmation that this is indeed the case was precluded by absent electron density for the activation loops of each protomer and an ATP-binding mutation introduced into the recombinant protein for crystallization. Consequently, the structure lacks a bound nucleotide and it is not possible to conclude anything definitively about the mechanism of autophosphorylation. The structure of the Rad53 kinase domain is equally problematic: again, a kinase-inactivating mutation was used to facilitate crystallization (Wybenga-Groot et al., 2014). A back-to-back dimer was observed in the asymmetric unit of the crystals, but the authors instead focused on a symmetry-related molecule of Rad53 due to its apparent similarity to the previously reported structure of human Chk2 (Figure 6C; Cai et al., 2009). However, superimposition of one protomer from each dimer shows that, whilst the r.m.s.d. over 156 C_α atoms for Chk2 and Rad53 kinase domains is 0.90 Å, this balloons to 11.50 Å over equivalent C_α atoms for the second chain. Again, definitive conclusions regarding the mechanism of autophosphorylation are precluded by the absence of electron density for the activation loops. Although not yet supported by an experimentally determined structure, recent in silico modeling and biochemistry on the closely related PKD has revealed a face-to-face trans-inhibited dimer (Reinhardt et al., 2023), which begs the question of how Chk2 and PKD could have opposite mechanisms of activation. Further work will undoubtedly be required to address this apparent contradiction.

Finally, AurA is a rich source of conflicting data on its mechanism of autophosphorylation. While kinetic data points towards autophosphorylation in cis (Dodson et al., 2013), AurA activation by intermolecular trans-autophosphorylation has been inferred from several crystal structures that dimerize via exchange of their activation loops (Lim et al., 2020; Zorba et al., 2014). Zorba et al reported a dimeric, active configuration of AurA, with Asp274 poised for phosphoryl transfer (Zorba et al., 2014). However, careful inspection of the structure reveals that Asp274 is in fact the aspartate of the DFG motif, which coordinates a magnesium ion required for ATP binding. In fact, the catalytic aspartate, Asp256, is not poised for phosphoryl transfer, having been pulled out of position by the interaction of Arg255 with a phosphate ion from the crystallization solution in the center of the exchanged activation loops (Figure 6D). The structure lacks magnesium ions in the catalytic site of both protomers and is not compatible with phosphoryl transfer. It most likely represents a crystallization artifact in which the activation loop exchanged conformation is stabilized by the coordination of the phosphate ion at its center. More recently, AurA has been proposed to be a redox-sensitive switch, inhibited by Coenzyme A (CoA) (Tsuchiya et al., 2020) or activated by increased levels of reactive oxygen species (ROS) during mitosis (Lim et al., 2020). The latter study reports seven crystal structures of AurA in various configurations. Fully reduced, phosphorylated, and monomeric AurA is essentially superimposable with a previous structure of AurA in complex with TPX2 (Bayliss et al., 2003). A second structure, covalently modified on two cysteines by the cacodylate buffer in the crystallization solution, exhibits an activation loop exchanged dimer that bears no similarity to the structure reported by Zorba et al. Two further structures, covalently modified on Cys290 with different compounds, exhibit structures essentially superimposable with the Zorba structure, unsurprising given that the lattice packing is identical in all three cases (although residues 298–309 encompassing Cys290 exhibit a different conformation). Finally, an oxidized, Cys290 disulfide-linked dimer exhibits yet another arrangement of the two protomers. Though autophosphorylation is clearly enhanced in this disulfide-linked dimer in vitro, the kinetics are extremely slow (incomplete after 30 min), an observation which is unexpected for a covalently linked dimer, and which suggests that the conformation of the two protomers in this dimer is not conducive to efficient trans-autophosphorylation. Biochemical studies have shown that oxidation inactivates AurA irrespective of activation loop autophosphorylation (Byrne et al., 2020; Tsuchiya et al., 2020).

The inherent ambiguity in interpreting crystal structures of kinase domain dimers necessitates their validation by other methods. A wide spectrum of tools for the detection of dimerization in solution has been employed, including analytical ultracentrifugation (AUC), size exclusion chromatography coupled to multi-angle light scattering (SEC-MALS), small-angle X-ray scattering (SAXS), mass photometry (MP), cross-linking mass spectrometry (XL-MS) and hydrogen-deuterium exchange mass spectrometry (HDX-MS) (Figure 7). However, the transient nature of dimerization and the limited resolution of each of these methods often precludes definitive corroboration of crystallographic dimers in solution. Furthermore, validation of crystallographic dimers by traditional mutagenesis of the interface is inherently flawed, since the region involved also makes physiologically relevant interactions with its own kinase domain in cis, potentially leading to a false positive validation of the interface. In summary, whilst impossible to comprehensively cover them all here, there are many instructive lessons that can be taken from the careful examination and interpretation of a large number of protein kinase structures, and we should be careful not to let our eyes deceive us.

Figure 7

Download asset Open asset

The interpretation of crystal structures has been particularly influential in efforts to understand the mechanism of activation loop autophosphorylation. However, before we begin to unpack some of those structures, let us first consider what has come to be known as the ‘enigma of autophosphorylation’ (Beenstock et al., 2016). Simply put, a kinase that relies on the phosphorylation of its activation loop in order to acquire a catalytically competent conformation must somehow be able to perform this reaction without activation loop phosphorylation (Figure 8A). This apparent paradox implies that the autophosphorylation reaction must be mechanistically distinct from the classical substrate phosphorylation reaction. In this final section, we examine some of the models that have been put forward and discuss the various caveats associated with each.

Figure 8

Download asset Open asset

At the most conceptual level, there are essentially three solutions to activation loop autophosphorylation: cis-autophosphorylation, symmetric trans-autophosphorylation, or asymmetric trans-autophosphorylation (Figure 8B). The kinetics of each of these possibilities have been discussed extensively already, so we will restrict ourselves to more conceptual considerations and the interpretation of some example crystal structures that have been proposed to represent the autophosphorylation reaction.

Circumstantial evidence that the autophosphorylation reaction is mechanistically distinct comes from the consensus autophosphorylation motifs of kinases that often don’t resemble their canonical substrate recognition motif (Figure 8B; Beenstock et al., 2016) and are not phosphorylated when presented as a peptide substrate in trans (Elsner et al., 2019; Oliver et al., 2006). Experimental evidence that this is the case for at least one kinase has recently been provided by a separation of function mutant of PKD, in which canonical substrate recognition by the conserved glutamate/aspartate in the αD helix (Figure 1A and E) was disrupted (Reinhardt et al., 2023). Whilst mutation of this residue to asparagine was sufficient to completely abrogate phosphorylation of the substrate peptide in trans, it had no effect on autophosphorylation in cis (Figure 8B).

For the two out of the three solutions that involve autophosphorylation in trans and, by definition, necessitate transient dimerization, the concentration of the reactants and their diffusive properties in the cell need to be considered. Kinases are not particularly abundant molecules, with an average concentration in the low-mid nanomolar range (Figure 8C; Hein et al., 2015). Eukaryotic cells are large and crowded places with protein concentrations estimated to be in the region of 200–300 mg/ml (Wiśniewski et al., 2014). By pure diffusion, the average protein with a half-life of 15 hr (relatively long-lived) is estimated to undergo less than 0.1 interactions with another copy of itself (Batada et al., 2004), an estimate which does not even take into account the required geometry for catalysis. As such, any bi-molecular reaction, including trans-autophosphorylation, requires the coordinated assembly of two molecules with high temporal and spatial fidelity. Unimolecular reactions, including cis-autophosphorylation, in contrast, do not rely on a solution to this search problem. Nature, clearly, has found elegant solutions to trap molecules in the same place. Many receptor tyrosine kinases, for example, have been observed as pre-formed, inactive dimers. Ligand-induced conformational changes transform these receptors into a state in which they are competent of autophosphorylation (Freed et al., 2015; Maruyama, 2015; Moriki et al., 2001). Other kinases can be locally concentrated on a membrane by their specific binding to a lipid second messenger, thereby facilitating autophosphorylation (Chung et al., 2019; Levina et al., 2022; Wang et al., 2015). Finally, subcellular compartmentalization of reactions can restrict the search problem to a much smaller volume (Küchler et al., 2016). What happens next, however, is still controversial.

Early kinetic data indicated that autophosphorylation of IRK could occur in both cis (Shoelson et al., 1991; Yamada et al., 1992) and trans (Cobbs et al., 1989; Frattali et al., 1992). However, structural and biochemical studies of related kinases, including insulin-like growth factor receptor 1 (IGFR1) and fibroblast growth factor receptor 3 (FGFR3), have since concluded that the reaction occurs in trans (Chen et al., 2020; Wu et al., 2008). Indeed, evidence that this reaction can be performed in trans has been obtained from a number of crystal structures in which the activation loop of both protomers (Wu et al., 2008) (symmetric, Figure 8D) or just one (Chen et al., 2020) (asymmetric, Figure 8E) is trapped in the active site of the opposing protomer. As can be seen, the symmetric and asymmetric arrangements of the protomers in IGFR1 (Figure 8D) and FGFR3 (Figure 8E) are very different (reference molecule denoted ‘ref’). The promiscuity of lattice contacts is further evidenced by the trapping of IGFR1 in an asymmetric dimer that is again different from the FGFR1 asymmetric dimer, yet still positions the activation loop tyrosine for phosphoryl transfer (Nemecek et al., 2010; Xu et al., 2015). Whether these structural differences reflect fundamental mechanistic differences or simply the energetics of crystal lattice packing is difficult to say, but the implications are quite fundamental. While IGFR1 might accomplish trans-autophosphorylation of each protomer simultaneously, FGFR3 would presumably need to go through a two-step reaction mechanism. Such a mechanism has also been proposed for other kinases, including p21-activated kinase (PAK) and Interleukin 1 (IL-1) receptor-associated kinase 4 (IRAK4), based on their crystal structures (Ferrao et al., 2014; Wang et al., 2011). Interestingly, the kinase domain of IRAK1, which apparently does not homodimerize, has been proposed to form heterodimers with phosphorylated, but not unphosphorylated, IRAK4, leading to a model in which IRAK4 phosphorylates IRAK1 (Wang et al., 2017).

Examination of the activation loop trajectories of IGFR1 and FGFR3, shows that they can sample a large conformational space (Figure 8F). Both the phosphorylated, active conformation (teal) and various conformations of the unphosphorylated activation loop have been observed in crystal structures. As we have already discussed, a cis conformation of the activation loop has also been observed in IRK (Hubbard et al., 1994) (magenta, Figure 8F and teal, Figure 2A). This structure was interpreted to reflect the inactive conformation of the IRK kinase domain on the basis that the activation loop sterically blocks ATP binding. However, inspection of the B-factors of this structure, which are a measure of the thermal motion of the protein in the crystal lattice, reveals that the activation loop is, in fact, the most mobile and least ordered part of the kinase domain (Figure 8G). Since the protein also lacks a bound nucleotide, the entire conformation of the activation loop may not be physiologically relevant.

Why is this important? Zooming in on the conformation of the activation loop surrounding the phosphorylated tyrosine in the cis, trans symmetric, trans asymmetric, and trans substrate structures reveals that the activation loop adopts the same conformation in each case, with the tyrosine poised for transfer of phosphate from ATP to its hydroxyl group (Figure 8H). We can, therefore, conclude from these structures that cis, trans symmetric, trans asymmetric, and trans substrate reactions are all stereochemically possible. It is perhaps also not surprising that what are essentially identical interactions can all be observed in the context of a crystal lattice. Does that mean that they can all happen in the cell? The answer to this question is more complicated and depends on the factors that limit each of these reactions, including local concentration and the available conformational space that can be sampled. Many of these mechanisms are surely rooted in strong biochemical evidence, but, once again, we should be careful not to let our eyes deceive us: what we see in a crystal lattice and what we can observe in a test tube do not necessarily reflect reality in the cell.

The regulation of protein kinases by activation loop autophosphorylation is an elegant mechanism by which ligand-induced conformational changes can be coupled to kinase activation. However, despite decades of work on numerous kinases, much is still unknown about this seemingly simple reaction. Fundamental barriers to progress include both the difficulty of studying these reactions quantitatively and mechanistically in the complex environment of the cell and, conversely, the pitfalls of the reductionist, in vitro approaches that characterize interactions and biochemistry that are physically and chemically possible, but that may not occur in the context of the native, cellular environment. Spatial confinement, restrictions on the conformational space that can be sampled by a kinase, and local concentration are all tightly regulated in the cell, but challenging to recapitulate in vitro. New in silico tools in structural biology promise much in terms of modeling transient, but specific interactions, while technological improvements in cryogenic electron microscopy are continually lowering the size of structures that can be determined at high resolution. However, we have a collective responsibility to report more quantitatively and more specifically. The reproducibility crisis is particularly grave in the case of antibodies, many of which are poorly validated or have been shown to recognize different targets. While DNA sequencing is nowadays an obligation, we have yet to make the validation of recombinant proteins by mass spectrometry a routine procedure or require its reporting. This is especially important in the context of reversible post-translational modifications, such as phosphorylation, which regulate the conformation, localization, and activity of proteins. Finally, new tools for the spatial arrangement of molecules in vitro on scaffolds that more faithfully mimic the cellular environment are desperately needed. Advances in protein design (Cao et al., 2022; Sahtoe et al., 2022), DNA nanotechnology (Engelhardt et al., 2019; Praetorius and Dietz, 2017), 3D printing of biopolymers (Daly et al., 2021), and label-free, single molecule surface particle tracking Foley et al., 2021; Heermann et al., 2021 have the potential to facilitate more complex in vitro reconstitutions. In summary, new technologies promise much discovery, but hypothesis-driven research compels us to first cast a critical eye over existing bodies of evidence.

1. 1. Agasid MT
   2. Robinson CV

   (2021) Probing membrane protein-lipid interactions this review comes from a themed issue on Membranes

   Current Opinion in Structural Biology 69:78–85.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbi.2021.03.010

   • Google Scholar
2. 1. Batada NN
   2. Shepp LA
   3. Siegmund DO

   (2004) Stochastic model of protein-protein interaction: why signaling proteins need to be colocalized

   PNAS 101:6445–6449.

   https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0401314101

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
3. 1. Bayliss R
   2. Sardon T
   3. Vernos I
   4. Conti E

   (2003) Structural basis of Aurora-A activation by TPX2 at the mitotic spindle

   Molecular Cell 12:851–862.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/s1097-2765(03)00392-7

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
4. 1. Beenstock J
   2. Mooshayef N
   3. Engelberg D

   (2016) How do protein kinases take a selfie (Autophosphorylate)?

   Trends in Biochemical Sciences 41:938–953.

   https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibs.2016.08.006

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
5. 1. Belyy V
   2. Zuazo-Gaztelu I
   3. Alamban A
   4. Ashkenazi A
   5. Walter P

   (2022) Endoplasmic reticulum stress activates human IRE1α through reversible assembly of inactive dimers into small oligomers

   eLife 11:e74342.

   https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.74342

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
6. 1. Bennett JL
   2. Nguyen GTH
   3. Donald WA

   (2022) Protein-small molecule interactions in native mass spectrometry

   Chemical Reviews 122:7327–7385.

   https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.1c00293

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
7. 1. Boczek EE
   2. Luo Q
   3. Dehling M
   4. Röpke M
   5. Mader SL
   6. Seidl A
   7. Kaila VRI
   8. Buchner J

   (2019) Autophosphorylation activates c-Src kinase through global structural rearrangements

   The Journal of Biological Chemistry 294:13186–13197.

   https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.RA119.008199

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
8. 1. Byrne DP
   2. Vonderach M
   3. Ferries S
   4. Brownridge PJ
   5. Eyers CE
   6. Eyers PA

   (2016) cAMP-dependent protein kinase (PKA) complexes probed by complementary differential scanning fluorimetry and ion mobility-mass spectrometry

   The Biochemical Journal 473:3159–3175.

   https://doi.org/10.1042/BCJ20160648

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
9. 1. Byrne DP
   2. Shrestha S
   3. Galler M
   4. Cao M
   5. Daly LA
   6. Campbell AE
   7. Eyers CE
   8. Veal EA
   9. Kannan N
   10. Eyers PA

   (2020) Aurora A regulation by reversible cysteine oxidation reveals evolutionarily conserved redox control of Ser/Thr protein kinase activity

   Science Signaling 13:eaax2713.

   https://doi.org/10.1126/scisignal.aax2713

   • PubMed
   • Google Scholar
10. 1. Cai Z
    2. Chehab NH
    3. Pavletich NP

    (2009) Structure and activation mechanism of the CHK2 DNA damage checkpoint kinase

    Molecular Cell 35:818–829.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2009.09.007

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
11. 1. Cao L
    2. Coventry B
    3. Goreshnik I
    4. Huang B
    5. Sheffler W
    6. Park JS
    7. Jude KM
    8. Marković I
    9. Kadam RU
    10. Verschueren KHG
    11. Verstraete K
    12. Walsh STR
    13. Bennett N
    14. Phal A
    15. Yang A
    16. Kozodoy L
    17. DeWitt M
    18. Picton L
    19. Miller L
    20. Strauch EM
    21. DeBouver ND
    22. Pires A
    23. Bera AK
    24. Halabiya S
    25. Hammerson B
    26. Yang W
    27. Bernard S
    28. Stewart L
    29. Wilson IA
    30. Ruohola-Baker H
    31. Schlessinger J
    32. Lee S
    33. Savvides SN
    34. Garcia KC
    35. Baker D

    (2022) Design of protein-binding proteins from the target structure alone

    Nature 605:551–560.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-04654-9

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
12. 1. Chen L
    2. Marsiglia WM
    3. Chen H
    4. Katigbak J
    5. Erdjument-Bromage H
    6. Kemble DJ
    7. Fu L
    8. Ma J
    9. Sun G
    10. Zhang Y
    11. Liang G
    12. Neubert TA
    13. Li X
    14. Traaseth NJ
    15. Mohammadi M

    (2020) Molecular basis for receptor tyrosine kinase A-loop tyrosine transphosphorylation

    Nature Chemical Biology 16:267–277.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41589-019-0455-7

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
13. 1. Cheng H
    2. Addona T
    3. Keshishian H
    4. Dahlstrand E
    5. Lu C
    6. Dorsch M
    7. Li Z
    8. Wang A
    9. Ocain TD
    10. Li P
    11. Parsons TF
    12. Jaffee B
    13. Xu Y

    (2007) Regulation of IRAK-4 kinase activity via autophosphorylation within its activation loop

    Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications 352:609–616.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbrc.2006.11.068

    • Google Scholar
14. 1. Chung JK
    2. Nocka LM
    3. Decker A
    4. Wang Q
    5. Kadlecek TA
    6. Weiss A
    7. Kuriyan J
    8. Groves JT

    (2019) Switch-like activation of Bruton’s tyrosine kinase by membrane-mediated dimerization

    PNAS 116:10798–10803.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1819309116

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
15. 1. Cobbaut M
    2. Derua R
    3. Parker PJ
    4. Waelkens E
    5. Janssens V
    6. Van Lint J

    (2018) Protein kinase D displays intrinsic Tyr autophosphorylation activity: insights into mechanism and regulation

    FEBS Letters 592:2432–2443.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/1873-3468.13171

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
16. 1. Cobbs MH
    2. Sang BC
    3. Gonzalez R
    4. Goldsmith E
    5. Ellis L

    (1989) Autophosphorylation activates the soluble cytoplasmic domain of the insulin receptor in an intermolecular reaction

    The journal of biological chemistry 264:18701–18706.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9258(18)51524-6

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
17. 1. Cole A
    2. Frame S
    3. Cohen P

    (2004) Further evidence that the tyrosine phosphorylation of glycogen synthase kinase-3 (GSK3) in mammalian cells is an autophosphorylation event

    The Biochemical Journal 377:249–255.

    https://doi.org/10.1042/BJ20031259

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
18. 1. Cui W
    2. Li J
    3. Ron D
    4. Sha B

    (2011) The structure of the PERK kinase domain suggests the mechanism for its activation

    Acta Crystallographica. Section D, Biological Crystallography 67:423–428.

    https://doi.org/10.1107/S0907444911006445

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
19. 1. Daly AC
    2. Prendergast ME
    3. Hughes AJ
    4. Burdick JA

    (2021) Bioprinting for the Biologist

    Cell 184:18–32.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.12.002

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
20. 1. Dar AC
    2. Dever TE
    3. Sicheri F

    (2005) Higher-order substrate recognition of eIF2alpha by the RNA-dependent protein kinase PKR

    Cell 122:887–900.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2005.06.044

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
21. 1. Devroe E
    2. Erdjument-Bromage H
    3. Tempst P
    4. Silver PA

    (2004) Human Mob proteins regulate the NDR1 and NDR2 serine-threonine kinases

    The Journal of Biological Chemistry 279:24444–24451.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M401999200

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
22. 1. Dey M
    2. Cao C
    3. Dar AC
    4. Tamura T
    5. Ozato K
    6. Sicheri F
    7. Dever TE

    (2005) Mechanistic link between PKR dimerization, autophosphorylation, and eIF2alpha substrate recognition

    Cell 122:901–913.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2005.06.041

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
23. 1. Dey M
    2. Mann BR
    3. Anshu A
    4. Mannan MA

    (2014) Activation of protein kinase PKR requires dimerization-induced cis-phosphorylation within the activation loop

    The Journal of Biological Chemistry 289:5747–5757.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M113.527796

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
24. 1. Dodson CA
    2. Yeoh S
    3. Haq T
    4. Bayliss R

    (2013) A kinetic test characterizes kinase intramolecular and intermolecular autophosphorylation mechanisms

    Science Signaling 6:ra54.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/scisignal.2003910

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
25. 1. Donnelly DP
    2. Rawlins CM
    3. DeHart CJ
    4. Fornelli L
    5. Schachner LF
    6. Lin Z
    7. Lippens JL
    8. Aluri KC
    9. Sarin R
    10. Chen B
    11. Lantz C
    12. Jung W
    13. Johnson KR
    14. Koller A
    15. Wolff JJ
    16. Campuzano IDG
    17. Auclair JR
    18. Ivanov AR
    19. Whitelegge JP
    20. Paša-Tolić L
    21. Chamot-Rooke J
    22. Danis PO
    23. Smith LM
    24. Tsybin YO
    25. Loo JA
    26. Ge Y
    27. Kelleher NL
    28. Agar JN

    (2019) Best practices and benchmarks for intact protein analysis for top-down mass spectrometry

    Nature Methods 16:587–594.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-019-0457-0

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
26. 1. Doran JD
    2. Liu X
    3. Taslimi P
    4. Saadat A
    5. Fox T

    (2004) New insights into the structure-function relationships of Rho-associated kinase: a thermodynamic and hydrodynamic study of the dimer-to-monomer transition and its kinetic implications

    The Biochemical Journal 384:255–262.

    https://doi.org/10.1042/BJ20040344

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
27. 1. Elkins JM
    2. Amos A
    3. Niesen FH
    4. Pike ACW
    5. Fedorov O
    6. Knapp S

    (2009) Structure of dystrophia myotonica protein kinase

    Protein Science 18:782–791.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/pro.82

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
28. 1. Elsner DJ
    2. Siess KM
    3. Gossenreiter T
    4. Hartl M
    5. Leonard TA

    (2019) A ubiquitin-like domain controls protein kinase D dimerization and activation by trans-autophosphorylation

    The Journal of Biological Chemistry 294:14422–14441.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.RA119.008713

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
29. 1. Endicott JA
    2. Noble MEM
    3. Johnson LN

    (2012) The structural basis for control of eukaryotic protein kinases

    Annual Review of Biochemistry 81:587–613.

    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-biochem-052410-090317

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
30. 1. Engelhardt FAS
    2. Praetorius F
    3. Wachauf CH
    4. Brüggenthies G
    5. Kohler F
    6. Kick B
    7. Kadletz KL
    8. Pham PN
    9. Behler KL
    10. Gerling T
    11. Dietz H

    (2019) Custom-size, functional, and durable DNA origami with design-specific scaffolds

    ACS Nano 13:5015–5027.

    https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.9b01025

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
31. 1. Eyers PA
    2. Erikson E
    3. Chen LG
    4. Maller JL

    (2003) A novel mechanism for activation of the protein kinase Aurora A

    Current Biology 13:691–697.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0960-9822(03)00166-0

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
32. 1. Eyers PA
    2. Liu J
    3. Hayashi NR
    4. Lewellyn AL
    5. Gautier J
    6. Maller JL

    (2005) Regulation of the G(2)/M transition in Xenopus oocytes by the cAMP-dependent protein kinase

    The Journal of Biological Chemistry 280:24339–24346.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M412442200

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
33. 1. Ferrao R
    2. Zhou H
    3. Shan Y
    4. Liu Q
    5. Li Q
    6. Shaw DE
    7. Li X
    8. Wu H

    (2014) IRAK4 dimerization and trans-autophosphorylation are induced by Myddosome assembly

    Molecular Cell 55:891–903.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2014.08.006

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
34. 1. Foley EDB
    2. Kushwah MS
    3. Young G
    4. Kukura P

    (2021) Mass photometry enables label-free tracking and mass measurement of single proteins on lipid bilayers

    Nature Methods 18:1247–1252.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-021-01261-w

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
35. 1. Frattali AL
    2. Treadway JL
    3. Pessin JE

    (1992)

    Transmembrane signaling by the human insulin receptor kinase. Relationship between intramolecular beta subunit trans- and cis-autophosphorylation and substrate kinase activation

    The Journal of Biological Chemistry 267:19521–19528.

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
36. 1. Freed DM
    2. Alvarado D
    3. Lemmon MA

    (2015) Ligand regulation of a constitutively dimeric EGF receptor

    Nature Communications 6:7380.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms8380

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
37. 1. Frohner IE
    2. Mudrak I
    3. Kronlachner S
    4. Schüchner S
    5. Ogris E

    (2020) Antibodies recognizing the C terminus of PP2A catalytic subunit are unsuitable for evaluating PP2A activity and holoenzyme composition

    Science Signaling 13:eaax6490.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/scisignal.aax6490

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
38. 1. Garcia P
    2. Ucurum Z
    3. Bucher R
    4. Svergun DI
    5. Huber T
    6. Lustig A
    7. Konarev PV
    8. Marino M
    9. Mayans O

    (2006) Molecular insights into the self-assembly mechanism of dystrophia myotonica kinase

    FASEB Journal 20:1142–1151.

    https://doi.org/10.1096/fj.05-5262com

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
39. 1. George S
    2. Rochford JJ
    3. Wolfrum C
    4. Gray SL
    5. Schinner S
    6. Wilson JC
    7. Soos MA
    8. Murgatroyd PR
    9. Williams RM
    10. Acerini CL
    11. Dunger DB
    12. Barford D
    13. Umpleby AM
    14. Wareham NJ
    15. Davies HA
    16. Schafer AJ
    17. Stoffel M
    18. O’Rahilly S
    19. Barroso I

    (2004) A family with severe insulin resistance and diabetes due to A mutation in AKT2

    Science 304:1325–1328.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1096706

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
40. 1. Gerlits O
    2. Tian J
    3. Das A
    4. Langan P
    5. Heller WT
    6. Kovalevsky A

    (2015) Phosphoryl transfer reaction snapshots in crystals: Insights into the mechanism of protein kinase a catalytic subunit

    The Journal of Biological Chemistry 290:15538–15548.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M115.643213

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
41. 1. Gerlits O
    2. Weiss KL
    3. Blakeley MP
    4. Veglia G
    5. Taylor SS
    6. Kovalevsky A

    (2019) Zooming in on protons: Neutron structure of protein kinase A trapped in A product complex

    Science Advances 5:eaav0482.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aav0482

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
42. 1. Goldberg J
    2. Nairn AC
    3. Kuriyan J

    (1996) Structural basis for the autoinhibition of calcium/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase I

    Cell 84:875–887.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0092-8674(00)81066-1

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
43. 1. Hajdusits B
    2. Suskiewicz MJ
    3. Hundt N
    4. Meinhart A
    5. Kurzbauer R
    6. Leodolter J
    7. Kukura P
    8. Clausen T

    (2021) McsB forms a gated kinase chamber to mark aberrant bacterial proteins for degradation

    eLife 10:e63505.

    https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.63505

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
44. 1. Haling JR
    2. Sudhamsu J
    3. Yen I
    4. Sideris S
    5. Sandoval W
    6. Phung W
    7. Bravo BJ
    8. Giannetti AM
    9. Peck A
    10. Masselot A
    11. Morales T
    12. Smith D
    13. Brandhuber BJ
    14. Hymowitz SG
    15. Malek S

    (2014) Structure of the BRAF-MEK complex reveals a kinase activity independent role for BRAF in MAPK signaling

    Cancer Cell 26:402–413.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccr.2014.07.007

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
45. 1. Hantschel O
    2. Nagar B
    3. Guettler S
    4. Kretzschmar J
    5. Dorey K
    6. Kuriyan J
    7. Superti-Furga G

    (2003) A myristoyl/phosphotyrosine switch regulates c-Abl

    Cell 112:845–857.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0092-8674(03)00191-0

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
46. 1. Happ JT
    2. Arveseth CD
    3. Bruystens J
    4. Bertinetti D
    5. Nelson IB
    6. Olivieri C
    7. Zhang J
    8. Hedeen DS
    9. Zhu JF
    10. Capener JL
    11. Bröckel JW
    12. Vu L
    13. King CC
    14. Ruiz-Perez VL
    15. Ge X
    16. Veglia G
    17. Herberg FW
    18. Taylor SS
    19. Myers BR

    (2022) A PKA inhibitor motif within SMOOTHENED controls Hedgehog signal transduction

    Nature Structural & Molecular Biology 29:990–999.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41594-022-00838-z

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
47. 1. Hauge C
    2. Antal TL
    3. Hirschberg D
    4. Doehn U
    5. Thorup K
    6. Idrissova L
    7. Hansen K
    8. Jensen ON
    9. Jørgensen TJ
    10. Biondi RM
    11. Frödin M

    (2007) Mechanism for activation of the growth factor-activated AGC kinases by turn motif phosphorylation

    The EMBO Journal 26:2251–2261.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.emboj.7601682

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
48. 1. Haydon CE
    2. Eyers PA
    3. Aveline-Wolf LD
    4. Resing KA
    5. Maller JL
    6. Ahn NG

    (2003) Identification of novel phosphorylation sites on Xenopus laevis Aurora A and analysis of phosphopeptide enrichment by immobilized metal-affinity chromatography

    Molecular & Cellular Proteomics 2:1055–1067.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/mcp.M300054-MCP200

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
49. 1. Heermann T
    2. Steiert F
    3. Ramm B
    4. Hundt N
    5. Schwille P

    (2021) Mass-sensitive particle tracking to elucidate the membrane-associated MinDE reaction cycle

    Nature Methods 18:1239–1246.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-021-01260-x

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
50. 1. Heikkila T
    2. Wheatley E
    3. Crighton D
    4. Schroder E
    5. Boakes A
    6. Kaye SJ
    7. Mezna M
    8. Pang L
    9. Rushbrooke M
    10. Turnbull A
    11. Olson MF

    (2011) Co-crystal structures of inhibitors with MRCKβ, a key regulator of tumor cell invasion

    PLOS ONE 6:e24825.

    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0024825

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
51. 1. Hein MY
    2. Hubner NC
    3. Poser I
    4. Cox J
    5. Nagaraj N
    6. Toyoda Y
    7. Gak IA
    8. Weisswange I
    9. Mansfeld J
    10. Buchholz F
    11. Hyman AA
    12. Mann M

    (2015) A human interactome in three quantitative dimensions organized by stoichiometries and abundances

    Cell 163:712–723.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2015.09.053

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
52. 1. Herzik MA
    2. Wu M
    3. Lander GC

    (2019) High-resolution structure determination of sub-100 kDa complexes using conventional cryo-EM

    Nature Communications 10:1032.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-08991-8

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
53. 1. Hu SH
    2. Parker MW
    3. Lei JY
    4. Wilce MC
    5. Benian GM
    6. Kemp BE

    (1994) Insights into autoregulation from the crystal structure of twitchin kinase

    Nature 369:581–584.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/369581a0

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
54. 1. Hubbard SR
    2. Wei L
    3. Ellis L
    4. Hendrickson WA

    (1994) Crystal structure of the tyrosine kinase domain of the human insulin receptor

    Nature 372:746–754.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/372746a0

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
55. 1. Hughes TP
    2. Mauro MJ
    3. Cortes JE
    4. Minami H
    5. Rea D
    6. DeAngelo DJ
    7. Breccia M
    8. Goh YT
    9. Talpaz M
    10. Hochhaus A
    11. le Coutre P
    12. Ottmann O
    13. Heinrich MC
    14. Steegmann JL
    15. Deininger MWN
    16. Janssen J
    17. Mahon FX
    18. Minami Y
    19. Yeung D
    20. Ross DM
    21. Tallman MS
    22. Park JH
    23. Druker BJ
    24. Hynds D
    25. Duan Y
    26. Meille C
    27. Hourcade-Potelleret F
    28. Vanasse KG
    29. Lang F
    30. Kim DW

    (2019) Asciminib in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia after ABL Kinase Inhibitor Failure

    The New England Journal of Medicine 381:2315–2326.

    https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1902328

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
56. 1. Huse M
    2. Kuriyan J

    (2002) The conformational plasticity of protein kinases

    Cell 109:275–282.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0092-8674(02)00741-9

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
57. 1. Iyer GH
    2. Garrod S
    3. Woods VL
    4. Taylor SS

    (2005) Catalytic independent functions of a protein kinase as revealed by a kinase-dead mutant: study of the Lys72His mutant of cAMP-dependent kinase

    Journal of Molecular Biology 351:1110–1122.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmb.2005.06.011

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
58. 1. Johnson LN
    2. Noble ME
    3. Owen DJ

    (1996) Active and inactive protein kinases: structural basis for regulation

    Cell 85:149–158.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0092-8674(00)81092-2

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
59. 1. Johnson JL
    2. Yaron TM
    3. Huntsman EM
    4. Kerelsky A
    5. Song J
    6. Regev A
    7. Lin TY
    8. Liberatore K
    9. Cizin DM
    10. Cohen BM
    11. Vasan N
    12. Ma Y
    13. Krismer K
    14. Robles JT
    15. van de Kooij B
    16. van Vlimmeren AE
    17. Andrée-Busch N
    18. Käufer NF
    19. Dorovkov MV
    20. Ryazanov AG
    21. Takagi Y
    22. Kastenhuber ER
    23. Goncalves MD
    24. Hopkins BD
    25. Elemento O
    26. Taatjes DJ
    27. Maucuer A
    28. Yamashita A
    29. Degterev A
    30. Uduman M
    31. Lu J
    32. Landry SD
    33. Zhang B
    34. Cossentino I
    35. Linding R
    36. Blenis J
    37. Hornbeck PV
    38. Turk BE
    39. Yaffe MB
    40. Cantley LC

    (2023) An atlas of substrate specificities for the human serine/threonine kinome

    Nature 613:759–766.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-05575-3

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
60. 1. Jumper J
    2. Evans R
    3. Pritzel A
    4. Green T
    5. Figurnov M
    6. Ronneberger O
    7. Tunyasuvunakool K
    8. Bates R
    9. Žídek A
    10. Potapenko A
    11. Bridgland A
    12. Meyer C
    13. Kohl SAA
    14. Ballard AJ
    15. Cowie A
    16. Romera-Paredes B
    17. Nikolov S
    18. Jain R
    19. Adler J
    20. Back T
    21. Petersen S
    22. Reiman D
    23. Clancy E
    24. Zielinski M
    25. Steinegger M
    26. Pacholska M
    27. Berghammer T
    28. Bodenstein S
    29. Silver D
    30. Vinyals O
    31. Senior AW
    32. Kavukcuoglu K
    33. Kohli P
    34. Hassabis D

    (2021) Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold

    Nature 596:583–589.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-021-03819-2

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
61. 1. Kannan N
    2. Haste N
    3. Taylor SS
    4. Neuwald AF

    (2007) The hallmark of AGC kinase functional divergence is its C-terminal tail, a cis-acting regulatory module

    PNAS 104:1272–1277.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0610251104

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
62. 1. Kim C
    2. Cheng CY
    3. Saldanha SA
    4. Taylor SS

    (2007) PKA-I holoenzyme structure reveals a mechanism for cAMP-dependent activation

    Cell 130:1032–1043.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2007.07.018

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
63. 1. Knighton DR
    2. Zheng JH
    3. Ten Eyck LF
    4. Xuong NH
    5. Taylor SS
    6. Sowadski JM

    (1991) Structure of a peptide inhibitor bound to the catalytic subunit of cyclic adenosine monophosphate-dependent protein kinase

    Science 253:414–420.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1862343

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
64. 1. Komander D
    2. Garg R
    3. Wan PTC
    4. Ridley AJ
    5. Barford D

    (2008) Mechanism of multi-site phosphorylation from a ROCK-I:RhoE complex structure

    The EMBO Journal 27:3175–3185.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/emboj.2008.226

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
65. 1. Korennykh AV
    2. Egea PF
    3. Korostelev AA
    4. Finer-Moore J
    5. Zhang C
    6. Shokat KM
    7. Stroud RM
    8. Walter P

    (2009) The unfolded protein response signals through high-order assembly of Ire1

    Nature 457:687–693.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nature07661

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
66. 1. Korennykh A
    2. Walter P

    (2012) Structural basis of the unfolded protein response

    Annual Review of Cell and Developmental Biology 28:251–277.

    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-cellbio-101011-155826

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
67. 1. Kornev AP
    2. Haste NM
    3. Taylor SS
    4. Ten Eyck LF

    (2006) Surface comparison of active and inactive protein kinases identifies a conserved activation mechanism

    PNAS 103:17783–17788.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0607656103

    • Google Scholar
68. 1. Kornev AP
    2. Taylor SS
    3. Ten Eyck LF

    (2008) A helix scaffold for the assembly of active protein kinases

    PNAS 105:14377–14382.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0807988105

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
69. 1. Krissinel E

    (2010) Crystal contacts as nature’s docking solutions

    Journal of Computational Chemistry 31:133–143.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/jcc.21303

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
70. 1. Küchler A
    2. Yoshimoto M
    3. Luginbühl S
    4. Mavelli F
    5. Walde P

    (2016) Enzymatic reactions in confined environments

    Nature Nanotechnology 11:409–420.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2016.54

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
71. 1. Larabi A
    2. Devos JM
    3. Ng SL
    4. Nanao MH
    5. Round A
    6. Maniatis T
    7. Panne D

    (2013) Crystal structure and mechanism of activation of TANK-binding kinase 1

    Cell Reports 3:734–746.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2013.01.034

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
72. 1. Lassila JK
    2. Zalatan JG
    3. Herschlag D

    (2011) Biological phosphoryl-transfer reactions: understanding mechanism and catalysis

    Annual Review of Biochemistry 80:669–702.

    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-biochem-060409-092741

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
73. 1. Lawhorn BG
    2. Philp J
    3. Zhao Y
    4. Louer C
    5. Hammond M
    6. Cheung M
    7. Fries H
    8. Graves AP
    9. Shewchuk L
    10. Wang L
    11. Cottom JE
    12. Qi H
    13. Zhao H
    14. Totoritis R
    15. Zhang G
    16. Schwartz B
    17. Li H
    18. Sweitzer S
    19. Holt DA
    20. Gatto GJ
    21. Kallander LS

    (2015) Identification of Purines and 7-Deazapurines as Potent and Selective Type I Inhibitors of Troponin I-Interacting Kinase (TNNI3K)

    Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 58:7431–7448.

    https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jmedchem.5b00931

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
74. 1. Lee KPK
    2. Dey M
    3. Neculai D
    4. Cao C
    5. Dever TE
    6. Sicheri F

    (2008) Structure of the dual enzyme Ire1 reveals the basis for catalysis and regulation in nonconventional RNA splicing

    Cell 132:89–100.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2007.10.057

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
75. 1. Lei M
    2. Lu W
    3. Meng W
    4. Parrini MC
    5. Eck MJ
    6. Mayer BJ
    7. Harrison SC

    (2000) Structure of PAK1 in an autoinhibited conformation reveals a multistage activation switch

    Cell 102:387–397.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0092-8674(00)00043-x

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
76. 1. Leman JK
    2. Weitzner BD
    3. Lewis SM
    4. Adolf-Bryfogle J
    5. Alam N
    6. Alford RF
    7. Aprahamian M
    8. Baker D
    9. Barlow KA
    10. Barth P
    11. Basanta B
    12. Bender BJ
    13. Blacklock K
    14. Bonet J
    15. Boyken SE
    16. Bradley P
    17. Bystroff C
    18. Conway P
    19. Cooper S
    20. Correia BE
    21. Coventry B
    22. Das R
    23. De Jong RM
    24. DiMaio F
    25. Dsilva L
    26. Dunbrack R
    27. Ford AS
    28. Frenz B
    29. Fu DY
    30. Geniesse C
    31. Goldschmidt L
    32. Gowthaman R
    33. Gray JJ
    34. Gront D
    35. Guffy S
    36. Horowitz S
    37. Huang P-S
    38. Huber T
    39. Jacobs TM
    40. Jeliazkov JR
    41. Johnson DK
    42. Kappel K
    43. Karanicolas J
    44. Khakzad H
    45. Khar KR
    46. Khare SD
    47. Khatib F
    48. Khramushin A
    49. King IC
    50. Kleffner R
    51. Koepnick B
    52. Kortemme T
    53. Kuenze G
    54. Kuhlman B
    55. Kuroda D
    56. Labonte JW
    57. Lai JK
    58. Lapidoth G
    59. Leaver-Fay A
    60. Lindert S
    61. Linsky T
    62. London N
    63. Lubin JH
    64. Lyskov S
    65. Maguire J
    66. Malmström L
    67. Marcos E
    68. Marcu O
    69. Marze NA
    70. Meiler J
    71. Moretti R
    72. Mulligan VK
    73. Nerli S
    74. Norn C
    75. Ó’Conchúir S
    76. Ollikainen N
    77. Ovchinnikov S
    78. Pacella MS
    79. Pan X
    80. Park H
    81. Pavlovicz RE
    82. Pethe M
    83. Pierce BG
    84. Pilla KB
    85. Raveh B
    86. Renfrew PD
    87. Burman SSR
    88. Rubenstein A
    89. Sauer MF
    90. Scheck A
    91. Schief W
    92. Schueler-Furman O
    93. Sedan Y
    94. Sevy AM
    95. Sgourakis NG
    96. Shi L
    97. Siegel JB
    98. Silva D-A
    99. Smith S
    100. Song Y
    101. Stein A
    102. Szegedy M
    103. Teets FD
    104. Thyme SB
    105. Wang RY-R
    106. Watkins A
    107. Zimmerman L
    108. Bonneau R

    (2020) Macromolecular modeling and design in Rosetta: recent methods and frameworks

    Nature Methods 17:665–680.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41592-020-0848-2

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
77. 1. Levina A
    2. Fleming KD
    3. Burke JE
    4. Leonard TA

    (2022) Activation of the essential kinase PDK1 by phosphoinositide-driven trans-autophosphorylation

    Nature Communications 13:1874.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-29368-4

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
78. 1. Lew ED
    2. Furdui CM
    3. Anderson KS
    4. Schlessinger J

    (2009) The precise sequence of FGF receptor autophosphorylation is kinetically driven and is disrupted by oncogenic mutations

    Science Signaling 2:ra6.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/scisignal.2000021

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
79. 1. Li J
    2. Taylor IA
    3. Lloyd J
    4. Clapperton JA
    5. Howell S
    6. MacMillan D
    7. Smerdon SJ

    (2008) Chk2 oligomerization studied by phosphopeptide ligation: implications for regulation and phosphodependent interactions

    The Journal of Biological Chemistry 283:36019–36030.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M804075200

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
80. 1. Liljedahl M
    2. Maeda Y
    3. Colanzi A
    4. Ayala I
    5. Van Lint J
    6. Malhotra V

    (2001) Protein kinase D regulates the fission of cell surface destined transport carriers from the trans-Golgi network

    Cell 104:409–420.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0092-8674(01)00228-8

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
81. 1. Lim DC
    2. Joukov V
    3. Rettenmaier TJ
    4. Kumagai A
    5. Dunphy WG
    6. Wells JA
    7. Yaffe MB

    (2020) Redox priming promotes Aurora A activation during mitosis

    Science Signaling 13:eabb6707.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/scisignal.abb6707

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
82. 1. Lochhead PA
    2. Sibbet G
    3. Morrice N
    4. Cleghon V

    (2005) Activation-loop autophosphorylation is mediated by a novel transitional intermediate form of DYRKs

    Cell 121:925–936.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2005.03.034

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
83. 1. Lodowski DT
    2. Pitcher JA
    3. Capel WD
    4. Lefkowitz RJ
    5. Tesmer JJG

    (2003) Keeping G proteins at bay: a complex between G protein-coupled receptor kinase 2 and Gbetagamma

    Science 300:1256–1262.

    https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1082348

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
84. 1. Lučić I
    2. Truebestein L
    3. Leonard TA

    (2016) Novel Features of DAG-Activated PKC Isozymes Reveal a Conserved 3-D Architecture

    Journal of Molecular Biology 428:121–141.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmb.2015.11.001

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
85. 1. Lučić I
    2. Rathinaswamy MK
    3. Truebestein L
    4. Hamelin DJ
    5. Burke JE
    6. Leonard TA
    7. Lučic I
    8. Rathinaswamy MK
    9. Truebestein L
    10. Hamelin DJ
    11. Burke JE
    12. Leonard TA

    (2018) Conformational sampling of membranes by Akt controls its activation and inactivation

    PNAS 115:E3940–E3949.

    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1716109115

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
86. 1. Madhusudan AP
    2. Xuong N-H
    3. Taylor SS

    (2002) Crystal structure of a transition state mimic of the catalytic subunit of cAMP-dependent protein kinase

    Nature Structural Biology 9:273–277.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/nsb780

    • Google Scholar
87. 1. Marcotte D
    2. Rushe M
    3. M. Arduini R
    4. Lukacs C
    5. Atkins K
    6. Sun X
    7. Little K
    8. Cullivan M
    9. Paramasivam M
    10. Patterson TA
    11. Hesson T
    12. D. McKee T
    13. May-Dracka TL
    14. Xin Z
    15. Bertolotti-Ciarlet A
    16. Bhisetti GR
    17. Lyssikatos JP
    18. Silvian LF

    (2017) Germinal-center kinase-like kinase co-crystal structure reveals a swapped activation loop and C-terminal extension

    Protein Science 26:152–162.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/pro.3062

    • Google Scholar
88. 1. Maruyama IN

    (2015) Activation of transmembrane cell-surface receptors via a common mechanism? The “rotation model”

    BioEssays 37:959–967.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/bies.201500041

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
89. 1. Mayans O
    2. van der Ven PF
    3. Wilm M
    4. Mues A
    5. Young P
    6. Fürst DO
    7. Wilmanns M
    8. Gautel M

    (1998) Structural basis for activation of the titin kinase domain during myofibrillogenesis

    Nature 395:863–869.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/27603

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
90. 1. Mayo CB
    2. Erlandsen H
    3. Mouser DJ
    4. Feinstein AG
    5. Robinson VL
    6. May ER
    7. Cole JL

    (2019) Structural basis of protein kinase r autophosphorylation

    Biochemistry 58:2967–2977.

    https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biochem.9b00161

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
91. 1. Mehmood S
    2. Allison TM
    3. Robinson CV

    (2015) Mass spectrometry of protein complexes: from origins to applications

    Annual Review of Physical Chemistry 66:453–474.

    https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-physchem-040214-121732

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
92. 1. Miller CJ
    2. Turk BE

    (2018) Homing in: mechanisms of substrate targeting by protein kinases

    Trends in Biochemical Sciences 43:380–394.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibs.2018.02.009

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
93. 1. Modi V
    2. Dunbrack RL

    (2019) A structurally-validated multiple sequence alignment of 497 human protein kinase domains

    Scientific Reports 9:19790.

    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-019-56499-4

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
94. 1. Moriki T
    2. Maruyama H
    3. Maruyama IN

    (2001) Activation of preformed EGF receptor dimers by ligand-induced rotation of the transmembrane domain

    Journal of Molecular Biology 311:1011–1026.

    https://doi.org/10.1006/jmbi.2001.4923

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
95. 1. Nadeau OW
    2. Lane LA
    3. Xu D
    4. Sage J
    5. Priddy TS
    6. Artigues A
    7. Villar MT
    8. Yang Q
    9. Robinson CV
    10. Zhang Y
    11. Carlson GM

    (2012) Structure and location of the regulatory β subunits in the (αβγδ)4 phosphorylase kinase complex

    The Journal of Biological Chemistry 287:36651–36661.

    https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M112.412874

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
96. 1. Nagar B
    2. Hantschel O
    3. Young MA
    4. Scheffzek K
    5. Veach D
    6. Bornmann W
    7. Clarkson B
    8. Superti-Furga G
    9. Kuriyan J

    (2003) Structural basis for the autoinhibition of c-Abl tyrosine kinase

    Cell 112:859–871.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/s0092-8674(03)00194-6

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
97. 1. Nagy Z
    2. Comer S
    3. Smolenski A

    (2018) Analysis of Protein Phosphorylation Using Phos-Tag Gels

    Current Protocols in Protein Science 93:e64.

    https://doi.org/10.1002/cpps.64

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
98. 1. Nemecek C
    2. Metz WA
    3. Wentzler S
    4. Ding FX
    5. Venot C
    6. Souaille C
    7. Dagallier A
    8. Maignan S
    9. Guilloteau JP
    10. Bernard F
    11. Henry A
    12. Grapinet S
    13. Lesuisse D

    (2010) Design of potent IGF1-R inhibitors related to bis-azaindoles

    Chemical Biology & Drug Design 76:100–106.

    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-0285.2010.00991.x

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
99. 1. Nolen B
    2. Taylor S
    3. Ghosh G

    (2004) Regulation of protein kinases; controlling activity through activation segment conformation

    Molecular Cell 15:661–675.

    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2004.08.024

    • PubMed
    • Google Scholar
100. 1. Oliver AW
     2. Paul A
     3. Boxall KJ
     4. Barrie SE
     5. Aherne GW
     6. Garrett MD
     7. Mittnacht S
     8. Pearl LH

     (2006) Trans-activation of the DNA-damage signalling protein kinase Chk2 by T-loop exchange

     The EMBO Journal 25:3179–3190.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.emboj.7601209

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
101. 1. Oliver AW
     2. Knapp S
     3. Pearl LH

     (2007) Activation segment exchange: a common mechanism of kinase autophosphorylation?

     Trends in Biochemical Sciences 32:351–356.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tibs.2007.06.004

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
102. 1. Park E
     2. Rawson S
     3. Li K
     4. Kim BW
     5. Ficarro SB
     6. Pino GGD
     7. Sharif H
     8. Marto JA
     9. Jeon H
     10. Eck MJ

     (2019) Architecture of autoinhibited and active BRAF-MEK1-14-3-3 complexes

     Nature 575:545–550.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1660-y

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
103. 1. Parker BW
     2. Gogl G
     3. Bálint M
     4. Hetényi C
     5. Reményi A
     6. Weiss EL

     (2020) Ndr/Lats kinases bind specific mob-family coactivators through a conserved and modular interface

     Biochemistry 59:1688–1700.

     https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biochem.9b01096

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
104. 1. Parrini MC
     2. Lei M
     3. Harrison SC
     4. Mayer BJ

     (2002) Pak1 kinase homodimers are autoinhibited in trans and dissociated upon activation by Cdc42 and Rac1

     Molecular Cell 9:73–83.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/s1097-2765(01)00428-2

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
105. 1. Patel AK
     2. Yadav RP
     3. Majava V
     4. Kursula I
     5. Kursula P

     (2011) Structure of the dimeric autoinhibited conformation of DAPK2, a pro-apoptotic protein kinase

     Journal of Molecular Biology 409:369–383.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmb.2011.03.065

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
106. 1. Pathak P
     2. Alexander KK
     3. Helton LG
     4. Kentros M
     5. LeClair TJ
     6. Zhang X
     7. Ho FY
     8. Moore TT
     9. Hall S
     10. Guaitoli G
     11. Gloeckner CJ
     12. Kortholt A
     13. Rideout H
     14. Kennedy EJ

     (2023) Doubly Constrained C-terminal of Roc (COR) Domain-Derived Peptides Inhibit Leucine-Rich Repeat Kinase 2 (LRRK2) Dimerization

     ACS Chemical Neuroscience 14:1971–1980.

     https://doi.org/10.1021/acschemneuro.3c00259

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
107. 1. Pearce LR
     2. Komander D
     3. Alessi DR

     (2010) The nuts and bolts of AGC protein kinases

     Nature Reviews. Molecular Cell Biology 11:9–22.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nrm2822

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
108. 1. Pike ACW
     2. Rellos P
     3. Niesen FH
     4. Turnbull A
     5. Oliver AW
     6. Parker SA
     7. Turk BE
     8. Pearl LH
     9. Knapp S

     (2008) Activation segment dimerization: a mechanism for kinase autophosphorylation of non-consensus sites

     The EMBO Journal 27:704–714.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/emboj.2008.8

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
109. 1. Pillai-Kastoori L
     2. Schutz-Geschwender AR
     3. Harford JA

     (2020) A systematic approach to quantitative Western blot analysis

     Analytical Biochemistry 593:113608.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ab.2020.113608

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
110. 1. Pinkse MWH
     2. Rijkers DTS
     3. Dostmann WR
     4. Heck AJR

     (2009) Mode of action of cGMP-dependent protein kinase-specific inhibitors probed by photoaffinity cross-linking mass spectrometry

     The Journal of Biological Chemistry 284:16354–16368.

     https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M808521200

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
111. 1. Pirruccello M
     2. Sondermann H
     3. Pelton JG
     4. Pellicena P
     5. Hoelz A
     6. Chernoff J
     7. Wemmer DE
     8. Kuriyan J

     (2006) A dimeric kinase assembly underlying autophosphorylation in the p21 activated kinases

     Journal of Molecular Biology 361:312–326.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmb.2006.06.017

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
112. 1. Pokorny D
     2. Truebestein L
     3. Fleming KD
     4. Burke JE
     5. Leonard TA

     (2021) In vitro reconstitution of Sgk3 activation by phosphatidylinositol 3-phosphate

     The Journal of Biological Chemistry 297:100919.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbc.2021.100919

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
113. 1. Praetorius F
     2. Dietz H

     (2017) Self-assembly of genetically encoded DNA-protein hybrid nanoscale shapes

     Science 355:eaam5488.

     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aam5488

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
114. 1. Rajakulendran T
     2. Sahmi M
     3. Lefrançois M
     4. Sicheri F
     5. Therrien M

     (2009) A dimerization-dependent mechanism drives RAF catalytic activation

     Nature 461:542–545.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nature08314

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
115. 1. Reinhardt R
     2. Hirzel K
     3. Link G
     4. Eisler SA
     5. Hägele T
     6. Parson MAH
     7. Burke JE
     8. Hausser A
     9. Leonard TA

     (2023) PKD autoinhibition in trans regulates activation loop autophosphorylation in cis

     PNAS 120:e2212909120.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2212909120

     • Google Scholar
116. 1. Rellos P
     2. Pike ACW
     3. Niesen FH
     4. Salah E
     5. Lee WH
     6. von Delft F
     7. Knapp S
     8. Taylor SS

     (2010) Structure of the CaMKIIdelta/calmodulin complex reveals the molecular mechanism of CaMKII kinase activation

     PLOS Biology 8:e1000426.

     https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000426

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
117. 1. Richards MW
     2. O’Regan L
     3. Mas-Droux C
     4. Blot JMY
     5. Cheung J
     6. Hoelder S
     7. Fry AM
     8. Bayliss R

     (2009) An autoinhibitory tyrosine motif in the cell-cycle-regulated Nek7 kinase is released through binding of Nek9

     Molecular Cell 36:560–570.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2009.09.038

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
118. 1. Rimmer MA
     2. Nadeau OW
     3. Artigues A
     4. Carlson GM

     (2018) Structural characterization of the catalytic γ and regulatory β subunits of phosphorylase kinase in the context of the hexadecameric enzyme complex

     Protein Science 27:485–497.

     https://doi.org/10.1002/pro.3340

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
119. 1. Rosenberg OS
     2. Deindl S
     3. Sung RJ
     4. Nairn AC
     5. Kuriyan J

     (2005) Structure of the autoinhibited kinase domain of CaMKII and SAXS analysis of the holoenzyme

     Cell 123:849–860.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2005.10.029

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
120. Book

     1. Rupp B

     (2009) Biomolecular Crystallography: Principles, Practice, and Application to Structural Biology

     Garland Science.

     https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429258756

     • Google Scholar
121. 1. Sahtoe DD
     2. Praetorius F
     3. Courbet A
     4. Hsia Y
     5. Wicky BIM
     6. Edman NI
     7. Miller LM
     8. Timmermans BJR
     9. Decarreau J
     10. Morris HM
     11. Kang A
     12. Bera AK
     13. Baker D

     (2022) Reconfigurable asymmetric protein assemblies through implicit negative design

     Science 375:eabj7662.

     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abj7662

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
122. 1. Schoepfer J
     2. Jahnke W
     3. Berellini G
     4. Buonamici S
     5. Cotesta S
     6. Cowan-Jacob SW
     7. Dodd S
     8. Drueckes P
     9. Fabbro D
     10. Gabriel T
     11. Groell JM
     12. Grotzfeld RM
     13. Hassan AQ
     14. Henry C
     15. Iyer V
     16. Jones D
     17. Lombardo F
     18. Loo A
     19. Manley PW
     20. Pellé X
     21. Rummel G
     22. Salem B
     23. Warmuth M
     24. Wylie AA
     25. Zoller T
     26. Marzinzik AL
     27. Furet P

     (2018) Discovery of Asciminib (ABL001), an Allosteric Inhibitor of the Tyrosine Kinase Activity of BCR-ABL1

     Journal of Medicinal Chemistry 61:8120–8135.

     https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jmedchem.8b01040

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
123. 1. Schüchner S
     2. Behm C
     3. Mudrak I
     4. Ogris E

     (2020) The Myc tag monoclonal antibody 9E10 displays highly variable epitope recognition dependent on neighboring sequence context

     Science Signaling 13:eaax9730.

     https://doi.org/10.1126/scisignal.aax9730

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
124. 1. Senior AW
     2. Evans R
     3. Jumper J
     4. Kirkpatrick J
     5. Sifre L
     6. Green T
     7. Qin C
     8. Žídek A
     9. Nelson AWR
     10. Bridgland A
     11. Penedones H
     12. Petersen S
     13. Simonyan K
     14. Crossan S
     15. Kohli P
     16. Jones DT
     17. Silver D
     18. Kavukcuoglu K
     19. Hassabis D

     (2020) Improved protein structure prediction using potentials from deep learning

     Nature 577:706–710.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1923-7

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
125. 1. Sessa F
     2. Mapelli M
     3. Ciferri C
     4. Tarricone C
     5. Areces LB
     6. Schneider TR
     7. Stukenberg PT
     8. Musacchio A

     (2005) Mechanism of Aurora B activation by INCENP and inhibition by hesperadin

     Molecular Cell 18:379–391.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molcel.2005.03.031

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
126. 1. Shaw AL
     2. Parson MAH
     3. Truebestein L
     4. Jenkins ML
     5. Leonard TA
     6. Burke JE

     (2023) ATP-competitive and allosteric inhibitors induce differential conformational changes at the autoinhibitory interface of Akt1

     Structure 31:343–354.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.str.2023.01.007

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
127. 1. Sheridan DL
     2. Kong Y
     3. Parker SA
     4. Dalby KN
     5. Turk BE

     (2008) Substrate discrimination among mitogen-activated protein kinases through distinct docking sequence motifs

     The Journal of Biological Chemistry 283:19511–19520.

     https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M801074200

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
128. 1. Shoelson SE
     2. Boni-Schnetzler M
     3. Pilch PF
     4. Kahn CR

     (1991) Autophosphorylation within insulin receptor beta-subunits can occur as an intramolecular process

     Biochemistry 30:7740–7746.

     https://doi.org/10.1021/bi00245a010

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
129. 1. Sicheri F
     2. Moarefi I
     3. Kuriyan J

     (1997) Crystal structure of the Src family tyrosine kinase Hck

     Nature 385:602–609.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/385602a0

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
130. 1. Simon B
     2. Huart AS
     3. Temmerman K
     4. Vahokoski J
     5. Mertens HDT
     6. Komadina D
     7. Hoffmann JE
     8. Yumerefendi H
     9. Svergun DI
     10. Kursula P
     11. Schultz C
     12. McCarthy AA
     13. Hart DJ
     14. Wilmanns M

     (2016) Death-associated protein kinase activity is regulated by coupled calcium/calmodulin binding to two distinct sites

     Structure 24:851–861.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.str.2016.03.020

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
131. 1. Smith FD
     2. Esseltine JL
     3. Nygren PJ
     4. Veesler D
     5. Byrne DP
     6. Vonderach M
     7. Strashnov I
     8. Eyers CE
     9. Eyers PA
     10. Langeberg LK
     11. Scott JD

     (2017) Local protein kinase A action proceeds through intact holoenzymes

     Science 356:1288–1293.

     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aaj1669

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
132. 1. Sok P
     2. Gógl G
     3. Kumar GS
     4. Alexa A
     5. Singh N
     6. Kirsch K
     7. Sebő A
     8. Drahos L
     9. Gáspári Z
     10. Peti W
     11. Reményi A

     (2020) MAP kinase-mediated activation of RSK1 and MK2 substrate kinases

     Structure 28:1101–1113.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.str.2020.06.007

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
133. 1. Song H
     2. Hanlon N
     3. Brown NR
     4. Noble MEM
     5. Johnson LN
     6. Barford D

     (2001) Phosphoprotein-protein interactions revealed by the crystal structure of kinase-associated phosphatase in complex with phosphoCDK2

     Molecular Cell 7:615–626.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/s1097-2765(01)00208-8

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
134. 1. Takimura T
     2. Kamata K
     3. Fukasawa K
     4. Ohsawa H
     5. Komatani H
     6. Yoshizumi T
     7. Takahashi I
     8. Kotani H
     9. Iwasawa Y

     (2010) Structures of the PKC-iota kinase domain in its ATP-bound and apo forms reveal defined structures of residues 533-551 in the C-terminal tail and their roles in ATP binding

     Acta Crystallographica. Section D, Biological Crystallography 66:577–583.

     https://doi.org/10.1107/S0907444910005639

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
135. 1. Taylor CA
     2. Juang YC
     3. Earnest S
     4. Sengupta S
     5. Goldsmith EJ
     6. Cobb MH

     (2015) Domain-Swapping Switch Point in Ste20 Protein Kinase SPAK

     Biochemistry 54:5063–5071.

     https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.biochem.5b00593

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
136. 1. Torres-Ocampo AP
     2. Özden C
     3. Hommer A
     4. Gardella A
     5. Lapinskas E
     6. Samkutty A
     7. Esposito E
     8. Garman SC
     9. Stratton MM

     (2020) Characterization of CaMKIIα holoenzyme stability

     Protein Science 29:1524–1534.

     https://doi.org/10.1002/pro.3869

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
137. 1. Truebestein L
     2. Elsner DJ
     3. Fuchs E
     4. Leonard TA

     (2015) A molecular ruler regulates cytoskeletal remodelling by the Rho kinases

     Nature Communications 6:10029.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10029

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
138. 1. Truebestein L
     2. Hornegger H
     3. Anrather D
     4. Hartl M
     5. Fleming KD
     6. Stariha JTB
     7. Pardon E
     8. Steyaert J
     9. Burke JE
     10. Leonard TA

     (2021) Structure of autoinhibited Akt1 reveals mechanism of PIP₃-mediated activation

     PNAS 118:e2101496118.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2101496118

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
139. 1. Truebestein L
     2. Antonioli S
     3. Waltenberger E
     4. Gehin C
     5. Gavin AC
     6. Leonard TA

     (2023) Structure and regulation of the myotonic dystrophy kinase-related Cdc42-binding kinase

     Structure 31:435–446.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.str.2023.02.002

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
140. 1. Tsuchiya Y
     2. Byrne DP
     3. Burgess SG
     4. Bormann J
     5. Baković J
     6. Huang Y
     7. Zhyvoloup A
     8. Yu BYK
     9. Peak-Chew S
     10. Tran T
     11. Bellany F
     12. Tabor AB
     13. Chan AE
     14. Guruprasad L
     15. Garifulin O
     16. Filonenko V
     17. Vonderach M
     18. Ferries S
     19. Eyers CE
     20. Carroll J
     21. Skehel M
     22. Bayliss R
     23. Eyers PA
     24. Gout I

     (2020) Covalent Aurora A regulation by the metabolic integrator coenzyme A

     Redox Biology 28:101318.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.redox.2019.101318

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
141. 1. Tu D
     2. Zhu Z
     3. Zhou AY
     4. Yun C
     5. Lee KE
     6. Toms AV
     7. Li Y
     8. Dunn GP
     9. Chan E
     10. Thai T
     11. Yang S
     12. Ficarro SB
     13. Marto JA
     14. Jeon H
     15. Hahn WC
     16. Barbie DA
     17. Eck MJ

     (2013) Structure and ubiquitination-dependent activation of TANK-binding kinase 1

     Cell Reports 3:747–758.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.celrep.2013.01.033

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
142. 1. Verbeek DS
     2. Goedhart J
     3. Bruinsma L
     4. Sinke RJ
     5. Reits EA

     (2008) PKC gamma mutations in spinocerebellar ataxia type 14 affect C1 domain accessibility and kinase activity leading to aberrant MAPK signaling

     Journal of Cell Science 121:2339–2349.

     https://doi.org/10.1242/jcs.027698

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
143. 1. von Raußendorf F
     2. de Ruiter A
     3. Leonard TA

     (2017) A switch in nucleotide affinity governs activation of the Src and Tec family kinases

     Scientific Reports 7:17405.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-17703-5

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
144. 1. Waldron RT
     2. Rey O
     3. Iglesias T
     4. Tugal T
     5. Cantrell D
     6. Rozengurt E

     (2001) Activation loop Ser744 and Ser748 in protein kinase D are transphosphorylated in vivo

     The Journal of Biological Chemistry 276:32606–32615.

     https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M101648200

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
145. 1. Wan PTC
     2. Garnett MJ
     3. Roe SM
     4. Lee S
     5. Niculescu-Duvaz D
     6. Good VM
     7. Jones CM
     8. Marshall CJ
     9. Springer CJ
     10. Barford D
     11. Marais R
     12. Cancer Genome Project

     (2004) Mechanism of activation of the RAF-ERK signaling pathway by oncogenic mutations of B-RAF

     Cell 116:855–867.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/s0092-8674(04)00215-6

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
146. 1. Wang J
     2. Wu JW
     3. Wang ZX

     (2011) Structural insights into the autoactivation mechanism of p21-activated protein kinase

     Structure 19:1752–1761.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.str.2011.10.013

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
147. 1. Wang Q
     2. Vogan EM
     3. Nocka LM
     4. Rosen CE
     5. Zorn JA
     6. Harrison SC
     7. Kuriyan J

     (2015) Autoinhibition of Bruton’s tyrosine kinase (Btk) and activation by soluble inositol hexakisphosphate

     eLife 4:e06074.

     https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.06074

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
148. 1. Wang L
     2. Qiao Q
     3. Ferrao R
     4. Shen C
     5. Hatcher JM
     6. Buhrlage SJ
     7. Gray NS
     8. Wu H

     (2017) Crystal structure of human IRAK1

     PNAS 114:13507–13512.

     https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1714386114

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
149. 1. Wiśniewski JR
     2. Hein MY
     3. Cox J
     4. Mann M

     (2014) A “proteomic ruler” for protein copy number and concentration estimation without spike-in standards

     Molecular & Cellular Proteomics 13:3497–3506.

     https://doi.org/10.1074/mcp.M113.037309

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
150. 1. Wood DJ
     2. Endicott JA

     (2018) Structural insights into the functional diversity of the CDK-cyclin family

     Open Biology 8:180112.

     https://doi.org/10.1098/rsob.180112

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
151. 1. Wu J
     2. Li W
     3. Craddock BP
     4. Foreman KW
     5. Mulvihill MJ
     6. Ji Q
     7. Miller WT
     8. Hubbard SR

     (2008) Small-molecule inhibition and activation-loop trans-phosphorylation of the IGF1 receptor

     The EMBO Journal 27:1985–1994.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/emboj.2008.116

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
152. 1. Wu P
     2. Sneeringer CJ
     3. Pitts KE
     4. Day ES
     5. Chan BK
     6. Wei B
     7. Lehoux I
     8. Mortara K
     9. Li H
     10. Wu J
     11. Franke Y
     12. Moffat JG
     13. Grogan JL
     14. Heffron TP
     15. Wang W

     (2019) Hematopoietic progenitor kinase-1 structure in a domain-swapped dimer

     Structure 27:125–133.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.str.2018.10.025

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
153. 1. Wybenga-Groot LE
     2. Ho CS
     3. Sweeney FD
     4. Ceccarelli DF
     5. McGlade CJ
     6. Durocher D
     7. Sicheri F

     (2014) Structural basis of Rad53 kinase activation by dimerization and activation segment exchange

     Cellular Signalling 26:1825–1836.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cellsig.2014.05.004

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
154. 1. Wylie AA
     2. Schoepfer J
     3. Jahnke W
     4. Cowan-Jacob SW
     5. Loo A
     6. Furet P
     7. Marzinzik AL
     8. Pelle X
     9. Donovan J
     10. Zhu W
     11. Buonamici S
     12. Hassan AQ
     13. Lombardo F
     14. Iyer V
     15. Palmer M
     16. Berellini G
     17. Dodd S
     18. Thohan S
     19. Bitter H
     20. Branford S
     21. Ross DM
     22. Hughes TP
     23. Petruzzelli L
     24. Vanasse KG
     25. Warmuth M
     26. Hofmann F
     27. Keen NJ
     28. Sellers WR

     (2017) The allosteric inhibitor ABL001 enables dual targeting of BCR-ABL1

     Nature 543:733–737.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nature21702

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
155. 1. Xu W
     2. Harrison SC
     3. Eck MJ

     (1997) Three-dimensional structure of the tyrosine kinase c-Src

     Nature 385:595–602.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/385595a0

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
156. 1. Xu G
     2. Lo YC
     3. Li Q
     4. Napolitano G
     5. Wu X
     6. Jiang X
     7. Dreano M
     8. Karin M
     9. Wu H

     (2011) Crystal structure of inhibitor of κB kinase β

     Nature 472:325–330.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nature09853

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
157. 1. Xu Q
     2. Malecka KL
     3. Fink L
     4. Jordan EJ
     5. Duffy E
     6. Kolander S
     7. Peterson JR
     8. Dunbrack RL

     (2015) Identifying three-dimensional structures of autophosphorylation complexes in crystals of protein kinases

     Science Signaling 8:rs13.

     https://doi.org/10.1126/scisignal.aaa6711

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
158. 1. Yamada K
     2. Goncalves E
     3. Kahn CR
     4. Shoelson SE

     (1992) Substitution of the insulin receptor transmembrane domain with the c-neu/erbB2 transmembrane domain constitutively activates the insulin receptor kinase in vitro

     The Journal of Biological Chemistry 267:12452–12461.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9258(18)42298-3

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
159. 1. Yamaguchi H
     2. Kasa M
     3. Amano M
     4. Kaibuchi K
     5. Hakoshima T

     (2006) Molecular mechanism for the regulation of rho-kinase by dimerization and its inhibition by fasudil

     Structure 14:589–600.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.str.2005.11.024

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
160. 1. Yang J
     2. Cron P
     3. Good VM
     4. Thompson V
     5. Hemmings BA
     6. Barford D

     (2002a) Crystal structure of an activated Akt/protein kinase B ternary complex with GSK3-peptide and AMP-PNP

     Nature Structural Biology 9:940–944.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/nsb870

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
161. 1. Yang J
     2. Cron P
     3. Thompson V
     4. Good VM
     5. Hess D
     6. Hemmings BA
     7. Barford D

     (2002b) Molecular mechanism for the regulation of protein kinase B/Akt by hydrophobic motif phosphorylation

     Molecular Cell 9:1227–1240.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/s1097-2765(02)00550-6

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
162. 1. Zhang X
     2. Gureasko J
     3. Shen K
     4. Cole PA
     5. Kuriyan J

     (2006) An allosteric mechanism for activation of the kinase domain of epidermal growth factor receptor

     Cell 125:1137–1149.

     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2006.05.013

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
163. 1. Zhang C
     2. Shang G
     3. Gui X
     4. Zhang X
     5. Bai XC
     6. Chen ZJ

     (2019) Structural basis of STING binding with and phosphorylation by TBK1

     Nature 567:394–398.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1000-2

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
164. 1. Zhao B
     2. Du F
     3. Xu P
     4. Shu C
     5. Sankaran B
     6. Bell SL
     7. Liu M
     8. Lei Y
     9. Gao X
     10. Fu X
     11. Zhu F
     12. Liu Y
     13. Laganowsky A
     14. Zheng X
     15. Ji JY
     16. West AP
     17. Watson RO
     18. Li P

     (2019) A conserved PLPLRT/SD motif of STING mediates the recruitment and activation of TBK1

     Nature 569:718–722.

     https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1228-x

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar
165. 1. Zorba A
     2. Buosi V
     3. Kutter S
     4. Kern N
     5. Pontiggia F
     6. Cho YJ
     7. Kern D

     (2014) Molecular mechanism of Aurora A kinase autophosphorylation and its allosteric activation by TPX2

     eLife 3:e02667.

     https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.02667

     • PubMed
     • Google Scholar

Author details

1. Ronja Reinhardt

   1. Max Perutz Labs, Vienna Biocenter Campus (VBC), Vienna, Austria
   2. Medical University of Vienna, Center for Medical Biochemistry, Vienna, Austria

   Contribution

   Conceptualization, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Writing – review and editing

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0002-6475-6048

2. Thomas A Leonard

   1. Max Perutz Labs, Vienna Biocenter Campus (VBC), Vienna, Austria
   2. Medical University of Vienna, Center for Medical Biochemistry, Vienna, Austria

   Contribution

   Conceptualization, Supervision, Funding acquisition, Visualization, Writing – original draft, Project administration, Writing – review and editing

   For correspondence

   thomas.leonard@meduniwien.ac.at

   Competing interests

   No competing interests declared

   "This ORCID iD identifies the author of this article:" 0000-0001-6853-666X

• 1,570

  views

• 252

  downloads

• 10

  citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.