Structure of a highly conserved domain of rock1 required for shroom-mediated regulation of cell morphology

Rho-associated coiled coil containing protein kinase (Rho-kinase or Rock) is a well-defined determinant of actin organization and dynamics in most animal cells characterized to date. One of the primary effectors of Rock is non-muscle myosin II. Activation of Rock results in increased contractility of myosin II and subsequent changes in actin architecture and cell morphology. The regulation of Rock is thought to occur via autoinhibition of the kinase domain via intramolecular interactions between the N-terminus and the C-terminus of the kinase. This autoinhibited state can be relieved via proteolytic cleavage, binding of lipids to a Pleckstrin Homology domain near the C-terminus, or binding of GTP-bound RhoA to the central coiled-coil region of Rock. Recent work has identified the Shroom family of proteins as an additional regulator of Rock either at the level of cellular distribution or catalytic activity or both. The Shroom-Rock complex is conserved in most animals and is essential for the formation of the neural tube, eye, and gut in vertebrates. To address the mechanism by which Shroom and Rock interact, we have solved the structure of the coiled-coil region of Rock that binds to Shroom proteins. Consistent with other observations, the Shroom binding domain is a parallel coiled-coil dimer. Using biochemical approaches, we have identified a large patch of residues that contribute to Shrm binding. Their orientation suggests that there may be two independent Shrm binding sites on opposing faces of the coiled-coil region of Rock. Finally, we show that the binding surface is essential for Rock colocalization with Shroom and for Shroom-mediated changes in cell morphology. © 2013 Mohan et al

Assessing the role of mini-applications in predicting key performance characteristics of scientific and engineering applications

Computational science and engineering application programs are typically large, complex, and dynamic, and are often constrained by distribution limitations. As a means of making tractable rapid explorations of scientific and engineering application programs in the context of new, emerging, and future computing architectures, a suite of "miniapps" has been created to serve as proxies for full scale applications. Each miniapp is designed to represent a key performance characteristic that does or is expected to significantly impact the runtime performance of an application program. In this paper we introduce a methodology for assessing the ability of these miniapps to effectively represent these performance issues. We applied this methodology to three miniapps, examining the linkage between them and an application they are intended to represent. Herein we evaluate the fidelity of that linkage. This work represents the initial steps required to begin to answer the question, "Under what conditions does a miniapp represent a key performance characteristic in a full app?

Assessing the role of mini-applications in predicting key performance characteristics of scientific and engineering applications

Computational science and engineering application programs are typically large, complex, and dynamic, and are often constrained by distribution limitations. As a means of making tractable rapid explorations of scientific and engineering application programs in the context of new, emerging, and future computing architectures, a suite of "miniapps" has been created to serve as proxies for full scale applications. Each miniapp is designed to represent a key performance characteristic that does or is expected to significantly impact the runtime performance of an application program. In this paper we introduce a methodology for assessing the ability of these miniapps to effectively represent these performance issues. We applied this methodology to three miniapps, examining the linkage between them and an application they are intended to represent. Herein we evaluate the fidelity of that linkage. This work represents the initial steps required to begin to answer the question, "Under what conditions does a miniapp represent a key performance characteristic in a full app?