|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
© The Rockefeller University Press,
0021-9525/2000//1141 $5.00
The Journal of Cell Biology, Volume 151, Number 6,
, 2000 1141-1154
Original Article |
Nischarin, a Novel Protein That Interacts with the Integrin 
5 Subunit and Inhibits Cell Migration
alahari{at}med.unc.edu
Integrins have been implicated in key cellular functions, including cytoskeletal organization, motility, growth, survival, and control of gene expression. The plethora of integrin
and β subunits suggests that individual integrins have unique biological roles, implying specific molecular connections between integrins and intracellular signaling or regulatory pathways. Here, we have used a yeast two-hybrid screen to identify a novel protein, termed Nischarin, that binds preferentially to the cytoplasmic domain of the integrin 5 subunit, inhibits cell motility, and alters actin filament organization. Nischarin is primarily a cytosolic protein, but clearly associates with 5β1, as demonstrated by coimmunoprecipitation. Overexpression of Nischarin markedly reduces 5β1-dependent cell migration in several cell types. Rat embryo fibroblasts transfected with Nischarin constructs have "basket-like" networks of peripheral actin filaments, rather than typical stress fibers. These observations suggest that Nischarin might affect signaling to the cytoskeleton regulated by Rho-family GTPases. In support of this, Nischarin expression reverses the effect of Rac on lamellipodia formation and selectively inhibits Rac-mediated activation of the c-fos promoter. Thus, Nischarin may play a negative role in cell migration by antagonizing the actions of Rac on cytoskeletal organization and cell movement.
Key Words: integrin • Rac • cell migration • cytoskeleton • two hybrid
© 2000 The Rockefeller University Press
 |
Introduction |
|---|
 TopAbstract Introduction Materials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
/β heterodimers and each subunit has a large extracellular domain, a single helical transmembrane domain, and, typically, a relatively short cytoplasmic domain. At specialized sites of cell–matrix adhesion, termed focal contacts, integrin cytoplasmic domains articulate, directly or indirectly, with various proteins, including talin, -actinin, vinculin, paxillin, tensin, and focal adhesion kinase (FAK), that are involved in coupling between integrins and the actin cytokeleton (Burridge and Chrzanowska-Wodnicka 1996). Integrin–cytoskeletal linkages play a critical role in cell adhesion, determination of cell shape, and cell motility (Burridge and Chrzanowska-Wodnicka 1996; Miyamoto et al. 1998). Integrins also play an important role in signal transduction processes, either by directly generating signals or by modulating signals generated by other receptors (Clark and Brugge 1995; Schwartz 1997; Aplin et al. 1998, Aplin et al. 1999a; Giancotti and Ruoslahti 1999). Integrin modulation of signaling affects control of the cell cycle (Assoian 1997) and regulation of programmed cell death (Frisch and Ruoslahti 1997).
The cytoplasmic domains of integrins play a key role in their function. Thus, the β chain cytoplasmic tail has been implicated in the recruitment of integrins to focal contacts (Reszka et al. 1992), activation of FAK (Akiyama et al. 1994), and determining the affinity of integrins for their ligands (Wang et al. 1997). Similarly, the subunit cytoplasmic tail has been implicated in regulation of integrin affinity (O'Toole et al. 1994) and control of cell motility (Chan et al. 1992; Bauer et al. 1993).
Integrins can interact with a variety of partner proteins, including various membrane receptors that bind to the extracellular and transmembrane domains of integrins (Hemler 1998; Porter and Hogg 1998), as well as intracellular proteins that associate with integrin cytoplasmic tails (Aplin et al. 1998). Yeast two-hybrid techniques have been used to identify several proteins that interact with integrin β subunit cytoplasmic domains and that have interesting and important biological functions (Kolanus et al. 1996; Biffo et al. 1997; Chang et al. 1997; Kashiwagi et al. 1997; Delcommenne et al. 1998; Li et al. 1999; Zhang and Hemler 1999). Fewer proteins have been reported to interact with chain cytoplasmic domains. Thus, calreticulin has been reported to bind the conserved GFFKR motif found in all chains and to modulate integrin affinity (Coppolino et al. 1997), whereas calcein integrin binding protein (CIB) is a calcium-binding protein that associates specifically with the cytoplasmic domain of IIb, possibly playing a role in activation of the IIbβ3 integrin (Naik et al. 1997).
The 5β1 integrin, a receptor for fibronectin, seems to play a special role in regulating growth and survival in some cell types. Thus, high expression of 5β1 has been linked with reductions in tumor cell growth rates both in vitro and in vivo (Giancotti and Ruoslahti 1990; Schreiner et al. 1991; Varner et al. 1995). Surprisingly, 5β1 also plays a unique role in protecting cells against apoptosis triggered by mitogen deprivation (Zhang et al. 1995; O'Brien et al. 1996; Lee and Juliano 2000). In addition, 5β1 has been reported to regulate muscle cell growth and differentiation (Sastry et al. 1999). These data suggest that certain effects of 5β1 on growth or apoptosis may be 5 specific, and thus, there may be intracellular proteins that selectively interact with the 5 cytoplasmic tail to mediate these events. Accordingly, we have made use of the yeast two-hybrid system to identify proteins that bind to the 5 cytoplasmic domain. We have identified a novel protein that associates with the cytoplasmic tail of the 5 subunit, and, to a minor degree, with cytoplasmic domains of other subunits, and that strongly affects cell migration and influences cytoskeletal organization. We named this novel protein Nischarin, which is derived from a term in classic Sanskrit that connotes slowness of motion. This designation is based on the finding, shown below, that overexpression of Nischarin dramatically impairs cell migration.
|
Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
200 trp1-901, 112 ade2 LYS2::(lexAop)4-HIS3 URA3(lexAop)8-LacZ Gal4) and AMR70 (Mata his3 lys2 trp1 leu2 URA3::(lexAop)8-LacZ Gal4) yeast strains were used (gifts from Dr. Stan Hollenberg, Vollum Institute, Oregon Health Sciences University, Portland, OR). Yeast two-hybrid screening was conducted as previously described (Vojtek et al. 1993). The pBTM 5 plasmid, which has the 5 cytoplasmic domain fused to the LexA DNA-binding domain and with a tryptophan marker, was transformed into yeast strain L40 and selected for tryptophan prototrophy. Plasmids (pVp16) containing mouse embryonic cDNA libraries of 9.5 and 10.5 d fused to the VP16-transactivating domain and a leucine marker were transformed into the L40 strain containing the bait plasmid and screened for leucine, tryptophan, and histidine prototrophy. A total of 1.7 x 107 transformants were screened for positives. The libraries and vectors were gifts from Dr. Stan Hollenberg. Histidine-positive colonies were further tested for LacZ activation. Dual positives were further confirmed for specificity of the interaction using various baits and included integrin β1, 2, and v cytoplasmic domains, as well as lamin, an irrelevant protein in this context. Specificity of the interaction was confirmed by mating experiments. The pBTM bait plasmids were "cured" from dual-positive clones by growth in nonselective medium. The presence of the library plasmids with inserts in the "cured" clones was confirmed by PCR using vector-specific primers. AMR 70 strain cells were transformed separately with pBTM 5, pBTM β1, pBTM v, pBTM 2, pBTM lamin, or pBTM vector alone. These transformed cells were mated with the "cured" L40 cells that contained positive pVP16 library plasmids.
Cloning of Full-Length Nischarin
To clone full-length Nischarin, we screened a mouse brain library in the lambda Zap II vector (Stratagene). Using a colony hybridization technique, 
30,000 plaques were screened with a 32P-labeled PCR product consisting of 0.45 kb of the integrin-binding region of Nischarin. From this screen, one strong positive plaque was identified and confirmed in two further rounds of screening. Sequence analysis of this clone (A3.1) indicated that the sequence was incomplete at the 3' end. Using a different PCR probe, the lambda Zap library was screened again to obtain the remainder of the Nischarin cDNA. This screen gave several positives, and the longest clone (clone 14.2) was picked. Clones A3.1 and 14.2 provided the complete open reading frame (ORF) of Nischarin.
DNA Constructions and Transfection
The construction of two-hybrid bait plasmids, GST chimeras, and partial- and full-length myc-tagged Nischarin mammalian expression constructs followed standard recombinant DNA procedures. Clones A3.1 and 14.2, mentioned above, were used to make full-length expression constructs. Full details are available upon request. A chimera comprised of full-length Nischarin and GFP was prepared by an inframe insertion of the coding region of Nischarin into the pE-GFP-N1 vector (CLONTECH Laboratories, Inc.). Expression plasmids for CD4, human 2, and v integrin subunits were obtained from Drs. R. Nicholas (University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC), L. Parise (University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill), and David Cheresh (The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA), respectively. Transfection of mammalian cell lines was usually done with Lipofectamine (GIBCO BRL) or Superfect (QIAGEN), according to the manufacturer's specifications.
Northern Blot Analyses
A mouse multiple tissue Northern blot (CLONTECH Laboratories, Inc.) was probed with a 0.45-kb fragment of the 5 integrin–binding region of Nischarin (probe 1) (nucleotides 1,305–1,743), with fragments from the far 5' end (probe 2) (nucleotides –334–+56], or the 3' end (probe 3)(nucleotides 2,936–3,748). RNA was isolated from various cell lines, run on agarose-formaldehyde gels, and hybridized with probes 1–3, using previously described techniques (Alahari et al. 1996).
Antibodies
The predicted ORF of Nischarin was used to design two peptides represented at the far COOH terminus of the protein. The peptides (EALCGRELPVELTGA-C and LDDGRRVRDLDRVL-C) were obtained from the University of North Carolina-Protein Core Laboratory. Both peptides were conjugated to keyhole limpet hemocyanin (Pierce Chemical Co.) and sent to Aves Laboratories for production of chicken pAbs. Anti-5 cytoplasmic domain pAb was a gift from Richard Hynes (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA). Anti-myc mAbs and pAbs were purchased from Babco. pAbs to v cytoplasmic domain were provided by Guido Tarone (University of Torino, Torino, Italy). Rat anti–mouse 5 mAb, and control rat IgG were purchased from PharMingen and Sigma-Aldrich, respectively. mAbs to vinculin and phosphotyrosine were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich and Upstate Biotechnology. Fluorescent phalloidin was bought from Sigma-Aldrich. A partially purified preparation of the human 5β1 integrin (Chemicon) was sometimes used as a control.
Binding To GST Fusion Proteins
GST–Nischarin fusion proteins expressed from pGEX vectors (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) were prepared in a standard manner and bound to glutathione-Sepharose 4B beads for "pull down" experiments. CHO cells (clone B227), which overexpress the human 5 integrin subunit, were used as the source of integrins (Bauer et al. 1993). 5-deficient cells (CHO B2) were used as controls. CHO cells were lysed in a buffer containing nonionic detergent and protease inhibitors. The CHO lysate was added to the GST protein–containing beads, incubated for 1 h at 4°C, and washed four times with buffer. Bound CHO proteins were eluted by boiling in 2x SDS sample buffer and analyzed by Western blotting using anti-5 cytoplasmic domain antibody.
Coimmunoprecipitation Experiments
CHO B227 and B2 cells were transiently transfected with myc vector, myc-Nischarin (434–581), or myc-Raf. After 48 h of transfection, cells were lysed in a 0.5% Triton X-100 buffer. These lysates were immunoprecipitated with anti-myc antibody, resolved by 7% SDS-PAGE, electrophoretically transferred to nylon membranes, and Western blotted with anti-5 cytoplasmic domain antibody. In further studies with full-length Nischarin, cells were lysed in a buffer containing 0.1% Triton X-100 (Borowsky and Hynes 1998). In one set of experiments, lysates of Cos7 cells cotransfected with myc-Nischarin and 5, v, or CD4, were immunoprecipitated with anti-myc and blotted with anti-5 extracellular domain antibody (Transduction Laboratories), anti-v, or anti-CD4 antibodies (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Inc.). For mouse NB41A3 cells, endogenous 5 was immunoprecipitated with rat anti-5 mAb and the immunoprecipitate was blotted for endogenous Nischarin using the chicken anti-Nischarin pAb described above.
Cell Migration Experiments
Wound-type cell migration experiments were performed as described previously (Bauer et al. 1992, Bauer et al. 1993), with minor modifications. In brief, 3T3 cells were cotransfected with 1 µg of β-galactosidase plasmid and various amounts of full-length myc-Nischarin construct and plated on gridded tissue culture dishes. After 48 h, the cell layer was scraped along the center of the dish with a sterile razor blade. After overnight incubation at 37°C in serum-containing medium, cells migrating into the scraped area were detected by staining for β-galactosidase. The percent of transfected cells that migrated across the line and into the denuded area was calculated by counting blue cells in several gridded fields from the unscraped area and in several fields from the scraped area. At least 50 migrant cells were counted for each condition. The ratio of migrant transfected cells to total transfected cells x100 was taken as the percent migration.
Cell migration studies using Nischarin-transfected or control-transfected 3T3 cells or CHO cells were also performed using a transwell assay, according to a previously described procedure (Keely et al. 1997). The transfected cells were marked by use of a GFP expression plasmid. Fibronectin or other matrix proteins were coated on the underside of the transwell, the cells were plated on the upper surface, and the percent of Nischarin or control transfectants migrating across the 8-µm pore size membrane was determined by visual inspection in a fluorescence microscope after overnight incubation in BSA-containing medium. Transwell experiments were performed with wild-type 3T3 cells, 3T3 sublines overexpressing human 5 or 2 subunits (Aplin et al. 1999b), and CHO B2 cells lacking 5, as well as CHO B2a27, its 5 transfectant (Bauer et al. 1993).
Subcellular Fractionation
Cos7 cells transfected with myc-Nischarin and untransfected Neuro 2A cells were subjected to subcellular fractionation, as described previously (Gu and Majerus 1996), with minor modifications. Cell lysates were centrifuged briefly at 1,500 rpm to remove nuclei and intact cells. The supernatant was further spun at 100,000 g for 30 min at 4°C; this supernatant was considered to be the cytosolic fraction. The pellet was solubilized in a 1% Triton X-100–containing solution and centrifuged at 100,000 g for 30 min; this supernatant was considered to be the membrane fraction. Membrane and cytosolic fractions were resolved by 8% SDS-PAGE, electrophoretically transferred onto a nylon membrane, and blotted with anti-Nischarin antibodies, as described above.
Fluorescence Microscopy
Immunofluorescence studies with antibodies to integrins or focal contact proteins were conducted according to procedures described previously (Burridge et al. 1992). Rat embryonic fibroblasts (REFs) were cotransfected with 1 µg of GFP plasmid and 2 µg of myc-Nischarin plasmid, or 1 µg of GFP alone, per well on six-well plates. After 48 h, cells were trypsinized and plated onto fibronectin-coated cover slips for 3 h in serum-containing medium. The cells were washed three times with cold PBS, fixed for 10 min in 0.37% formaldehyde, and permeabilized in 1%Triton X-100 for 5 min. Then, cells were washed several times and blocked in 2% BSA for 1 h at room temperature. Primary antibody incubation was done in a moist chamber overnight in a cold room. Anti-tubulin, anti-PY, anti-vinculin, and anti-vimentin antibodies were used at a dilution of 1:100. After rinsing in PBS, coverslips were incubated with an appropriate TRITC-conjugated secondary antibody for 1 h at room temperature. For actin staining, cover slips were incubated with TRITC-phalloidin (1:1,000) for 15 min.
In some cases, the subcellular distribution of Nischarin was evaluated using the full-length Nischarin–GFP chimera described above. This was transfected into 3T3 cells at a level of 2 µg per well (it should be noted that levels of expression of Nischarin–GFP chimeric protein were substantially lower than expression of myc-Nischarin protein when equivalent amounts of plasmid were transfected). After 48 h of transfection, cells were plated onto fibronectin coverslips, as described above, and incubated with antibodies to vinculin or integrins, and then with TRITC-conjugated secondary antibody, or with TRITC-phalloidin to visualize actin. In all cases, coverslips were observed on a ZEISS Axioscop fluorescence microscope using a 40x oil immersion objective. Images were recorded using a CCD camera and a computer with Metamorph image analysis software.
Rho GTPase Experiments
For studies on Rho-mediated signaling, NIH 3T3 cells were cotransfected with 1 µg of luciferase reporter under the control of the c-fos promoter (c-fos–Luc) (Hill et al. 1995), 3 µg of pAX142 vector, pAX142 Rac Q61L (Whitehead et al. 1988), or an activated MEK construct (pFC-MEK1; Stratagene) and various amounts of pcDNA myc-Nischarin or pcDNA vector, using Superfect. The pAX142 vectors were provided by Drs. I. Whitehead and C. Der (University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill). After 4 h of transfection, cells were washed with PBS, maintained in 0.5% serum for 24 h, and lysed in luciferase buffer, as described above. Additional experiments were done with commercial luciferase reporter systems (Stratagene) using either Rac-driven c-Jun transcriptional activation or protein kinase A–driven activation of the cyclic AMP–response element (CRE)-response element. In all transfections, DNA quantities were normalized with the pcDNA vector. Luciferase activity was measured by normalizing for total protein content or by coexpression of Renilla luciferase.
To study the effect of Rho-family GTPase on the cytoskeleton, 3T3 cells were transfected with a plasmid expressing an activated (Q61L) form of Rac and with a Nischarin plasmid or with a vector control. A small amount of a GFP-expressing plasmid was used to mark the transfectants. After 48 h, the actin filaments were stained with TRITC-phalloidin and the cells were observed by fluorescence microscopy, as described above.
|
Results |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
5-interacting Protein5 cytoplasmic domain. A protein composed of the complete cytoplasmic tail of 5 fused with the DNA-binding domain of Lex A was expressed from the yeast plasmid pBTM5. We searched mouse embryonic libraries for proteins that interact with the 5 cytoplasmic tail. Protein domains from the libraries were fused to the VP16-transactivating domain and expressed from the yeast plasmid pVP16. Cotransformants of pBTM5 and pVP16 in the yeast L40 were screened for conversion to histidine prototrophy. Out of 1.7 x 107 transformants screened, 120 colonies were positive for histidine; of those, 45 were also positive for LacZ activation. To determine specificity, several other "baits" were tested for interaction with the 5-binding library protein(s). In particular, we tested for interactions with the cytoplasmic domains of the 2, v, or β1 integrin subunits, or with the irrelevant protein lamin. As seen in Fig. 1 and Table , the 5 bait strongly interacted with the library protein and activated expression of the histidine and LacZ markers. The v and 2 baits only weakly activated the histidine reporter, and were unable to activate LacZ. These data suggest that the 5-positive library protein may interact weakly with several integrin subunits, but binds strongly to the 5 subunit.
|
|
|
Nischarin Binds Integrin 5 Subunit In Vitro and In Vivo
To confirm that the interaction between the 5 cytoplasmic tail and Nischarin detected by two-hybrid analysis also occurs in vitro, two GST–Nischarin constructs were made, GST–Nisch (435–582) and GST–Nisch (33–588). GST–Nisch (435–582) corresponds to the integrin-binding region of Nischarin identified in the two-hybrid system, whereas the second construct contains additional NH2-terminal residues. The Nischarin–GST fusion proteins were immobilized on a glutathione-agarose matrix and incubated with purified 5β1 protein, with a cell lysate of CHO B227 (human 5–transfected cells) or CHO B2 (5-deficient cells). The proteins retained on the glutathione matrix were analyzed by SDS-PAGE and immunoblotting for 5. Consistent with the yeast data, the GST–Nischarin fusion proteins, but not GST alone, were able to interact with purified 5β1 or with 5β1 from a cell lysate (Fig. 3 A). These data indicate Nischarin binds the 5 integrin subunit in vitro.
|
5 integrin subunit in mammalian cells. First, CHO B227 cells were transiently transfected with a construct expressing a truncated myc epitope–tagged segment of Nischarin (435–582), with myc-tagged Raf, or with myc vector alone. Cells were lysed in a buffer containing nonionic detergent, immunoprecipitated with anti-myc antibody, and blotted with anti-5 or anti-myc antibodies. Western blotting with anti-5 antibody indicated that 5 coimmunoprecipitated with anti-myc antibody only in cells transfected with myc-Nischarin (435–582), but not in cells transfected with myc-Raf or myc vector alone (Fig. 3 B). Expression of similar amounts of myc-Nischarin and myc-Raf was confirmed by Western blotting (data not shown). In experiments with CHO B2 cells, which lack 5, Nischarin did not coimmunoprecipitate a band in the 5 region. This indicates that myc-tagged Nischarin (435–582), but not an irrelevant myc-tagged protein, can bind 5β1 integrin.
Further coimmunoprecipitation experiments were done using full-length Nischarin. To show that Nischarin interacts preferentially with 5 integrins and not with other transmembrane proteins, coimmunoprecipitations were done with CD4, another protein having a single transmembrane domain. Cos 7 cells were transiently cotransfected with myc-Nischarin and pcDNA-5 or myc-Nischarin and pcDNA-CD4. These cells were lysed and myc immunoprecipitates were processed for blotting with anti-5 or anti-CD4 antibodies. As shown in Fig. 3 C, myc-Nischarin specifically immunoprecipitated 5, but not CD4.
To further examine the alpha subunit selectivity of Nischarin, Cos 7 cells were cotransfected with myc-Nischarin and plasmids expressing the human 5 or v subunits. These cells were lysed and myc immunoprecipitates were processed for blotting with anti-5 or anti-v antibodies. As seen in Fig. 3 D, Nischarin coimmunoprecipitated substantial amounts of 5, but barely detectable v subunits. Thus, the strong preference of Nischarin for the 5 subunit, which was detected in the two-hybrid analysis, seems to be borne out in the cellular setting.
Coimmunoprecipitation experiments were also done for endogenous Nischarin and endogenous 5 subunit. NB41A3 cells, a mouse neuronal-derived line, were lysed and immunoprecipitates formed using rat anti–mouse 5 mAb, or rat IgG as a control. The immunoprecipitates were Western blotted using chicken anti-Nischarin pAb. As seen in Fig. 3 E, a band for Nischarin was detected in the 5 immunoprecipitate, but not in the control. It was not possible to examine other integrin –subunit imunoprecipitates, since only low levels of expression were found in NB41A3 cells for other integrins for which anti–mouse mAb are available.
The experiments shown in Fig. 3 A–E indicate: (a) full-length Nischarin or truncated Nischarin (435–582) can bind to the 5 integrin subunit, (b) other proteins (e.g., myc-Raf) do not bind 5 under the conditions used for immunoprecipitation, and (c) full-length Nischarin does not bind to coexpressed irrelevant proteins. Furthermore, Nischarin seems to prefer the 5 subunit compared with other tested subunits. These findings demonstrate a selective interaction between Nischarin and the 5 integrin subunit in mammalian cells. This interaction is able to occur under physiological conditions, as indicated by the coimmunoprecipitation of endogenous 5 and Nischarin.
Tissue Distribution of Nischarin
To determine the tissue distribution of Nischarin mRNA, a mouse multiple tissue Northern blot was hybridized with a PCR probe from the Nischarin integrin-binding region. A single mRNA of 5.5 kb was detected. In further analysis (not shown), three probes from different regions of the cDNA (extreme 5' end, integrin-binding region, and extreme 3' end of the ORF) were used; all three probes detected the same message. Nischarin mRNA expression was highest in brain and kidney, expression levels were lower in heart, liver, lung, and skeletal muscle, whereas no expression was seen in spleen and testis (Fig. 4 A). To address the expression of Nischarin in various cell types, we performed Northern blot analysis on several cell lines. Nischarin message was present in various rodent epithelial, fibroblast, and neuronal cell lines, though higher levels tended to be present in neuronal cells (Fig. 4 B and data not shown). Analysis of a mouse embryo RNA blot indicated the presence of Nischarin message as early as 7 d of development (Fig. 4 C).
|
190 kD (Fig. 5A and Fig. B); this is somewhat larger than the predicted molecular weight of expressed Nischarin, but the reason for this is unclear. The expression of endogenous Nischarin was evaluated in detergent lysates of several cell lines by Western blotting with chicken anti-Nischarin antibodies (Fig. 5 A). In rat intestinal epithelial (RIE) cells (Oldham et al. 1996), a protein band of 190 kD was detected; this band comigrated with the immunoreactive band in Nischarin-transfected Cos7 cells. In NIH 3T3 cells, the chicken anti-Nischarin antibody detected a very weak band of 190 kD (data not shown). In several mouse neuronal cell lines (NIE 119, NB41A3, BC(3)H1, and Neuro 2A), an immunoreactive band of somewhat higher apparent molecular weight was detected (Fig. 5 A, and data not shown). The immunoreactivities of the bands detected in Nischarin-transfected Cos7 cells, or in nontransfected RIE cells, were competed out upon addition of the Nischarin COOH-region peptide used for chicken immunization (Fig. 5 C). Thus, the bands detected by the chicken antibody in the various rodent cell lines or in the transfected Cos7 cells are very likely to represent Nischarin. The detection of immunoreactive bands of differing apparent molecular weights in the various cell types examined suggests differences in splicing or posttranslational modifications. The fact that only a single Nischarin message is seen by Northern analysis seems to militate against the possibility of splicing differences. However, alternate splicing of a short region of the mRNA might not be readily detected. The data of Fig. 5A–C, indicate that Nischarin is widely expressed in various rodent cell lines, with higher levels found in cells of neuronal origin.
|
|
5 antibody also failed to reveal any obvious colocalization with Nischarin (not shown). Similar studies using an antiphosphotyrosine antibody to detect focal contact sites yielded the same result (data not shown). Thus, Nischarin is found primarily in the cytosol, with some concentration in the perinuclear area, but does not concentrate at "classical" focal adhesion sites.
The observations in Fig. 6 indicate that Nischarin is largely a cytosolic protein, and its overall distribution does not coincide with focal adhesion structures. Since Nischarin can clearly associate with the 5 subunit, as demonstrated by coimmunoprecipitation, this may indicate that only a small fraction of the total cellular pool of Nischarin is associated with the 5β1 integrin at any given time.
Nischarin Inhibits Cell Migration
To investigate the biological role(s) of Nischarin, we focused on the finding that Nischarin seems to interact most strongly with the 5 subunit and on the knowledge that 5β1 plays an important role in cell motility. The effect of Nicharin on cell migration was initially evaluated using a monolayer "wounding" assay (Bauer et al. 1993). NIH 3T3 cells were cotransfected with various amounts of a plasmid expressing full-length Nischarin and with a β-galactosidase marker plasmid. After transfection and recovery, the transfected cell monolayers were scraped with a razor blade. The migration of transfected (β-galactosidase positive) cells across the wound boundary was quantitated, as described in Materials and Methods. As seen in Fig. 7 A, cells overexpressing Nischarin showed significant inhibition of migration compared with cells transfected with β-galactosidase plasmid alone. Increasing the dose of Nischarin plasmid resulted in a progressive decrease in migration. This is unlikely to be due to toxicity since increasing the amount of Nischarin transfected did not reduce the survival of the transfectants, as judged by the fraction of β-galactosidase–positive cells in the total cell population.
|
5β1 expression (Bauer et al. 1993). CHO B2 cells lack 5β1 and do not adhere to fibronectin, but express other integrins that allow adhesion and migration on vitronectin or other matrix proteins. CHO B2a27 cells derive from B2, but have been stably transfected with human 5; these cells migrate on fibronectin in a completely 5β1-dependent manner. The transwell membranes for these assays were coated with either fibronectin or vitronectin. As seen in Fig. 7 B, transfection of B2a27 cells with Nischarin led to a major reduction of their migration on fibronectin-coated membranes, but only a modest reduction on vitronectin-coated membranes. Furthermore, migration of the B2 cells on vitronectin-coated membranes was not at all affected by expression of Nischarin. Treatment of cells with cytochalasin D completely abolished migration of either cell type.
In another set of experiments, transwell migration assays were performed with 3T3 cells stably transfected with human 5 or 2 subunits (Aplin et al. 1999b). The adhesion, and presumably migration, of these cells is strongly influenced by the transfected integrin subunit. As seen in Fig. 7 C, transfection with Nischarin markedly inhibited migration of the 5-overexpressing cells on fibronectin, but had little effect on the migration of the 2-overexpressing cells on collagen.
Thus, Nischarin overexpression can profoundly inhibit cell migration. This effect displays substantial integrin subunit specificity and is much more dramatic for migration on fibronectin mediated by 5β1 than for migration on other matrix proteins mediated by other integrins.
Effects of Nischarin on the Cytoskeleton
Since overexpression of Nischarin resulted in substantial alterations in cell migration, we wished to determine if this was accompanied by changes in the organization of the cytoskeleton. REF cells were transfected with plasmids expressing full-length Nischarin and GFP. Cells were probed with the actin-binding reagent phalloidin or were immunostained for phosphotyrosine, vinculin, tubulin, or vimentin. Phalloidin staining (Fig. 8 A) indicated that many of the transfected REF cells had a unique phenotype, with a more or less circular shape and having actin filaments arranged in "basket" structures around the periphery, rather than as the linear stress fibers commonly seen in adherent fibroblasts. Although this phenotype was not universal, 60% of the REF cells cotransfected with Nischarin and GFP showed the basket-like actin structures. In contrast, only a few percent of the control GFP transfectants had this phenotype. We next looked for the effects of Nischarin on focal adhesions by staining for vinculin and phosphotyrosine. As seen in Fig. 8 B, vinculin-containing focal contacts and phosphotyrosine in focal contacts were somewhat reduced in REF cells transfected with Nischarin compared with control cells. Staining, with anti-tubulin or anti-vimentin antibodies, suggested that Nischarin expression had little effect on the organization of microtubules or intermediate filaments in REF cells (not shown). Similar effects were observed in WI-38 cells, another well spread cell line (not shown). However, the "basket" phenotype was not apparent in Nischarin-transfected NIH 3T3 cells or in Cos7 cells, both of which are less well spread. The highly organized actin filaments of REFs may allow easier visualization of the relatively subtle effects of Nischarin on cytoskeletal architecture.
|
|
35–40% of the cells displaying large lamellipodia when higher doses of Nischarin were transfected (Fig. 10 C). Some of the Rac plus Nischarin–transfected cells resembled untransfected 3T3 cells (Fig. 10 B). However, various cells at each dose of Nischarin displayed intermediate phenotypes with partial ruffling and incomplete lamellipodia (not shown). Thus, overexpression of Nischarin can inhibit lamellipodia formation, one of the most characteristic effects of Rac on the cytoskeleton and associated with cell movement. These findings suggest that Nischarin inhibits cell migration, at least in part, through its actions on pathways regulated by the Rac GTPase.
|
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
/β heterodimers can play unique roles in the regulation of cell migration, growth, survival, and differentiation (Pozzi et al. 1998; Farrelly et al. 1999; Liu et al. 1999; Lochter et al. 1999; Sastry et al. 1999; Lee and Juliano 2000). This may come about via specific interactions between the cytoplasmic domains of individual integrins and intracellular proteins involved in signal transduction or other aspects of cell regulation. The 5β1 integrin is particularly interesting in this regard, since it has been implicated in the control of both cell growth and programmed cell death (Varner et al. 1995; Zhang et al. 1995; O'Brien et al. 1996; Sastry et al. 1999; Lee and Juliano 2000). Here, we have reported the identification and characterization of mouse Nischarin, a soluble intracellular protein that is capable of interacting with the cytoplasmic domain of the integrin 5 subunit. Using both two-hybrid analysis and coimmunoprecipitation of expressed proteins in cells, Nischarin was found to interact with the 5 subunit much more strongly than with the other two subunits tested. Furthermore, immunoprecipitation of endogenous 5β1 from a mouse neuronal cell line resulted in coimmunoprecipitation of endogenous Nischarin. Thus, current evidence suggests that Nischarin interacts preferentially with the 5 subunit, and this interaction can occur under physiological conditions. However, we cannot rule out the possibility that Nischarin may interact with other examples of the many known subunits. Nischarin bears limited resemblance to identified proteins with a well-known functions. Only two close homologues of Nischarin have been reported in the DNA data bases. The human homologue of Nischarin has been described as a putative imidazoline receptor (Ivanov et al. 1998) (sequence data available from GenBank/EMBL/DDBJ under accession no. AF082516). Imidazolines are thought to be neurotransmitters and, thus, their receptors would presumably be transmembrane proteins. However, our results clearly show that endogenous Nischarin is primarily a soluble protein and most likely rules out a role as a transmembrane neurotransmitter receptor. A second close homologue of the NH2-terminal region of Nischarin has been reported from the C. elegans genome project (accession no. Z69383) and two similar proteins are found in Drosophila. However, the function of these proteins is completely unknown. The human protein contains a segment that is highly homologous to the integrin-binding region of mouse Nischarin that we detected by two-hybrid screening. There are also substantial homologies between the central proline-rich region of Nischarin and portions of several neurofilament proteins, but the functional significance of this is unclear. Examination of the primary sequence of Nischarin, using programs that search for common protein structural or functional motifs, yielded few clues as to the biological role of this molecule.
Nischarin is expressed in many cell types and is found both in the adult mouse and in the developing embryo. Higher amounts of Nischarin are found in neuronal-derived cell lines than in epithelial cells or fibroblasts, but some Nischarin is expressed in all of these cell types. Western blotting of various cell lines for endogenous Nischarin revealed proteins of two distinct sizes; in some cells, an 190 kD form is found that comigrates with expressed Nischarin. However, in neuronal cells, a larger form of the protein is seen. The basis for this difference is currently unknown, but may reflect cell-type specific alternative splicing, use of alternate start codons, or posttranslational modification.
Immunofluorescence and biochemical fractionation studies indicate that Nischarin is largely a soluble cytosolic protein. It is clear from fluorescence microscopy studies that Nischarin is not concentrated in vinculin-rich focal contacts. Although, one might expect a protein that interacts with 5β1 integrin to be localized to focal contacts, this is not always the case. For example, members of the TM4 family of proteins clearly interact specifically with certain integrins, but TM4 proteins are not found in "classic" focal contacts (Porter and Hogg 1998; Berditchevski and Odintsova 1999). This is also true of calveolin, which has been found to interact with certain integrins (Wary et al. 1996). At present it is unknown whether there is any physiological regulation of the association between the 5β1 integrin and Nischarin that might affect its subcellular distribution.
It seems clear that Nischarin can selectively bind to the cytoplasmic domain of the 5 integrin subunit, based both upon two-hybrid analysis and coimmunoprecipitation of full-length Nischarin with native 5β1 in mammalian cells. However, at any given time, only a small fraction of the total Nischarin in a cell is likely to be bound to the integrin, since most Nischarin is found in the cytosolic fraction. This type of situation is often seen in signaling pathways, where only a minority of a cytosolic effector molecule associates with its membrane-bound partner molecule. The well-known association between Ras and Raf-1 is a good example, where Raf is primarily found in the cytosol, despite its clear ability to interact with membrane-bound Ras (Wartmann et al. 1997; Campbell et al. 1998).
Overexpression of full-length Nischarin results in major changes in cell behavior and also affects cytoskeletal organization. The most dramatic aspect is the profound inhibition of cell migration caused by Nischarin. At this point, it is unclear whether the reduced cell migration observed in the "wounding" and transwell assays used here is due to a reduction in innate motility or to an impairment of directional movement (Gu et al. 1999). This will be an important issue for further investigation. The effects of Nischarin on cell migration are quite -subunit selective. Thus, 5β1-dependent migration on fibronectin is inhibited far more strongly than migration on other substrata mediated by other integrins.
The overexpression of Nischarin in certain fibroblasts leads to substantial changes in focal contact and actin filament organization. Thus, Nischarin-transfected REF cells display fewer linear stress fibers and a reduction in mature, vinculin-positive focal contacts. Instead, the actin filaments form unusual "basket" structures around the cell periphery. These effects are clearly seen in well spread fibroblasts such as REF and WI-38 cells, but are much less apparent in cell lines such as 3T3 and Cos. The dramatic effects of Nischarin on cell migration and actin filament organization described here may be due, at least in part, to the fact that the transfected molecule is expressed at substantially higher levels than the normal amount of endogenous Nischarin. However, even the somewhat skewed effects triggered by overexpression may provide important clues in eventually ascertaining the physiological role of Nischarin.
The observed effects of Nischarin on cell motility and cytoskeletal organization suggested that Nischarin might impact the pathways used by some Rho-family GTPases to regulate individual pools of actin filaments (Mackay and Hall 1998). Thus, it was satisfying to find that overexpression of Nischarin strongly blocked the ability of active forms of Rac to drive reporter gene expression from the serum-response element of the c-fos promoter. Failure to strongly block MEK-induced activation of this same promoter indicates that Nischarin acts preferentially on Rac-mediated events rather than other signaling cascades. The theme that Nischarin can block Rac functions clearly associated with cytoskeletal organization and cell motility was extended by the observation that Nischarin can inhibit or reverse the well-known action of Rac in promoting lamellipodia formation. Thus, it seems likely that Nischarin can have a substantial impact on the signaling and cytoskeletal functions of Rac. There is little in the primary sequence of Nischarin to suggest a mechanism for its influence on Rac GTPase pathways, that is, no obvious homologies to exchange factor, GAP, or GDI domains (Sasaki and Takai 1998) are apparent.
Lately, the mechanistic basis underlying integrin-mediated cell movement has received a good deal of attention. It is clear that FAK is a key regulator of cell migration in most cells (Ilic et al. 1995; Cary et al. 1998; Sieg et al. 2000). Overexpression of the PTEN tumor suppressor, a dual specificity phosphatase, results in the dephosphorylation of FAK and a reduction in directional cell motility (Tamura et al. 1998; Gu et al. 1999). The focal contact protein p130Cas is tyrosine phosphorylated by FAK; subsequently, the adaptor protein Crk can bind phosphotyrosyl sites on Cas. The Cas–Crk complex has been implicated in the control of cell migration, whereas the Rac GTPase seems to be a downstream mediator of the Cas/Crk pathway (Cary et al. 1998; Klemke et al. 1998). In epithelial cells, an important connection has been made between cell motility and a signaling pathway involving phosphatidyl inositol-3-kinase and the Rac and CDC42 GTPases (Keely et al. 1997; Shaw et al. 1997). Interestingly, integrin-mediated cell adhesion has been shown to directly activate Rac and CDC42 (Price et al. 1998), whereas Ras, CDC42, Rac, and Rho have all been implicated in cooperative regulation of cell movement (Clark and Brugge 1995; Nobes and Hall 1999). Thus, though many of the molecular details remain to be determined, it seems clear that a pathway (perhaps branched) involving integrins, FAK, Cas/Crk, phosphatidyl inositol-3-kinase, and Rho-family GTPases positively regulates cell motility. However, other than the role of PTEN in FAK dephosphorylation, there has been little evidence, to date, of physiological inhibitors of cell motility. In this context, Nischarin may play an important role by negatively impacting cell motility pathways controlled by Rac.
In summary, we have identified and characterized a novel protein that we have named Nischarin. This protein can bind selectively to the cytoplasmic tail of the integrin 5 subunit. Overexpression of Nischarin has potent effects in terms of retarding cell migration, and it acts preferentially on migration mediated by the 5β1 integrin. Nischarin overexpression also influences actin filament organization in some cell types. These effects may be mediated through Nischarin's selective action on pathways regulated by the Rac GTPase. Thus, one important aspect of Nischarin's biological role may be to counterbalance the effects of Rac in promoting directed cell movement.
|
Acknowledgments |
|---|
5- and 2-positive 3T3 cell lines. We also thank Drs. U. Naik and T. Griffith for their suggestions concerning yeast two-hybrid techniques, and Dr. K. Burridge for his critical reading of the manuscript. In addition, the authors thank Brenda Asam for outstanding secretarial assistance. This work was supported by a grant from the National Institutes of Health to R.L. Juliano (CA 74966).
Submitted: 15 September 2000
Revised: 12 October 2000
Accepted: 12 October 2000
Abbreviations used in this paper: FAK, focal adhesion kinase; GFP, green fluorescent protein; ORF, open reading frame; REF, rat embryonic fibroblast; RIE, rat intestinal epithelial.
|
References |
|---|
|
TopAbstractIntroductionMaterials and MethodsResultsDiscussionReferences |
|---|
Akiyama S.K., Yamada S.S., Yamada K.M. & LaFlamme S.E.. Transmembrane signal transduction by integrin cytoplasmic domains expressed in single-subunit chimeras, J. Biol. Chem., 269, 1994, 15961–15964.
Alahari S.K., Dean N.M., Fisher M.H., DeLong R., Manoharan M., Tivel K.L. & Juliano R.L.. Inhibition of expression of the multidrug resistance-associated P-glycoprotein by phosphorothioate and 5' cholesterol-conjugated phosphorothioate antisense oligonucleotides, Mol. Pharmacol., 50, 1996, 808–819.[Abstract]
Aplin A.E., Howe A., Alahari S.K. & Juliano R.L.. Signal transduction and signal modulation by cell adhesion receptorsthe role of integrins, cadherins, immunoglobulin-cell adhesion molecules, and selectins, Pharmacol. Rev., 50, 1998, 197–263.
Aplin A.E., Howe A.K. & Juliano R.L.. Cell adhesion molecules, signal transduction and cell growth, Curr. Opin. Cell Biol., 11, 1999, 737–744a.[Medline]
Aplin A.E., Short S.M. & Juliano R.L.. Anchorage-dependent regulation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase cascade by growth factors is supported by a variety of integrin alpha chains, J. Biol. Chem., 274, 1999, 31223–31228b.
Assoian R.K.. Anchorage-dependent cell cycle progression, J. Cell Biol., 136, 1997, 1–4.
Bauer J.S., Schreiner C.L., Giancotti F., Ruoslahti E. & Juliano R.L.. Motility of fibronectin receptor deficient cells on fibronectin and vitronectincollaborative interactions among integrins, J. Cell Biol., 116, 1992, 477–487.
Bauer J.S., Varner J., Schreiner C., Kornberg L., Nicholas R. & Juliano R.L.. Functional role of the cytoplasmic domain of the integrin alpha 5 subunit, J. Cell Biol., 122, 1993, 209–221.
Berditchevski F. & Odintsova E.. Characterization of integrin-tetraspanin adhesion complexesrole of tetraspanins in integrin signaling, J. Cell Biol., 146, 1999, 477–492.
Biffo S., Sanvito F., Costa S., Preve L., Pignatelli R., Spinardi L. & Marchisio P.C.. Isolation of a novel beta4 integrin-binding protein (p27[BBP]) highly expressed in epithelial cells, J. Biol. Chem., 272, 1997, 30314–30321.
Borowsky M.L. & Hynes R.O.. Layilin, a novel talin-binding transmembrane protein homologous with C-type lectins, is localized in membrane ruffles, J. Cell Biol., 143, 1998, 429–442.
Burridge K. & Chrzanowska-Wodnicka M.. Focal adhesions, contractility, and signaling, Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol., 12, 1996, 463–519.[Medline]
Burridge K., Turner C.E. & Romer L.H.. Tyrosine phosphorylation of paxillin and pp125FAK accompanies cell adhesion to extracellular matrixa role in cytoskeletal assembly, J. Cell Biol., 119, 1992, 893–903.
Campbell S.L., Khosravi-Far R., Rossman K.L., Clark G.J. & Der C.J.. Increasing complexity of Ras signaling, Oncogene, 17, 1998, 1395–1413.[Medline]
Cary L.A., Cho Han D. & Guan J.-L.. Identification of p130Cas as a mediator of focal adhesion kinase-promoted cell migration, J. Cell Biol., 140, 1998, 211–221.
Chan B.M.C., Kassner P.D., Schiro J.A., Byers H.R., Kupper T.S. & Hemler M.E.. Distinct cellular functions mediated by different VLA integrin subunit cytoplasmic domains, Cell, 68, 1992, 1051–1060.[Medline]
Chang D.D., Wong C., Smith H. & Liu J.. ICAP-1, a novel beta 1 integrin cytoplasmic domain-associated protein, binds to a conserved and functionally important NPXY sequence motif of beta 1 integrin, J. Cell Biol., 138, 1997, 1149–1157.
Clark E.A. & Brugge J.S.. Integrins and signal transduction pathwaysthe road taken, Science, 268, 1995, 233–239.
Coppolino M.G., Woodside M.J., Demaurex N., Grinsten S., St-Arnaud R. & Dedhar S.. Calreticulin is essential for integrin-mediated calcium signalling and cell adhesion, Nature, 386, 1997, 843–847.[Medline]
Delcommenne M., Tan C., Gray V., Rue L., Woodgett J. & Dedhar S.. Phosphoinositide-3-OH kinase-dependent regulation of glycogen synthase kinase 3 and protein kinase B/AKT by the intrgrin-linked kinase, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 95, 1998, 11211–11216.
Farrelly N., Lee Y.J., Oliver J., Dive C. & Streuli C.H.. Extracellular matrix regulates apoptosis in mammary epithelium through a control on insulin signaling, J. Cell Biol., 144, 1999, 1337–1348.
Frisch S.M. & Ruoslahti E.. Integrins and anoikis, Curr. Opin. Cell Biol, 9, 1997, 701–706.[Medline]
Giancotti F.G. & Ruoslahti E.. Elevated levels of the 5β1 receptor suppress the transformed phenotype of Chinese hamster ovary cells, Cell, 60, 1990, 849–859.[Medline]
Giancotti F.G. & Ruoslahti E.. Integrin signaling, Science, 285, 1999, 1028–1032.
Gu M. & Majerus P.W.. The Properties of the Protein Tyrosine Phosphatase PTPMEG, J. Biol. Chem., 271, 1996, 27751–27759.
Gu J., Tamura M., Pankov R., Danen E.H.J., Takino T., Matsumoto K. & Yamada K.M.. Shc and FAK differentially regulate cell motility and directionality modulated by PTEN, J. Cell Biol., 146, 1999, 389–403.
Hemler M.E.. Integrin associated proteins, Curr. Opin. Cell Biol., 10, 1998, 578–585.[Medline]
Hill C.S., Wynne J. & Treisman R.. The Rho family GTPases RhoA, Rac1, and CDC42Hs regulate transcriptional activation by SRF, Cell, 81, 1995, 1159–1170.[Medline]
Ilic D., Furuta Y., Kanazawa S., Takeda N., Sobue K., Nakatsuji N., Nomura S., Fujimoto J., Okada M. & Yamamoto T.. Reduced cell motility and enhanced focal adhesion contact formation in cells from FAK-deficient mice, Nature, 377, 1995, 539–544.[Medline]
Ivanov T.R., Jones J.C., Dontenwill M., Bousquet P. & Piletz J.E.. Characterization of a partial cDNA clone detected by imidazoline receptor-selective antisera, J. Auton. Nerv. Syst., 72, 1998, 98–110.[Medline]
Kashiwagi H., Schwartz M.A., Eigenthaler M., Davis K.A., Ginsberg M.H. & Shattil S.J.. Affinity modulation of platelet integrin aIIbb3 by b3 endonexin, a selective binding partner of the b3 integrin cytoplasmic tail, J. Cell Biol., 137, 1997, 1433–1443.
Keely P.J., Westwick J.K., Whitehead I.P., Der C.J. & Parise L.V.. Cdc42 and Rac1 induce integrin-mediated cell motility and invasiveness through PI(3)K, Nature, 390, 1997, 632–636.[Medline]
Klemke R.L., Leng J., Molander R., Brooks P.C., Vuori K. & Cheresh D.A.. CAS/Crk coupling serves as a "molecular switch" for induction of cell migration, J. Cell Biol., 140, 1998, 961–972.
Kolanus W., Nagel W., Schiller B., Zeitlmann L., Godar S., Stockinger H. & Seed B.. Alpha L beta 2 integrin/LFA1 binding to ICAM1 induced by cytohesin-1, a cytoplasmic regulatory molecule, Cell, 86, 1996, 233–242.[Medline]
Lee J.W. & Juliano R.L.. 5β1 Integrin protects intestinal epithelial cells from apoptosis through a phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase and protein kinase B dependent pathway, Mol. Biol. Cell, 11, 2000, 1973–1987.
Li J., Mayne R. & Wu C.. A novel muscle-specific beta1 integrin binding protein (MIBP) that modulates myogenic differentiation, J. Cell Biol., 147, 1999, 1391–1398.
Liu S., Thomas S.M., Woodside D.G., Rose D.M., Kiosses W.B., Pfaff M. & Ginsberg M.H.. Binding of paxillin to alpha4 integrins modifies integrin-dependent biological responses, Nature, 402, 1999, 676–681.[Medline]
Lochter A., Navre M., Werb Z. & Bissell M.J.. 1 and 2 integrins mediate invasive activity of mouse mammary carcinoma cells through regulation of stromelysin-1 expression, Mol. Biol. Cell, 10, 1999, 271–282.
Mackay D.J. & Hall A.. Rho GTPases, J. Biol. Chem., 273, 1998, 20685–20688.
Miyamoto S., Katz B.Z., Lafrenie R.M. & Yamada K.M.. Fibronectin and integrins in cell adhesion, signaling, and morphogenesis, Ann. NY Acad. Sci., 857, 1998, 119–129.[Medline]
Naik U.P., Patel P.M. & Parise L.V.. Identification of a novel calcium-binding protein that interacts with the integrin aIIb cytoplasmic domain, J. Biol. Chem, 272, 1997, 4651–4654.
Nobes C.D. & Hall A.. Rho GTPases control polarity, protrusion, and adhesion during cell movement, J. Cell Biol., 144, 1999, 1235–1244.
O'Brien V., Frisch S.V. & Juliano R.L.. Expression of integrin alpha 5 subunit in HT29 colon carcinoma cells suppress apoptosis triggered by serum deprivation, Exp. Cell Res., 224, 1996, 208–213.[Medline]
Oldham S.M., Clark G.J., Gangarosa L.M., Coffey R.J. Jr. & Der C.J.. Activation of the Raf-1/MAP kinase cascade is not sufficient for Ras transformation of RIE-1 epithelial cells, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 93, 1996, 6924–6928.
O'Toole T.E., Katagiri Y., Faull R.J., Peter K., Tamura R., Quaranta V., Loftus J.C., Shattil S.J. & Ginsberg M.H.. Integrin cytoplasmic domains mediate inside-out signal transduction, J. Cell Biol., 124, 1994, 1047–1059.
Porter J.C. & Hogg N.. Integrins take partnerscross-talk between integrins and other membrane receptors, Trends Cell Biol., 8, 1998, 390–396.[Medline]
Pozzi A., Wary K.K., Giancotti F.G. & Gardner H.A.. Integrin 1β1 mediates a unique collagen-dependent proliferation pathway in vivo, J. Cell Biol., 142, 1998, 587–594.
Price L.S., Leng J., Schwartz M.A. & Bokoch G.M.. Activation of Rac and Cdc42 by integrins mediates cell spreading, Mol. Biol. Cell, 9, 1998, 1863–1871.
Reszka A.A., Hayashi Y. & Horwitz A.F.. Identification of amino acid sequences in the integrin b1 cytoplasmic domain implicated in cytoskeletal association, J. Cell Biol., 117, 1992, 1321–1330.
Sasaki T. & Takai Y.. The Rho small G protein family-Rho GDI system as a temporal and spatial determinant for cytoskeletal control, Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun., 245, 1998, 641–645.[Medline]
Sastry S.K., Lakonishok M., Wu S., Truong T.Q., Huttenlocher A., Turner C.E. & Horwitz A.F.. Quantitative changes in integrin and focal adhesion signaling regulate myoblast cell cycle withdrawal, J. Cell Biol., 144, 1999, 1295–1309.
Schreiner C., Fisher M., Hussein S. & Juliano R.L.. Increased tumorigenicity of fibronectin receptor deficient Chinese hamster ovary cell variants, Cancer Res., 51, 1991, 1738–1740.
Schwartz M.A.. Integrins, oncogenes, and anchorage independence, J. Cell Biol., 139, 1997, 575–578.
Shaw L.M., Rabinovitz I., Wang H.H.-F., Toker A. & Mercurio A.M.. Activation of phosphoinositide 3-OH kinase by the 6β4 integrin promotes carcinoma invasion, Cell, 91, 1997, 949–960.[Medline]
Sieg D.J., Hauck C.R., Ilic D., Klingbeil C.K., Schaefer E., Damsky C.H. & Schlaepfer D.D.. FAK integrates growth-factor and integrin signals to promote cell migration, Nat. Cell Biol, 2, 2000, 249–256.[Medline]
Sparks A.B., Rider J.E., Hoffman N.G., Fowlkes D.M., Quilliam L.A. & Kay B.K.. Distinct ligand preferences of Src homology 3 domains from Src, Yes, Abl, Cortactin, p53bp2, PLC, Crk, and Grb2, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA., 93, 1996, 1540–1544.
Tamura M., Gu J., Matsumoto K., Aota S., Parsons R. & Yamada K.M.. Inhibition of cell migration, spreading, and focal adhesions by tumor suppressor PTEN, Science, 280, 1998, 1614–1617.
Varner J.A., Emerson D.A. & Juliano R.L.. Integrin 5β1 expression negatively regulates cell growthreversal by attachment to fibronectin, Mol. Biol. Cell, 6, 1995, 725–740.[Abstract]
Vojtek A.B., Hollenberg S.M. & Cooper J.A.. Mammalian Ras interacts directly with the serine/threonine kinase Raf, Cell, 74, 1993, 205–214.[Medline]
Wang R., Shattil S.J., Ambruso D.R. & Newman P.J.. Truncation of the cytoplasmic domain of β3 in a variant form of Glanzmann thrombasthenia abrogates signaling through the integrin (IIb)β3 complex, J. Clin. Investig., 100, 1997, 2392–2403.
Wartmann M., Hofer P., Turowski P., Saltiel A.R. & Hynes N.E.. Negative modulation of membrane localization of the Raf-1 protein kinase by hyperphosphorylation, J. Biol. Chem., 272, 1997, 3915–3923.
Wary K.K., Mainiero F., Isakoff S.J., Marcantonio E.E. & Giancotti F.G.. The adaptor protein Shc couples a class of integrins to the control of cell cycle progression, Cell, 87, 1996, 733–743.[Medline]
Whitehead I.P., Abe K., Gorski J.L. & Der C.J.. CDC42 and FGD1 cause distinct signaling and transforming activities, Mol. Cell. Biol., 18, 1988, 4689–4697.[Medline]
Zhang X.A. & Hemler M.E.. Interaction of the integrin beta1 cytoplasmic domain with ICAP-1 protein, J. Biol. Chem., 274, 1999, 11–19.
Zhang Z., Vuori K., Reed J.C. & Ruoslahti E.. The 5β1 integrin supports survival of cells on fibronectin and up-regulates Bcl-2 expression, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 92, 1995, 6161–6165.
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Facebook 
Reddit 
Technorati 
Twitter What's this?
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
