J Biol Chem, Vol. 274, Issue 39, 27553-27561, September 24, 1999
The ARF-like 2 (ARL2)-binding Protein, BART
PURIFICATION, CLONING, AND INITIAL CHARACTERIZATION*
J. Daniel
Sharer and
Richard A.
Kahn
From the Department of Biochemistry, Emory University School of
Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia 30322-3050
 |
ABSTRACT |
ARF-like proteins (ARLs) comprise a functionally
distinct group of incompletely characterized members in the ARF family
of RAS-related GTPases. We took advantage of the GTP binding
characteristics of human ARL2 to develop a specific, high affinity
binding assay that allowed the purification of a novel ARL2-binding
protein. A 19-kDa protein (BART, Binder of Arl
Two) was identified and purified from bovine brain
homogenate. BART binding is specific to ARL2·GTP with high affinity
but does not interact with ARL2·GDP or activated ARF or RHO proteins.
Based on peptide sequences of purified bovine BART, the human cDNA
sequence was determined. The 489-base pair BART open reading frame
encodes a novel 163-amino acid protein with a predicted molecular mass
of 18,822 Da. Recombinant BART was found to bind ARL2·GTP in a manner
indistinguishable from native BART. Northern and Western analyses
indicated BART is expressed in all tissues sampled. The lack of
detectable membrane association of ARL2 or BART upon activation of ARL2
is suggestive of actions quite distinct from those of the ARFs. The
lack of ARL2 GTPase-activating protein activity in BART led us to
conclude that the specific interaction with ARL2·GTP is most
consistent with BART being the first identified ARL2-specific effector.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The ADP-ribosylation factor
(ARF)1 family (1-4) of
Ras-like GTPases can be divided into two distinct groups based on both structural and functional considerations (14). The ARF proteins, numbering at least six distinct genes/proteins in mammals, are at least
60% identical at the amino acid level, and all share certain
activities, specifically complementation of the lethal yeast
arf1
/arf2
knockout mutant strain, co-factor activity in the bacterial
toxin-catalyzed ADP-ribosylation of Gs, and activation of
phospholipase D (15-17). The ARF family also includes a group of more
structurally divergent ARF-like proteins (ARLs) with 40-60% sequence
identity to any ARF or to each other. The ARLs lack each of these ARF
activities, although reports of relatively low activity have emerged
for human ARL1 (18). Only one ARL, so far, has been shown to be
essential; deletion of ARF-like 1 in Drosophila melanogaster
is lethal at an early embryonic stage (19). Each ARL sequenced to date
has a glycine at position 2, the site of N-myristoylation on
ARFs. Yeast ARL1 (20) and human
ARL12 have been shown to be
N-myristoylated by co-expressing each in bacteria with an
N-myristoyltransferase. There is a possibility that human
ARL2 and ARL3 are not acylated, as they each fail to incorporate
radiolabeled myristate when co-expressed with the N-myristoyltransferase (21). A lack of acylation would
likely indicate a difference in cellular mechanisms as
N-myristoylation of ARFs is essential in yeast and critical
to a number of biochemical activities found for ARF proteins.
ARFs offer a good example of diversity in GTPase signaling, as ARF
proteins can regulate mitotic growth (5), sporulation (6), respiration
(5), and vesicular membrane traffic (7, 8) in the yeast,
Saccharomyces cerevisiae, despite the presence of only two
ARF genes/proteins. ARF exchange factors (9, 10) and GAPs (11-13) have
been described, and each possess features in their primary sequences
that may help define them, the SEC7 and ARF GAP domains, respectively.
In contrast, with the exception of ARF GAPs, each of the ARF effectors
identified to date lack common structural motifs or features
(5).3
Although there exists at least a partial understanding of a cellular
role for ARF proteins, little is known about the function of any of the
ARL proteins. To begin to define one or more signaling pathways for ARL
proteins in mammals, we attempted to identify and characterize specific
ARL-binding proteins. The ability of ARL2 to bind activating guanine
nucleotide triphosphates to high stoichiometry, in the absence of
detergents or lipids (22), allowed the use of techniques not possible
with ARF proteins. One such approach is the GTPase overlay, used
successfully in previous studies to identify factors that interact with
other small GTPases, such as RAC or CDC42 (23, 24) and Ran (25). In
this report we describe the identification, purification, and initial
characterization of a novel 19-kDa bovine brain protein, BART, which
specifically interacts with ARL2·GTP. This is the first protein shown
to interact with an ARL protein. Based on the specificity and affinity
of BART binding of ARL2·GTP, we conclude that BART is an effector for
ARL2.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Gel Electrophoresis and Immunoblotting--
Protein samples were
prepared in Laemmli's sample buffer (26) and boiled for 5 min before
loading onto 12.5 or 15% polyacrylamide gels. Resolved proteins were
either stained with colloidal brilliant blue (Sigma) or transferred
electrophoretically to nitrocellulose filters (Bio-Rad), for 2 h
at 60 V in Towbin's buffer (50 mM Tris base, 0.38 M glycine, 0.1% SDS, 20% methanol (27)). Immunoblots were
performed as described previously (28) using horseradish peroxidase-conjugated secondary antibodies (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). Filters were developed for enhanced chemiluminescence (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech, ECL) to visualize reactive proteins.
GTPase Overlay Assay--
The GTPase overlay assay was developed
by modifying the procedure of Lounsbury et al. (25). Up to
25 µg of protein was loaded per lane and resolved and transferred to
nitrocellulose filters, as described above for immunoblots. Filters
were then incubated for at least 1 h at 4 °C in renaturation
buffer (10 mM MOPS, pH 7.1, 100 mM potassium
acetate (KOAc), 5 mM magnesium acetate (MgOAc), 0.25%
Tween 20, 5 mM dithiothreitol (DTT), and 0.5% bovine serum albumin (BSA)). The filter was then equilibrated by shaking in 15-ml
binding buffer (20 mM MOPS pH 7.1, 100 mM KOAc,
5 mM MgOAc, 0.1% Triton X-100, 0.5% BSA, 5 mM
DTT, 50 µM GTP, and 50 µM GDP) for at least
30 min at room temperature (RT). Radioactive ARL2·GTP was produced by
incubating 2 µg of purified recombinant ARL2 with 20 µCi of
[
-32P]GTP (3,000 Ci/mmol; NEN Life Science Products)
for 15 min at 30 °C in 15 µl of loading buffer, consisting of 20 mM MOPS, pH 7.1, 1 mM EDTA, 0.05 mM
MgOAc, 1 mg/ml BSA, and 1 mM DTT. Approximately 70% of the
radionucleotide is bound to protein at the end of this loading
reaction. The filter was then incubated with the
ARL2·[
-32P]GTP mixture in 15 ml of binding buffer
for 15 min at RT with gentle shaking. Note that the binding buffer
(also used for washes) contains 50 µM GTP and GDP to
lower the specific activity of free nucleotides to such a point that
binding of radionucleotides by filter-bound nucleotide-binding proteins
is insignificant. The filter was then washed 3 times with binding
buffer and then exposed to x-ray film (Eastman Kodak Co., XAR) or
phosphorscreens (Molecular Dynamics Storm PhosphorImager) for analysis.
Protein Purification--
All resins were obtained from Amersham
Pharmacia Biotech, except for Ultrogel AcA54 (Bio Sepra). All
purification procedures were carried out at 4 °C unless otherwise
indicated. Frozen bovine brains (
300 g; Pel-Freez) were homogenized
with a Polytron in 300 ml of ice-cold buffer, consisting of 20 mM Tris, pH 8.0, 100 mM NaCl, 5 mM
MgCl2, 1 mM DTT (TNMD), and protease inhibitors (40 µg/ml phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, 1 µg/ml leupeptin, and 0.5 µg/ml aprotinin). The resulting homogenate was filtered through cheesecloth and spun at 100,000 × g for 60 min at
4 °C. The supernatant (S100) was then applied to a 1 liter (bed
volume) DEAE-Sephacel column (50 mm × 60 cm) and developed with a
0.1-1.0 M linear NaCl gradient in TNMD buffer at 240 ml/h.
Fractions (15 ml) were assayed by gel overlay analysis, and fractions
within the half-maximal activity range were pooled. ARL2·GTP binding
activity eluted as a single peak, at a position corresponding to
approximately 420 mM NaCl. The DEAE pool was slowly brought
to 2 M ammonium sulfate at 4 °C with stirring for 30 min
and then clarified by centrifugation at 10,000 × g for
30 min. The resulting pellet was resuspended in a minimal volume of
TNMD and applied to an AcA54 column (1-liter bed volume; 50 mm × 60 cm) at a flow rate of 60 ml/h. Fractions of 8 ml were collected and
assayed for binding activity. The activity migrated as a single peak on
both Aca54 and Superdex 75 gel filtration media. By using the latter
matrix, the activity migrated with an apparent molecular mass of
25
kDa, by comparison to molecular weight standards. The pooled peak of
activity was applied directly onto to a Source Q column (15-ml bed
volume; 16 mm × 12 cm) at a flow rate of 1 ml/min. Proteins
adsorbed to the column were eluted with a nonlinear 0.15-0.5
M NaCl gradient, including a linear portion from 260 to 430 mM NaCl. Binding activity, eluting around 330 mM NaCl, was pooled and applied directly onto a Pro-RPC C1/C8 reversed phase column (2 ml; 5 mm × 10 cm) at a flow rate of 18 ml/h in 0.1% trifluoroacetic acid and developed in a gradient of
30-80% acetonitrile with 0.1% trifluoroacetic acid. This preparation was performed several times, with an estimated 4000-fold increase in
specific activity and ~3-4% total recovery of activity (see Table
I).
Protein Expression--
The open reading frame of BART was
amplified in a PCR reaction using synthetic oligonucleotides that
incorporate unique restriction sites at each end to facilitate
subcloning. Both native and hexa-histidine (6His)-tagged open reading
frames were amplified, the latter achieved by additional sequence added
to the 3'-oligonucleotide. The Taq polymerase was used, and
the template was purified mini-prep DNA from EST 505092/z147e07.s1.
Products from the PCR reaction were subcloned into the bacterial
expression vector, pET3C (29), and sequenced entirely to ensure against
PCR-introduced mutations. BL21 cells (Invitrogen), containing
recombinant plasmids, were grown to mid-log phase and induced for 1-3
h with 1 mM isopropyl-
-D-thiogalactoside (IPTG). Cells were lysed using a French press and 6His-tagged BART was
purified on a 1- or 5-ml HiTrap Chelating column (Amersham Pharmacia
Biotech), according to manufacturer's instructions. Eluted BART-6His
was further purified, and excess metal ions were removed by
chromatography on a Superdex 75 gel filtration column (24 ml; 10 mm x
30 cm; Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). Recombinant human ARL2 was
expressed in BL21 cells and purified as described (14). All protein
concentrations were determined using the Bradford assay (Bio-Rad)
(30).
Mant-Gpp(NH)p Fluorescence--
To assay binding between BART
and activated ARL2 in solution, changes in the fluorescence of
ARL2-bound N-methylanthraniloyl (Mant)-Gpp(NH)p were
monitored. Recombinant ARL2 (0.15 µM) was loaded with 0.6 µM Mant-Gpp(NH)p in 40 mM HEPES, pH 7.4, 2 mM EDTA, 100 mM NaCl, 2 mM DTT, 1 mM MgCl2, 0.1 mg/ml BSA (HENDM) at RT, until
fluorescence reached equilibrium (typically 5-10 min). Fluorescence
was determined using a Perkin-Elmer LS-5B luminescence spectrometer
using an excitation wavelength of 355 nm and measuring emission at 440 nm, as described previously (31). Changes in fluorescence, as a
function of BART addition, were then determined.
The theoretical best fit line described for the
F
versus [BART] was obtained using a Michaelis-Menten,
non-linear least squares fit of the data, as described in Nishimoto
et al. (31). The KD for a single binding
site was determined using the following Equation 1, from Nomanbhoy and
Cerione (32).
|
(Eq. 1)
|
where
F is the fluorescence change after
each addition of BART;
Fmax is the maximal
change in fluorescence at an extrapolated, infinite [BART];
KD is the dissociation constant;
LT is the [BART], and RT is the
total concentration of ARL2·Mant-Gpp(NH)p.
Immunoprecipitation--
Recombinant proteins or controls were
incubated in single detergent buffer (SDB, 50 mM Tris, pH
7.5, 150 mM NaCl, 1% Triton X-100) with appropriate
nucleotides for 1 h at 4 °C with gentle rocking. Protein
G-Sepharose (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) beads (10 µl) were then
added and incubated an additional 1 h. Beads were then washed 3 times with SDB. Specifically bound proteins were eluted by boiling
beads in Laemmli's sample buffer for 5 min. Samples were analyzed by
immunoblotting, as described above, using rabbit polyclonal anti-BART
(R46712-1) or mouse monoclonal anti-MYC epitope (33) as primary antibodies.
Antibody Production--
Polyclonal rabbit antisera were raised
against purified, recombinant BART (with the carboxyl-terminal 6His
tag; R46712-1) or human ARL2 (R86336-1). Subcutaneous inoculations were
performed initially in complete Freund's adjuvant, followed by three
boosts in incomplete Freund's adjuvant. Preliminary characterization of the two antibody preparations has been primarily through
immunoblotting. Less than 1 ng of purified BART-C'His and approximately
5 ng of ARL2 were detectable on immunoblots by the anti-BART and
anti-ARL2 sera, respectively. The ARL2 antisera did not cross-react
with other members of the ARF/ARL family. We tested 50 ng each of human ARF1, ARF4, ARF6, ARL1, and ARL3. Immunoreactivity could be effectively and specifically competed by preincubation with recombinant antigen (commonly 15 µg of recombinant protein with 4 µl of serum).
GAP Assay--
GTP hydrolysis of ARL2, in the presence and
absence of BART, was analyzed as described previously (34). Briefly,
ARL2 (2 µM final concentration) was loaded with
[
-32P]GTP and then incubated in separate reactions
+/
BART at 30 °C. Loading buffer consisted of 25 mM
HEPES, pH 7.4, 100 mM NaCl, 2.5 mM
MgCl2, 0.1% Triton X-100, 1 mM dithiothreitol,
30 µCi of [
-32P]GTP, and 1 mM ATP. The
GAP assay buffer included 1 mM GTP to lower the specific
activity of free nucleotide and help prevent background levels to be
raised by the presence of nucleotidases or other enzymes capable of
hydrolyzing GTP in an ARL2-independent fashion. Reactions were stopped
by dilution into ice-cold TNMD at various times and rapidly filtered on
nitrocellulose filters (25 mm BA85, Schleicher & Schuell) to trap
protein-bound nucleotides. Free nucleotides were then extracted from
the filters by soaking in 1 M formic acid and resolved by
chromatography on polyethyleneimine-cellulose thin layer plates
developed in 1:1 (v/v) 1 M lithium chloride and 1 M formate. Controls were included to ensure that only
relevant GTP hydrolysis, catalyzed by ARL2, was included. Visualization and quantification of separated nucleotides was performed using a
Molecular Dynamics Storm phosphorimaging system.
Membrane Translocation Assay--
Translocation of proteins from
cytosolic to membrane associated forms was monitored by a modification
of the method of Donaldson et al. (35). The source of
cytosol was the mouse BC3H1 smooth muscle-like brain tumor-derived cell
line, obtained from ATCC (Rockville, MD). The source of membranes was
Chinese hamster ovary cells, prepared as described previously (36).
Membranes and cytosol were incubated at 37 °C for 20 min in the
presence of either 25 µM GDP or GTP
S before membranes
were collected by centrifugation. Pelleted material was then subjected
to immunoblot analyses using the following primary antibodies: ARF
(1D9; 40), ARL2 (R86336-1), or BART (R46712-1).
Northern Blotting--
Nylon filters containing poly(A)-enriched
(2 µg/lane) RNA, isolated from assorted human tissues, were purchased
from CLONTECH. The BART open reading frame was used
as the probe and was labeled using random hexamer primers (Life
Technologies, Inc.) and [
-32P]dCTP (NEN Life Science
Products). Hybridization of probe to immobilized RNAs was performed at
68 °C in Express Hyb (CLONTECH) and washing
increased to a final stringency of 0.1× SSC at 50 °C. Hybridizing
bands were detected by exposure to film or phosphorscreens.
 |
RESULTS |
Detection of an ARL2-binding Protein in Bovine Brain
Lysates--
The GTPase overlay assay was used to identify specific
binding partners for activated ARL proteins. As described under
"Materials and Methods," this technique involves the
electrophoretic separation of protein mixtures in SDS-polyacrylamide
gels, followed by their transfer to nitrocellulose sheets where they
are allowed to re-fold in a renaturation buffer and probed with a
radioactively labeled ligand. This method depends upon the ability of
the binding protein to (a) bind to the nitrocellulose,
(b) be capable of re-folding properly following denaturing
electrophoresis and transfer, (c) have a relatively high
affinity for the ligand, and (d) be present in sufficient
quantity to allow detection by the labeled ligand. Note that the ligand
in this case is a protein, made radioactive by pre-loading with
radionucleotides. Each of the human ARFs (ARF1-6) and two human ARLs
(ARL2 and -3) were initially tested in the gel overlay assay, using
bovine brain extract (an abundant source of ARF proteins) as tissue
source for potential binding partners.
By using the gel overlay protocol, we detected specific association
between ARL2·GTP and a protein from bovine brain that migrated on SDS
gels with a predicted molecular mass of about 19 kDa (Fig.
1, lane 1). This binding
activity was present in the soluble fraction (S100) but was absent from
the pellet (P100; data not shown). Binding activity was increased
approximately 20-fold or more by the inclusion of mixed micelles of
dimyristoylphosphatidylcholine and cholic acid (D/C, Fig. 1,
lane 2) in the binding buffer of the gel overlay assay.
Triton X-100 (0.1%) could be used in place of D/C to similar effect
(data not shown). The presence of D/C in the assay increased either the
re-folding of the binding protein or the interaction with ARL2 as it
had only minimal effects on the binding of GTP to ARL2. We believe the
former explanation is more likely true as Triton X-100 is not required
in the solution binding assay (see below), but we have not explored
this issue further.

View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
The GTPase overlay assay detects a 19-kDa
protein from bovine brain that binds ARL2-GTP but not ARL2-GDP.
BART activity was partially purified from bovine brain by
chromatography on DEAE-Sephacel, as described under "Materials and
Methods." The pooled material (25 µg/lane) was resolved by
denaturing gel electrophoresis, transferred to nitrocellulose, and
assayed by the GTPase overlay assay, under various conditions, as
indicated in the figure. Binding activity is only observed in the
presence of the ARL2-[ -32P]GTP complex and is enhanced
by the presence of mixed micelles of dimyristoylphosphatidylcholine and
cholic acid/cholate. Separate filters were incubated with
ARL2-[ -32P]GTP (lanes 1 and 2),
dimyristoylphosphatidylcholine and cholic acid/cholate (lanes
2 and 4), [ -32P]GTP without ARL2
(lanes 3 and 4), or
ARL2·[ -32P]GDP (lane 5).
|
|
Interaction between the binding protein and ARL2 was dependent on GTP
being bound to ARL2, as no signal was observed when equal specific
activity [
-32P]GDP replaced the
[
-32P]GTP in the loading reaction (Fig. 1, lane
5). An important control is shown in Fig. 1, lanes 3 and 4. No binding activity was seen when the same amount of
[
-32P]GTP, in the absence of ARL2, was used as the
ligand in the overlay assay. This lack of binding activity was not
changed by the addition of D/C (Fig. 1, lane 4). No
GTP-binding proteins on the filter bound the labeled nucleotides in the
overlay assay, due to the presence of high concentrations of unlabeled
GDP and GTP in the binding buffer. The specific activity of the GTP in
the ARL2-binding site is much higher than that of the nucleotide free
in solution. Therefore, the GTPase overlay assay allowed the detection
of a single protein species of approximately 19 kDa that bound ARL2 in
a GTP-dependent fashion.
The specificity of the binding protein for different GTPases was
determined by replacement of ARL2 with other ARFs (human ARF1, 3-6),
ARL3, or the small GTPase RhoA. Each of these proteins was loaded with
[
-32P]GTP, but none gave a signal in the overlay assay
(data not shown) when fractions containing the ARL2 binding activity
were tested.
An estimate of the affinity between ARL2 and the binding protein was
obtained from competition experiments (see Fig.
2). The specifically bound radioactivity
in the gel overlay assay was effectively competed by the addition of
increasing amounts of ARL2, loaded with unlabeled GTP. Half-maximal
binding was observed with the addition of only 20 nM
ARL2·GTP.

View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
BART binds to
ARL2-[ -32P]GTP with nanomolar
affinity in the overlay assay. Recombinant ARL2 (6 nM)
was preincubated with [ -32P]GTP (20 µCi) and later
with nitrocellulose filters containing 40 ng of BART, in the presence
or absence of (varying amounts of) unlabeled ARL2-GTP, as indicated.
ARL2-[ -32P]GTP-BART complex formation was quantified
by PhosphorImager analysis and plotted relative to the control, as a
function of increasing unlabeled ARL2-GTP concentration. Half-maximal
binding was seen with 20 nM unlabeled ARL2-GTP.
|
|
Whereas the binding activity was capable of re-folding after being
boiled in Laemmli's sample buffer, electrophoresis through polyacrylamide and out of the gel onto nitrocellulose, incubation of
the nitrocellulose filter with trypsin (0.25 mg/ml for 2 h at RT)
totally abolished the binding signal (data not shown). Taken together,
these results indicate that the S100 fraction from bovine brain
contains a protein that binds ARL2 in a GTP-dependent fashion and with high specificity, with an apparent
KD in the low nanomolar range. This protein was
named BART, for binder of Arl
2.
Purification of BART from Bovine Brain--
Mouse tissues were
used to check for the presence and relative abundance of BART activity
in different organs. Tissues were harvested from a freshly sacrificed
animal and homogenized in buffer, as described under "Materials and
Methods." Equal amounts of total tissue proteins (25 µg/lane) were
loaded onto SDS-polyacrylamide gels and assayed with the GTPase overlay
assay. The activity was most abundant in brain, with a lesser amount
apparent in muscle tissue (data not shown). Thus, our earlier choice of
bovine brain as source of the binding protein proved to be fortuitous.
However, even in brain, BART appeared to be present in only low
amounts. Assuming a 1:1 binding of BART and ARL2, we calculated BART to comprise only about 0.003% of soluble brain protein.
The overlay assay was used to follow BART activity during purification
by column chromatography. As seen in Fig.
3, BART activity eluted as a single peak
from a DEAE-Sephacel column, developed with an increasing gradient of
sodium chloride. The position of the BART peak of activity corresponded
to a concentration of 420 mM NaCl. Following concentration
by ammonium sulfate precipitation, BART also eluted from the gel
filtration column (AcA54 resin) as a single, monodisperse species with
an apparent molecular mass (
25 kDa) consistent with the size
determined from the gel overlay assay (data not shown). As seen in
Table I, sequential chromatography on ion
exchange and gel filtration columns led to a 50-fold increase in
specific activity with about 30% recovery of total BART activity.

View larger version (34K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Bovine BART elutes from DEAE-Sephacel as a
single peak. A, bovine brain S100 ( 6 g of total
protein) was applied to a 1-liter DEAE-Sephacel column and eluted with
a linear gradient of sodium chloride (0.1-1.0 M). Samples
of fractions were assayed for ARL2 binding activity in the overlay
assay. Chromatogram shows absorbance at 280 nm, theoretical NaCl
concentration, and the ARL2 binding peak as determined by quantitative
overlay binding analysis. B, gel overlay assay results of
those fractions with activity.
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table I
Representative purification of BART from bovine brain extracts
Each step in the chromatographic purification of BART is indicated,
with total protein in the initial S100 material and in subsequent
pooled peaks indicated. Increase in ARL2 binding specific activity over
the S100 material is given as fold purification and is based on
quantification of overlay assay results. The percentage of total
recovered binding activity relative to the starting S100 is also shown.
Starting material (S100) was soluble protein homogenate from two adult
bovine brains following centrifugation at 100,000 × g
for 1 h. Note that peak protein from the DEAE column was
precipitated with 2 M ammonium sulfate and resuspended in
TNMD buffer prior to application on the AcA54 gel filtration column;
separate purification and recovery for this step were not determined.
|
|
Chromatography on the quaternary amine exchanger, Source Q, yielded
another 7-fold enrichment with about 30% recovery. This was followed
by high resolution reverse phase, C8 (Pro-RPC), chromatography that
gave more than a 10-fold increase in specific activity with good
recovery. At this point the BART preparation (shown in Table I) was
enriched about 4000-fold from the S100 with an overall recovery of 4%.
Comparison of activity in the gel overlay assay with the colloidal blue
staining profile (see Fig. 4) revealed a
single band in the 20-kDa region that exactly co-migrated with the
ARL2-binding protein. We estimate that the BART was about 30%
pure at this point. The band identified as BART was well
separated from the 2-3 other bands staining in the gel (see Fig. 4,
combined fractions 29/30). This allowed clean excision of
the 19-kDa band from polyacrylamide gels for protein
microsequencing.

View larger version (45K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
BART activity elutes from the Pro-RPC column
with a clearly resolved protein band. BART activity eluting from
the Source Q column (400 µg of protein) was pooled and applied to a
2-ml Pro-RPC column in 0.1% trifluoroacetic acid, as described under
"Materials and Methods." A, the column was developed
with a rapid ramp to 30% acetonitrile, followed by a more gradual,
linear gradient of 30-80% acetonitrile in 0.1% trifluoroacetic acid.
A single peak of BART activity eluted at an acetonitrile concentration
of approximately 60% acetonitrile. B, each fraction was
resolved by SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis on a 12.5%
acrylamide gel and stained with Coomassie Blue. C, proteins
were transferred to nitrocellulose and assayed using the overlay
binding assay. Total protein in the combined fractions 29 and 30 was
determined to be 1.2 µg, of which 20-30% (~240-360 ng) was
estimated to be the 19-kDa protein band. Note the similarities in
relative staining intensity of the 19-kDa band in fractions 29/30 and
31 compared with the binding intensity in the same lanes.
|
|
Peptide Sequencing and Cloning of BART--
Approximately 100 ng
of the protein band at 19 kDa was excised from a 15%
SDS-polyacrylamide gel and subjected to peptide sequence analysis.
Partial tryptic cleavage allowed the purification of peptides by
reverse phase high pressure liquid chromatography. Electrospray mass
spectroscopy was then used to determine peptide sequences from two
different peptides, 9 and 15 residues in length (Fig.
5).

View larger version (61K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Human BART cDNA sequence, including
translated ORF and original tryptic peptides. A,
consensus human BART cDNA sequence was determined by alignment of
multiple overlapping EST clones and confirmed by direct DNA sequencing
of two such clones (EST505092 and EST267702) which together contain the
entire predicted BART cDNA. The 163-amino acid residues encoded by
the BART coding region are indicated, and the two original tryptic
peptides from bovine brain BART (with a single species difference in
sequence given) are underlined. B, alignment of
predicted human and mouse BART protein sequences. The mouse sequence
was predicted by alignment of EST clones. Overall identity between the
two proteins is 95.7%.
|
|
Homology searches of GenBankTM and Swiss-Prot protein data
bases failed to identify a single protein with high homology to either peptide. In contrast, 14 translated human expressed sequence tags (ESTs) were initially found that contained identical or nearly identical (1 mismatch in the nonapeptide) sequences to the bovine BART
peptides. Alignment of these EST sequences allowed the construction of
a single, continuous cDNA encoding a protein 163 amino acids in
length (Fig. 5A), with a predicted molecular mass of 18,822 daltons. The length of the predicted open reading frame and presence of
both peptides in a single protein are consistent with this consensus
open reading frame encoding human BART. We ascribe the single amino
acid mismatch between the protein encoded in this consensus ORF and the
peptides sequenced to species differences in the BART sequence between
cows and humans. Note that the original activity was purified from
bovine brains, and the recombinant protein and all results reported
below were obtained using the recombinant human BART protein.
In addition to the two original peptide sequences, the predicted
protein contains an abundance of acidic residues, giving the molecule
an overall pI of 4.1. No previously identified domain or motifs were
identified in the protein, by using pattern or domain-identifying
algorithms (e.g. Prosite, Prodom, Profile).
In order to clone and confirm the putative ARL2-binding protein
cDNA, we obtained an EST (number 505092) that was predicted to
contain the entire open reading frame (ORF) of BART. Automated, dideoxy
DNA sequencing of the library insert from this clone agreed exactly
with our consensus sequence for the open reading frame of BART.
By continuing to align EST sequences, we were able to construct a
consensus cDNA for human BART that was a total of 1771 bp and included 101 and 1171 bp of 5'- and 3'-untranslated sequence, respectively (see Fig. 5A). This length is consistent with
the single hybridizing band seen in Northern blots (see below) and suggests that the cDNA sequence shown in Fig. 5 likely corresponds to the full-length of the message. A total of 140 human ESTs, derived
from the human BART message, has been found to date. To confirm the
accuracy of this consensus, we obtained a clone (EST number 267702),
predicted to be near full length, and sequenced the library insert in
its entirety. This sequence agreed exactly with that derived from
building the consensus of ESTs.
BLAST searching of human genomic sequences identified sequence on both
chromosomes V and XII that are highly homologous to human BART.
However, each genomic sequence contains multiple stop codons within the
BART ORF, as well as some other differences. The presence of a
contiguous, genomic sequence highly homologous to BART-untranslated
regions, without introns, is suggestive of processed pseudogenes. No
good candidate for a functional BART gene was found.
In addition to the human ESTs, there are also a sufficient number of
mouse ESTs available in the dbEST collection to allow the construction
of a predicted, full-length mouse BART ORF. Alignment of the human and
mouse BART sequences revealed them to be 96 and 85% identical at the
protein and nucleotide levels, respectively (see Fig. 5B).
The high degree of homology among such a large number of human ESTs,
coming from diverse human cDNA libraries, is evidence for a single
BART gene that is expressed in a diverse array of tissues and cells.
BART Is Ubiquitously Expressed in Human Tissues--
Northern blot
analysis of human tissues indicated that a single BART message is
ubiquitous in all surveyed tissues. The
2.0-kilobase pair transcript
was most abundant in heart, brain, and skeletal muscle, with less
message found in placenta, kidney, pancreas, lung, and liver (see Fig.
6). This result is very similar to those obtained from the screen for BART activity in mouse tissues where brain
was the most abundant source for binding activity. With the development
of rabbit polyclonal anti-BART sera, we were also able to screen for
expression of BART in different mouse tissues, and we found a very
similar pattern of expression to that suggested by Northern blotting
but with brain the most abundant source (data not shown). The presence
of ESTs encoding BART from cDNA libraries derived from even more
human tissues is further evidence of the ubiquity of BART
expression.

View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Northern blot analysis of human tissue
mRNA with a BART cDNA probe. A
poly(A)+-enriched human tissue RNA filter (2 µg of
RNA/lane) was hybridized with a BART cDNA probe, as described under
"Materials and Methods." The filter was washed at high stringency
prior to being exposed to a phosphorscreen for 12 h. Note the
presence of a single hybridizing band in all tissues tested.
kb, kilobase pair.
|
|
Characterization of Recombinant BART and Its Interaction with
ARL2·GTP--
PCR primers, directed against the 5' and 3' ends of
the BART ORF, were used to amplify the full-length coding region, using EST clone 505092 as template. The resulting
500-bp PCR product was
subcloned into the bacterial expression vector pET3C for inducible expression of recombinant protein. The addition of a hexa-histidine tag
at the carboxyl terminus led to greater stability of the recombinant protein in bacteria and facilitated purification. As shown in Fig.
7, IPTG induced the expression of a
protein, readily detected by Coomassie Blue staining of bacterial
lysates on SDS gels, that bound ARL2·GTP in a manner
indistinguishable from bovine brain BART. This result confirmed that
the peptides we had sequenced were from BART and that the consensus
cDNA sequence from multiple ESTs (but amplified from one) encoded
human BART.

View larger version (59K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
Recombinant BartC'His binds ARL2. BART
was expressed in BL21(DE3) cells with a hexa-histidine tag at the
carboxyl terminus, using the plasmid pBART3C, derived from the parent
plasmid pET3C, which is devoid of insert, as described under
"Materials and Methods." Liquid cultures were grown to mid-log
phase and induced with 1 mM IPTG for 3 h where
indicated. Bacterial lysates ( 10 µg/lane) were analyzed in the
overlay assay, using partially purified endogenous bovine BART as a
positive control.
|
|
In order to produce and readily purify sufficient amounts of
recombinant human BART for analysis, a carboxyl-terminal hexa-histidine fusion protein (BART-6His) was expressed and purified via
Ni2+ chelate chromatography. This method allowed
approximately 25 mg of protein to be rapidly purified from 1 liter of
bacterial culture. Unless otherwise stated, all subsequent work was
performed with this fusion protein.
An inherent aspect of the GTPase overlay technique used to identify
BART is protein denaturation, which is necessary to resolve electrophoretically individual components of the sample. To verify in vitro interaction between BART and ARL2 in the absence of
protein-denaturing agents, two approaches were taken. First, ARL2 was
pre-loaded with the fluorescent GTP analog, Mant-Gpp(NH)p, and then
titrated with BART or a buffer control containing BSA. As has been
found for some other GTPase interactions (31, 32) complex formation between ARL2·Mant-Gpp(NH)p and another protein caused variations in
the microenvironment of the fluorophore, resulting in changes in
emissions at 440 nm, after excitation at 355 nm. As shown in Fig.
8, additions of BART increased the
Mant-Gpp(NH)p fluorescence over the control, indicative of association
between ARL2·Mant-Gpp(NH)p and BART. The change in fluorescence with
varying concentrations of BART was used to determine a binding constant
for the ARL2·BART interaction, as described under "Materials and
Methods." Values for the dissociation constant ranged between 10 and
20 nM in at least four different experiments, the same as
that calculated by competition in the GTPase overlay assay. This result
confirmed that the high affinity interaction between ARL2·GTP and
BART in the GTPase overlay assay was not dependent on denaturation of BART or due to inappropriate refolding of BART on the nitrocellulose filter.

View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
ARL2-MantGppNHp binds with high affinity to
recombinant BARTC'His in solution. Recombinant ARL2 (0.15 µM) was pre-loaded with the fluorescent GTP analog
MantGpp(NH)p (0.6 µM) for 5-10 min at room temperature.
The fluorescence of the ARL2-MantGppNHp complex was then determined, as
described under "Materials and Methods," in the presence of
increasing amounts of recombinant BART (as indicated) or a buffer
control containing BSA. The increases in fluorescence emissions at 440 nm were recorded and plotted as a function of increasing BART
concentration.
|
|
Another means of detecting specific interaction between ARL2 and BART
was also employed. A GTPase-deficient mutant of ARL2, [Q70L]ARL2, was
found to co-immunoprecipitate with BART in the presence of GTP
S but
not in the presence of GDP. These results and a series of controls are
shown in Fig. 9. This further
demonstrated the GTP dependence and specificity of this
interaction.

View larger version (45K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 9.
ARL2 co-immunoprecipitates with BART in a
GTP-dependent manner. Polyclonal anti-BART or
preimmune serum was incubated with recombinant BART and/or [Q70L]ARL2
(containing a MYC epitope) in the presence or absence of GDP or GTP S
for 1 h. Following the addition of protein G-Sepharose, the
mixtures were incubated an additional 1 h, washed extensively, and
then boiled in SDS sample buffer to release bound proteins that were
analyzed by immunoblotting with anti-BART or anti-MYC probes. The heavy
bands migrating just above the ARL2 position on the anti-MYC blot are
light chain IgGs that cross-react with the secondary antibody used for
immunoblotting. Approximately 2 ng of pure recombinant BART and 25 ng
of pure recombinant [Q70L]ARL2-MYC were loaded in the appropriate
lanes as standards.
|
|
The demonstration of ARL2-BART binding in solution was also important
for another reason. No protein has yet been shown to interact with any
ARF protein in solution or, more specifically, in the absence of
membranes/lipids. This is presumably because of the importance of
membrane translocation of ARFs upon activation. Binding to membranes is
thought to orient and promote protein interactions and has come to be
thought of as a critical part of ARF actions. To begin to test for the
role of membrane translocation in ARL2 or BART activation, we asked
whether ARL2 or BART could be recruited to membranes upon activation of
the ARL2 by the binding of GTP
S, as described under "Materials and
Methods." BC3H1 cells were used as the source of cytosol as ARL2,
BART, and ARFs (used as a positive control) were all present in readily
detectable levels. After incubation in the presence of GTP
S for 20 min, the recruitment of ARF proteins was easily seen, whereas no
increase in the levels of ARL2 or BART was ever seen. This experiment
was repeated at least three times with the same results (data not shown).
BART Is Not an ARL2 GAP--
To investigate the effect of BART
binding on ARL2, we first tested whether the protein was capable of
increasing the intrinsic GTPase activity of ARL2, which is serving as
an ARL2 GAP. Like ARF proteins, ARL2 has no detectable GTPase activity
alone (14). Addition of BART did not alter the rate of GTP hydrolysis
by ARL2 using the same conditions in which ARF GAP activity can be
readily detected (data not shown; Ref. 34).
 |
DISCUSSION |
We describe the identification, purification, cloning, sequencing,
and initial characterization of the first ARL-binding protein. BART
binds specifically to ARL2 with an apparent KD of 20 nM and in a nucleotide (GTP)-dependent fashion.
It is widely expressed in human and mouse tissues, with highest
abundance in the brain. Although originally identified in a GTPase
overlay assay, the specific interaction with ARL2 was also shown to
occur in solution and without prior protein denaturation. Purified, recombinant BART was active as a high affinity, specific binder of
ARL2·GTP but lacked any ARL2 GTPase-activating protein activity. Based on this spectrum of activities, we conclude that BART is an
immediate downstream effector of ARL2. Further analysis of BART, its
binding partners, and activities should assist in the elucidation of
the physiological role of ARL2 and BART in cell regulation.
The sequence analysis of this first ARL-binding protein was
disappointing in its lack of previously identified domains that may
have provided insight into function or other binding partners. However,
lack of conserved GTPase or other, more general, protein binding motifs
is quite common among effectors for members of the ARF
family.4 A cysteine-rich
motif has been described in proteins with ARF GAP activity, which are
also ARF effectors (5), but this ARF GAP domain is clearly absent on at
least six other ARF-binding proteins, including PLD1, POR1/ARFaptin2,
and the bacterial toxins CTA (cholera toxin) or LTA (Escherichia
coli heat-labile toxin). So clues toward the identification of
biological functions for ARL2 and BART must come from other sources.
The large number of ESTs encoding BART allowed the full-length sequence
of the cDNA to be determined in silico and confirmed by
DNA sequencing of selected clones. Genomic sequencing of human DNA
revealed the presence of two BART-related genes, presumably pseudogenes. We conclude that there is a single BART message expressed in a wide array of cells and that the cDNA sequence shown in Fig. 5A is full length, or very nearly so.
It has become increasingly apparent that RAS-like GTPases often, if not
always, interact with a large number (>10) of specific effectors. At
least 13 different proteins bind to RAS in a GTP-sensitive manner (37),
whereas RHO family members have at least 15 such binding partners (38).
Although the underlying molecular mechanism(s) of most small GTPases
remains uncertain, much of what is known regarding the pathways they
regulate has come from the characterization of the proteins they bind.
Based upon results with other GTPases, we fully expect there to be a
number of ARL2-binding proteins, only one of which was identified by
the GTPase overlay assay. Because this assay requires the GTPase binder
to be denatured and renatured out of SDS while adhering to a
nitrocellulose filter, it is likely that others do not survive these
harsh constraints. The small size of BART was likely a contributing
factor that facilitated its re-folding on filters. The high affinity of
active ARL2 for BART undoubtedly also was an important contributing
factor in our ability to first detect, and later purify, the novel
binding protein.
Although other ARL-binding proteins are predicted, having one in hand
allows us to begin to test for function(s) and make comparisons to ARF
proteins. A critical component in ARF signaling is thought to be the
GTP-dependent membrane translocation that is evident for
ARF1-5, although not ARF6 as it more stably associates with membranes.
The covalent addition of myristate to the amino terminus of ARFs is a
requirement for membrane binding and for ARF to function in cells (39).
Thus, it was surprising when we first noted that recombinant ARL2,
co-expressed in bacteria with N-myristoyltransferase, does
not get acylated (21). This conclusion was further supported recently
by the failure to detect any N-myristoylation of ARL2 in
mammalian cells.5 Thus, it
appears that ARL2 is distinct from ARF proteins in this regard, despite
having the glycine at position 2 that is the site of acylation. Other
structural differences between ARL2 and the ARFs may also explain why
ARL2 binds guanine nucleotide triphosphates rapidly and to high
stoichiometry. These characteristics are only found on an ARF protein
after deletion of the amino-terminal
-helix. The inability of ARL2
or BART to bind to membranes after incubation with GTP
S
distinguishes this GTPase from the ARF proteins and further supports
the idea that ARL2 and BART bind in solution and may do so
independently of membranes or lipids.
High affinity, GTP-specific interaction between BART and ARL2 has been
demonstrated using three separate in vitro methods, and we
have initiated studies designed to reveal aspects of the in
vivo significance of this association. Preliminary studies indicate that BART and ARL2 can enter the
nucleus,6 yet their sequences
contain no identifiable nuclear localization sequence. Other studies
appear to indicate a role for ARL2 in determination of Golgi morphology
in at least some cell types,6 similar to what has been
observed for ARF proteins, but a role for BART in this effect is
uncertain. Additional work will be required before a testable model for
ARL2 or BART action in cells can emerge. At about 50% identity in
primary sequence, there is good reason to believe that the ARF proteins
will provide a useful model to compare and contrast effects and models
of ARLs in the future. These initial studies provide some evidence that
interesting differences between the groups of GTPases in the ARF family
will emerge. Since their discovery some 9 years ago, functional aspects of ARL proteins have been delayed by the extensive interest in the ARF
proteins as regulators of membrane traffic and targets of the drug
brefeldin A. It is anticipated that further characterization of BART,
and identification and analysis of other ARL-specific effectors, will
lead to a better understanding of the larger ARL branch of the ARF
family of GTPases that may shed new light on the actions of ARF
proteins as well.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We acknowledge the outstanding technical
expertise provided by Bill Lane and members of the Harvard
Microsequencing Facility. We also thank Shabnam Montalebi and J. David
Lambeth for assistance with the Mant-Gpp(NH)p assay and Jun Kuai for
assistance with the membrane translocation assay.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported in part by National Research Service
Award 1F32CA73202 (to J. D. S.) and by National Institutes of Health
Grant R01GM55148 and R01GM55823 (to R. A. K.).The costs of publication of this
article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article
must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement" in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
The nucleotide sequence(s) reported in this paper has been submitted to the GenBankTM/EMBL Data Bank with accession number(s) AF126062.
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Biochemistry,
Emory University School of Medicine, 1510 Clifton Rd., Atlanta, GA
30322-3050. Tel.: 404-727-3561; Fax: 404-727-3746; E-mail:
rkahn@bimcore.emory.edu.
2
H. Van Valkenburgh and R. A. Kahn,
unpublished observations.
3
A. L. Boman, J. Kuai, X. Zhu, J. Chen, R. Kuriyama, and R. A. Kahn, submitted for publication.
4
A. L. Boman and R. A. Kahn, submitted
for publication.
5
H. VanValkenburgh, J. D. Sharer, and
R. A. Kahn, unpublished observations.
6
J. D. Sharer and R. A. Kahn,
unpublished observations.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
ARF, ADP-ribosylation factor;
ARL2, ARF-like 2;
GAP, GTPase-activating
protein;
MOPS, 4-morpholinepropanesulfonic acid;
DTT, dithiothreitol;
BSA, bovine serum albumin;
RT, room temperature;
PCR, polymerase chain
reaction;
IPTG, isopropyl-
-D-thiogalactoside;
Mant, N-methylanthraniloyl;
Gpp(NH)p, guanosine
5'-(
,
-imido)triphosphate;
GTP
S, guanosine
5'-3-O-(thio)triphosphate;
bp, base pair;
EST, expressed
sequence tag;
ORF, open reading frame;
D/C, dimyristoylphosphatidylcholine and cholic acid.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Donaldson, J. G.,
and Klausner, R. D.
(1994)
Curr. Opin. Cell Biol.
6,
527-532[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 2.
|
Nuoffer, C.,
and Balch, W. E.
(1994)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
63,
949-990[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 3.
|
Boman, A. L.,
and Kahn, R. A.
(1995)
Trends Biochem. Sci.
20,
147-150[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 4.
|
Moss, J.,
and Vaughan, M.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
12327-12330[Free Full Text]
|
| 5.
|
Zhang, C.,
Cavenagh, M. M.,
and Kahn, R. A.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
19792-19796[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 6.
|
Rudge, S. A.,
Cavenagh, M. M.,
Kamath, R.,
Sciorra, V. A.,
Morris, A. J.,
Kahn, R. A.,
and Engebrecht, J.
(1998)
Mol. Biol. Cell
9,
2025-2036[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 7.
|
Stearns, T.,
Kahn, R. A.,
Botstein, D.,
and Hoyt, M. A.
(1990)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
10,
6690-6699[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 8.
|
Stearns, T.,
Willingham, M. C.,
Botstein, D.,
and Kahn, R. A.
(1990)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
87,
1238-1242[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 9.
|
Franco, M.,
Boretto, J.,
Robineau, S.,
Monier, S.,
Goud, B.,
Chardin, P.,
and Chavrier, P.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
9926-9931[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 10.
|
Goldberg, J.
(1998)
Cell
95,
237-248[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 11.
|
Cukierman, E.,
Huber, I.,
Rotman, M.,
and Cassel, D.
(1995)
Science
270,
1999-2002[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 12.
|
Brown, M. T.,
Andrade, J.,
Radhakrishna, H.,
Donaldson, J. G.,
Cooper, J. A.,
and Randazzo, P. A.
(1998)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18,
7038-7051[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 13.
|
Poon, P. P.,
Cassel, D.,
Spang, A.,
Rotman, M.,
Pick, E.,
Singer, R. A.,
and Johnston, G. C.
(1999)
EMBO J.
18,
555-564[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 14.
|
Clark, J.,
Moore, L.,
Krasinskas, A.,
Way, J.,
Battey, J.,
Tamkun, J.,
and Kahn, R.
(1993)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
90,
8952-8956[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 15.
|
Brown, H. A.,
Gutowski, S.,
Moomaw, C. R.,
Slaughter, C.,
and Sternweis, P. C.
(1993)
Cell
75,
1137-1144[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 16.
|
Kahn, R. A.,
Kern, F. G.,
Clark, J.,
Gelmann, E. P.,
and Rulka, C.
(1991)
J. Biol. Chem.
266,
2606-2614[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 17.
|
Cockcroft, S.,
Thomas, G. M.,
Fensome, A.,
Geny, B.,
Cunningham, E.,
Gout, I.,
Hiles, I.,
Totty, N. F.,
Truong, O.,
and Hsuan, J. J.
(1994)
Science
263,
523-526[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 18.
|
Hong, J. X.,
Lee, F. J.,
Patton, W. A.,
Lin, C. Y.,
Moss, J.,
and Vaughan, M.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
15872-15876[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 19.
|
Tamkun, J. W.,
Kahn, R. A.,
Kissinger, M.,
Brizuela, B. J.,
Rulka, C.,
Scott, M. P.,
and Kennison, J. A.
(1991)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
88,
3120-3124[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 20.
|
Lee, F. J.,
Huang, C. F., Yu, W. L.,
Buu, L. M.,
Lin, C. Y.,
Huang, M. C.,
Moss, J.,
and Vaughan, M.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
30998-31005[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 21.
|
Randazzo, P. A.,
Weiss, O.,
and Kahn, R. A.
(1995)
Methods Enzymol.
257,
128-135[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 22.
|
Clark, J.,
Moore, L.,
Krasinskas, A.,
Way, J.,
Battey, J.,
Tamkun, J.,
and Kahn, R. A.
(1993)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
90,
8952-8956
|
| 23.
|
Manser, E.,
Leung, T.,
Monfries, C.,
Teo, M.,
Hall, C.,
and Lim, L.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
16025-16028[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 24.
|
Manser, E.,
Leung, T.,
Salihuddin, H.,
Zhao, Z. S.,
and Lim, L.
(1994)
Nature
367,
40-46[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 25.
|
Lounsbury, K. M.,
Beddow, A. L.,
and Macara, I. G.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
11285-11290[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 26.
|
Laemmli, U. K.
(1970)
Nature
227,
680-685[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 27.
|
Towbin, H.,
Staehelin, T.,
and Gordon, J.
(1979)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
76,
4350-4354[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 28.
|
Zhang, C. J.,
Rosenwald, A. G.,
Willingham, M. C.,
Skuntz, S.,
Clark, J.,
and Kahn, R. A.
(1994)
J. Cell Biol.
124,
289-300[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 29.
|
Studier, F. W.,
Rosenberg, A. H.,
Dunn, J. J.,
and Dubendorff, J. W.
(1990)
Methods Enzymol.
185,
60-89[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 30.
|
Bradford, M. M.
(1976)
Anal. Biochem.
72,
248-254[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 31.
|
Nisimoto, Y.,
Freeman, J. L. R.,
Motalebi, S. A.,
Hirshberg, M.,
and Lambeth, J. D.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
18834-18841[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 32.
|
Nomanbhoy, T. K.,
and Cerione, R.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
10004-10009[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 33.
|
Evan, G. I.,
Lewis, G. K.,
Ramsay, G.,
and Bishop, J. M.
(1985)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
5,
3610-3616[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 34.
|
Randazzo, P. A.,
and Kahn, R. A.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
10758-10763[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 35.
|
Donaldson, J. G.,
Cassel, D.,
Kahn, R. A.,
and Klausner, R. D.
(1992)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
89,
6408-6412[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 36.
|
Balch, W. E.,
Dunphy, W. G.,
Braell, W. A.,
and Rothman, J. E.
(1984)
Cell
39,
405-416[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 37.
|
Campbell, S. L.,
Khosravi-Far, R.,
Rossman, K. L.,
Clark, G. J.,
and Der, C. J.
(1998)
Oncogene
17,
1395-1413[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 38.
|
Aspenstrom, P.
(1999)
Curr. Opin. Cell Biol.
11,
95-102[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 39.
|
Kahn, R. A.,
Clark, J.,
Rulka, C.,
Stearns, T.,
Zhang, C.,
Randazzo, P. A.,
Terui, T.,
and Cavenagh, M.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
143-150[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 40.
|
Cavenagh, M. M.,
Whitney, J. A.,
Carroll, K.,
Zhang, C.,
Boman, A. L.,
Rosenwald, A. G.,
Mellman, I.,
and Kahn, R. A.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
21767-21774[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
Copyright © 1999 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles: