J Biol Chem, Vol. 274, Issue 42, 30169-30181, October 15, 1999
Quantification of Short Term Signaling by the Epidermal Growth
Factor Receptor*
Boris N.
Kholodenko
§,
Oleg V.
Demin
¶,
Gisela
Moehren
, and
Jan B.
Hoek
From the
Department of Pathology, Anatomy and Cell
Biology, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107 and the ¶ A. N. Belozersky Institute of Physico-Chemical Biology,
Moscow State University, Moscow 119899, Russia
 |
ABSTRACT |
During the past decade, our knowledge of
molecular mechanisms involved in growth factor signaling has
proliferated almost explosively. However, the kinetics and control of
information transfer through signaling networks remain poorly
understood. This paper combines experimental kinetic analysis and
computational modeling of the short term pattern of cellular responses
to epidermal growth factor (EGF) in isolated hepatocytes. The
experimental data show transient tyrosine phosphorylation of the EGF
receptor (EGFR) and transient or sustained response patterns in
multiple signaling proteins targeted by EGFR. Transient responses
exhibit pronounced maxima, reached within 15-30 s of EGF stimulation
and followed by a decline to relatively low (quasi-steady-state)
levels. In contrast to earlier suggestions, we demonstrate that the
experimentally observed transients can be accounted for without
requiring receptor-mediated activation of specific tyrosine
phosphatases, following EGF stimulation. The kinetic model predicts how
the cellular response is controlled by the relative levels and activity
states of signaling proteins and under what conditions activation
patterns are transient or sustained. EGFR signaling patterns appear to
be robust with respect to variations in many elemental rate constants
within the range of experimentally measured values. On the other hand,
we specify which changes in the kinetic scheme, rate constants, and
total amounts of molecular factors involved are incompatible with the experimentally observed kinetics of signal transfer. Quantitation of
signaling network responses to growth factors allows us to assess how
cells process information controlling their growth and differentiation.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The epidermal growth factor receptor
(EGFR)1 belongs to the family
of protein-tyrosine kinase receptors, which regulate cell growth,
survival, proliferation, and differentiation (1-3). EGFR is activated
by binding of epidermal growth factor (EGF) or another EGF family
factor (e.g. transforming growth factor-
). This binding causes EGFR dimerization and rapid activation of its intrinsic tyrosine
kinase followed by autophosphorylation of multiple tyrosine residues in
the cytoplasmic receptor domain. Tyrosine phosphorylation of EGFR
generates a biochemical message for a battery of cytoplasmic target
proteins that contain characteristic protein domains, such as Src
homology 2 (SH2) domains and phosphotyrosine binding domains (e.g. see Refs. 4-6). Binding and
phosphorylation/activation of these proteins, e.g. growth
factor receptor-binding protein 2 (Grb2), Src homology and collagen
domain protein (Shc), phospholipase C-
(PLC
), and others lead to
a further propagation of the signal through multiple interacting pathways.
Several signaling pathways emanating from EGFR involve activation of
SOS (Son of Sevenless homolog protein), the downstream target of which
is Ras protein. Mitogenic signaling by EGFR is associated with
Ras-dependent stimulation of mitogen-activated protein
kinase cascades, leading to phosphorylation of both cytoplasmic and
nuclear targets. Although a predominant role of EGFR and other tyrosine
kinase receptors is stimulation of cell growth and proliferation, recent data suggest that the physiological outcome of tyrosine kinase
signaling strongly depends on the timing, duration, and amplitude of
activation of signaling components (2, 7, 8).
Initially, signaling pathways were viewed as linear relay routes, which
simply transmitted and amplified signals. Now it is increasingly
appreciated that signaling responses are shaped by multiple
interactions of many components of signaling networks (9). A subtle
difference in input signals and/or interaction kinetics may result in
differential response patterns and, eventually, in alterations in gene
expression by signal-regulated transcription factors. For instance,
variable strength of Raf-1 activation (the first kinase of the
mitogen-activated protein kinase cascade, a direct downstream target of
Ras) has been linked to such opposing responses as the induction of DNA
synthesis and growth inhibition (10-13). Experiments with PC12 cells
have shown that the specificity of cellular responses depends on the
duration of activation of extracellular signal-regulated kinase (Erk)
(the terminal kinase of the mitogen-activated protein kinase cascade),
e.g. whether Erk activation is transient or sustained (2,
14-16). Therefore, signaling through the same pathway in the same cell
type may result in completely different outputs depending on the
amplitude and persistence of activation of signaling intermediates,
i.e. on their kinetic behavior.
The kinetics (i.e. the transient and steady-state behavior)
of the cellular response to EGF depends on many factors, including the
number of receptors displayed on the cell surface; the concentration of
the growth factor, docking, and target proteins; and their initial
activity states. Moreover, other signaling pathways that share or
interact with one or more components of the EGFR pathway can influence
the kinetic pattern of EGFR signaling. Although a large body of data
describes EGFR signaling at the molecular level, the manner in which
the complex pattern of cellular responses to EGF is controlled remains
poorly understood. An important reason is the lack of a quantitative
description of EGFR signaling network, which hampers a careful
examination of the influence of multiple factors. Detailed
understanding of the dynamics of complex cellular responses requires a
combination of experimental and computational approaches (17-19).
The early events of EGFR signaling, such as EGF binding and receptor
autophosphorylation, binding and activation of Grb2, phosphorylation of
Shc and PLC
, and activation of SOS, develop in a time frame of
seconds. There are slower processes involving receptor internalization
and its subsequent degradation in lysosomes, which have an important
role in EGF-induced signaling (20-22). Activation and binding of
ligands causes the recruitment of EGFR to clathrin-coated pits and
transfer to endosomes. These processes are developing over time frames
of minutes to hours, i.e. much more slowly than early EGFR
signaling events, which evolve to a quasi-steady-state level in a time
scale of seconds. Here we will study the short term response (up to
120 s) to EGF stimulation.
The aim of the present study is to give a quantitative description of
the short term EGFR signaling based on a detailed kinetic scheme of the
interactions of proteins and other signaling molecules involved. To
this end, we combine a computational approach with experimental
analysis of the time course of activation/phosphorylation of different
components of the EGFR signaling pathway in isolated rat hepatocytes.
We test the model against the experimental data to gain a better
understanding of the factors governing the kinetics of phosphorylated
signaling intermediates. In particular, the model explains why the
total phosphorylated EGFR and its complexes with target proteins
exhibit pronounced maxima and then descend to sustained levels, whereas
the total concentration of phosphorylated forms of Shc and the
concentrations of Shc-Grb2 and Shc-Grb2-SOS complexes increase
monotonically, reaching a quasi-steady-state level. We demonstrate
which enzyme activities and kinetic constants exert significant control
over the EGFR signaling and how the transient behavior is regulated.
This analysis will enable us to assess how the EGFR signaling system
can process information and generate distinct outputs in response to stimuli.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Materials
Antibodies against EGFR (sheep polyclonal) and PLC
(mixed
mouse monoclonals) were obtained from Upstate Biotechnology, Inc. (Lake
Placid, NY); anti-Shc (rabbit polyclonal or mouse monoclonal), anti-Grb2 (mouse monoclonal), and anti-phosphotyrosine-horseradish peroxidase (type RC20H) were from Transduction Laboratories (Lexington, KY). Anti-phosphotyrosine-agarose conjugates (mouse monoclonal) were
obtained from Sigma, and anti-IgG-horseradish peroxidase conjugates
were from Pierce. Gradient gels and nitrocellulose membranes were from
Bio-Rad, and detection of the Western blots was done by
chemiluminescence using Supersignal reagent (Pierce). Collagenase type
I was from Worthington, and bovine serum albumin fraction V and the
Complete protease inhibitor mixture were obtained from Roche Molecular
Biochemicals. EGF (receptor grade), protein G-Sepharose, and protein
A-Sepharose were from Sigma. Other chemicals and biochemicals were
obtained from Sigma or Fisher.
Cell Preparation and Incubation Conditions
Isolated hepatocytes were prepared from the livers of male
Harlan Sprague Dawley rats by collagenase perfusion as described previously (23). Cell preparations were suspended in a modified Krebs-Ringer bicarbonate buffer (pH 7.4) containing NaCl (127 mM), NaHCO3 (25 mM), KCl (4 mM), MgCl2 (1.2 mM), potassium
phosphate (1.2 mM), Hepes (10 mM, pH 7.4),
CaCl2 (1.0 mM), and glucose (15 mM)
and stored on ice until use. Incubations were carried out in a shaking
water bath at 37 °C in capped plastic flasks in a gas phase of 95%
O2, 5% CO2. Cells were preincubated at a cell density of 107 cells/ml in Krebs-Ringer bicarbonate buffer
for 45 min to optimize receptor presentation on the cell surface, prior
to stimulation with different concentrations of EGF (24). Reactions
were stopped after 0, 15, 30, 45, 60, and 120 s by a 1:1 dilution
of a sample of the incubation mixture with ice-cold lysis buffer
containing (final concentrations) Hepes (50 mM, pH 7.5),
NaCl (150 mM), EGTA (5 mM), glycerol (10%),
Triton X-100 (1%), NaF (100 mM), sodium o-vanadate (0.2 mM), sodium pyrophosphate (10 mM), and the commercially available protease inhibitor
mixture Complete (Roche Molecular Biochemicals). After 10 min on ice,
lysates were centrifuged in the cold room (4 °C) in an Eppendorf
microcentrifuge 5 min at top speed to remove the Triton-insoluble
fraction and either used immediately or stored at
70 °C until use.
In some experiments, cells were lysed with a digitonin-containing
buffer instead of with Triton X-100. The concentration of digitonin was
150 µg/ml, equivalent to 5-7 µg/mg of protein, sufficient to
achieve maximal release of soluble proteins, as determined from the
release of lactate dehydrogenase. Other treatment conditions were
similar to those described above. The particulate fraction from
digitonin-treated cells was further extracted by resuspending in lysis
buffer containing 0.1% SDS plus 1% deoxycholate.
Immunoprecipitation Conditions, Gel Electrophoresis, and Western
Blotting
Immunoprecipitations were carried out by a modification of the
procedures described in Ref. 25. Antibody titration experiments established that maximally effective (>90%) immunoprecipitation of
both unphosphorylated and phosphorylated forms of the relevant proteins
was achieved at high antibody:antigen ratio. Based on these titration
studies, equal volumes (25-100 µl) of lysate and undiluted
commercial antibody solution were mixed and incubated for a minimum of
4 h at 4 °C with continuous mixing. Immune complexes with
anti-EGFR antibody (sheep, polyclonal IgG) and PLC-
(mixed mouse
monoclonal) were captured by the addition of 15 µl of protein G-Sepharose added during the final hour, and anti-SHC (rabbit polyclonal IgG) complexes were captured with 15 µl of protein A-Sepharose. Immune complexes were washed three times with HNTG buffer
(Hepes (20 mM, pH 7.5), NaCl (150 mM), Triton
X-100 (0.1%), glycerol (10%), sodium o-vanadate (0.2 mM), NaF (10 mM), and the Complete protease
inhibitor mixture). Immunoprecipitates and full lysate samples were
dissolved in Laemmli buffer (20% glycerol, 3% SDS, 3%
-mercaptoethanol, 10 mM EDTA, 0.05% bromphenol blue) and placed in a boiling water bath for 5 min. Proteins were separated by SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis on 4-20% gradient gels electroblotted onto nitrocellulose membranes. Membranes were blocked with 1.5% bovine serum albumin in TBST (Tris 10 mM, pH
8.0, 150 mM NaCl, 0.05% Triton X-100) at room temperature.
For Western blotting, all antibodies were diluted in TBST according to
the manufacturer's recommendations. The membranes were incubated with primary antibody for 1 h at room temperature and then with
horseradish peroxidase-conjugated secondary antibody for 30 min and
washed four times for 10 min with TBST before detection by chemiluminescence.
Quantitative analysis of tyrosine phosphorylation of signaling proteins
following EGF stimulation was carried out by the following procedure.
Anti-phosphotyrosine (anti-Tyr(P)) immunoprecipitates of each sample
were loaded onto the gels side-by-side with the corresponding samples
of EGFR or PLC-
immunoprecipitates, after appropriate dilution with
HNTG buffer to achieve a signal intensity in the same range as that of
the corresponding tyrosine-phosphorylated protein on the Western blot.
Alternatively, anti-Tyr(P) immunoprecipitates were loaded side by side
with a sample of the corresponding total lysate (after appropriate
dilution with HNTG), and the resulting nitrocellulose membranes were
probed with antibodies to EGFR or SHC. This procedure allowed for
quantitation of tyrosine phosphorylation of specific target proteins by
normalization to the total target protein in the lysate. A similar
strategy was followed to assess the extent of Grb2 coprecipitation with
either EGFR or SHC proteins.
After chemiluminescence, a range of different film exposures was made
for each membrane to avoid overexposure and to maintain band densities
within a linear range for densitometric quantitation. Protein bands
were identified according to their molecular weights and by comparison
with specific immunoprecipitates. Bands were analyzed densitometrically
using a Sharp JX-330 gel scanner and quantified by the Image Master ID
software (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). Results from multiple (4-8)
scans were averaged and several (three or four) immunoprecipitates from
a single experiment were compared. Data are presented as the mean ± S.E. for different estimates from a single experiment,
representative of three or more similar experiments.
Kinetic Analysis
Schematic Representation of Protein-Protein Interactions Induced
by EGF Binding
For a quantitative analysis of the EGFR signaling network, an
adequate description is required of the reactions that contribute to
the experimentally detected protein-protein interactions and tyrosine
phosphorylation events. The kinetic scheme presented in Fig. 1 forms
the basis for the integration of the experimental study and the
computational analysis.
In step 1, EGF binds to the extracellular domain of the monomeric EGFR
(designated as R in the kinetic scheme) and forms the EGF·EGFR
complex (designated as Ra). EGF binding drives the
association of two receptor monomers into an activated receptor dimer
(step 2). Recent studies (26, 27) have shown that a 2:2 (EGF:EGFR) complex is the predominant form of the receptor dimer (designated as
R2). The phosphorylation of tyrosine residues by receptor
tyrosine kinase is combined into a single step 3, yielding a form
designated as RP. Although multiple tyrosine residues on the
cytoplasmic tail of the receptor are targets for autophosphorylation,
we did not attempt to distinguish experimentally between different
phosphorylated forms of the receptor, and, as we will discuss below,
the initial computational analysis also does not require a functional
distinction to be made. Step 4 is the dephosphorylation of RP,
catalyzed by one or more phosphotyrosine phosphatase(s) (28, 29).
Tyrosine phosphorylation triggers the binding of cytoplasmic proteins
to the receptor. We consider here three proteins that directly interact
with phosphotyrosine residues on the receptor, namely Grb2, Shc, and
PLC
(4). Although several other proteins bind to the activated EGFR,
it is helpful to consider a limited number of target proteins as an
initial core model. It is not entirely clear whether these multiple
proteins can bind simultaneously to their target phosphotyrosine
residues on the same receptor molecule or whether the binding of, for
example, Grb2 to the receptor hampers the binding of PLC
(competitive binding). The model depicted in Fig. 1 considers the
binding of cytoplasmic proteins to occur by a competitive mechanism.
The advantage of a model with competitive binding is that it allows us
to consider receptor phosphorylation as a single step rather than
monitoring different phosphorylated forms of R2 as distinct
entities. We also assume that, when Grb2, Shc, or PLC
are bound to
EGFR, the corresponding phosphotyrosine residues are not available to
receptor phosphotyrosine phosphatases. The implications of these
assumptions for the dynamic pattern of EGFR signaling will be
considered below. Which mechanism of interactions of EGFR and adapter
proteins occurs in vivo remains to be identified.
The entire network of reactions of the receptor with its cytoplasmic
target proteins can now be divided into three coupled cycles of
interactions with Grb2, PLC
, and Shc, respectively. One receptor
cycle includes the binding of PLC
(step 5 in Fig. 1, resulting in
the formation of the complex designated as R-PL) and phosphorylation of
PLC
at two tyrosine residues by receptor tyrosine kinase (step 6, yielding the complex R-PLP). The partial cycle of the receptor is
completed by the dissociation of R-PLP into phosphorylated
phospholipase C
(PLC
P) and RP in step 7. Tyrosine phosphorylation
of PLC
is thought to be necessary for its activation and the
subsequent formation of inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate and generation of
a Ca2+ response (30, 31). PLC
P can translocate to
cytoskeletal or membrane structures (step 25), which yields bound
PLC
P-I (32, 33).
Another partial receptor cycle starts with the binding of Grb2 to a
receptor phosphotyrosine (step 9, forming the complex R-G). The complex
of the EGF receptor with the adapter protein Grb2 is a branch point
that leads to several signaling pathways through binding to different
potential targets. Here we consider the link of EGFR to the Ras
signaling pathway. The SH3 domains of Grb2 bind to proline-rich regions
of the Ras-specific GDP-GTP exchange factor SOS. In step 10, SOS binds
to the receptor-bound Grb2, resulting in the formation of the ternary
complex R-G-S. The binding of SOS to the EGFR-Grb2 complex localizes
SOS in the vicinity of Ras, which is anchored to the cell membrane. The
ternary complex R-G-S dissociates (step 11), yielding the
phosphorylated receptor (RP) and the complex G-S, which further
dissociates into Grb2 and SOS (step 12).
The final EGFR cycle considered here includes the formation of the
complex of Shc with EGFR (R-SH) (step 13 in Fig. 1) and its subsequent
phosphorylation at Tyr317 by receptor tyrosine kinase (step
14, yielding R-ShP). This allows Grb2 to also bind to EGFR indirectly
through phosphorylated Shc, forming a ternary complex (R-Sh-G) (step
17). There are three embedded EGFR cycles that involve Shc protein. The
shortest of these cycles is completed in step 15, where the complex
R-ShP dissociates, yielding the phosphorylated receptor (RP) and
phosphorylated Shc (ShP). The second cycle is completed in step 18, where the ternary complex R-Sh-G dissociates into RP and the complex
Sh-G. The longest of the three embedded cycles includes SOS binding to
R-Sh-G, leading to the formation of a four-protein complex, R-Sh-G-S
(step 19). The complex R-Sh-G-S can also be formed by association of
R-ShP and G-S complexes in step 24. The third cycle is completed in
step 20, where the complex R-Sh-G-S dissociates, releasing the
phosphorylated receptor (RP) and the complex Sh-G-S.
It is unknown whether the binding of the phosphorylated target proteins
to EGFR protects them against specific phosphatases. The kinetic scheme
of Fig. 1 assumes that PLC
P and ShP are dephosphorylated only after
they dissociate from the receptor (steps 16 and 8). However, this
assumption is not critical, provided the dephosphorylation of bound
target proteins proceeds no faster than that of their unbound
phosphorylated forms.
After phosphorylated Shc dissociates from the receptor (ShP), it
retains its ability to bind various SH2 domain-containing targets. The
remaining steps in Fig. 1 constitute the cycle of ShP. The scheme shows
that Grb2 binds to ShP, forming the complex Sh-G (step 21). The GDP-GTP
exchange factor SOS is able to bind to Grb2 complexed with
phosphorylated Shc, forming the ternary complex Sh-G-S (step 22). The
dissociation of the complex Sh-G-S yields G-S and ShP (step 23).
Derivation of a Kinetic Model
Kinetic Equations--
In order to integrate the experimental
observations in a description of the dynamic behavior of the EGFR
signaling network, we converted the reaction scheme of Fig. 1 into a
set of mathematical equations known as chemical kinetics equations
(34). For changes with time of the concentration of any component,
e.g. the receptor form RP, one can write the following.
|
(Eq. 1)
|
Here the total rate is the sum of the rates that produce or
consume RP according to the kinetic diagram. For instance, the total
rate of RP production equals the sum of the (net) rates of six steps
(steps 3, 7, 11, 15, 18, and 20; see Fig. 1). A complete set of
chemical kinetic equations describing the reactions of Fig. 1 is
provided in Table I.
Kinetic equations are usually written in terms of concentrations
(not of mole numbers), since the reaction rates are functions of
concentrations. If the same compound participates in reactions taking
place in different compartments with different volumes, the effective
concentration of that compound will be different depending on the
volume of the corresponding compartment. Step 1 (EGF binding to EGFR)
could be considered as taking place in the extracellular compartment
with a given initial concentration of EGF. The concentration of EGFR in
the extracellular compartment would then be calculated as the number of
the receptors on the cell surface divided by the (average) volume of
incubation medium per cell (Vm). In step 2, association and dissociation of the receptor monomers occurs in the
cell membrane. All other steps are considered as taking place in the
cytosolic compartment. Therefore, the same mole number of EGFR would
give rise to three EGFR concentrations (representing the different
compartments). However, for computational purposes, it is more
convenient to deal only with a single concentration of EGFR related to
the cytoplasmic water volume (Vcw) of the cell. This
requires rescaling the rate constants of steps 1 and 2. For the purpose
of this rescaling, the EGF concentration in the model was also related
to the cytoplasmic water volume; i.e. [EGF] in the
experimental medium was multiplied by the ratio
Vm/Vcw (see Table
II). Typically, there were
107 cells/ml in our experiments (see "Cell Preparation
and Incubation Conditions"); therefore, Vm = 10
7 ml. Assuming the diameter of a hepatocyte of 20 µm
and a cytoplasmic water volume of about 70% of total intracellular
volume, Vm/Vcw = 33.3.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table II
Rate equations and parameter values of the kinetic model
Concentrations and the Michaelis constants (K4,
K8, and K16) are given in
nM. First- and second-order rate constants are expressed in
s 1 and nM 1 · s 1,
respectively. V4, V8, and
V16 are expressed in nM · s 1. [EGFR]total = 100, [EGF]total = 680, [RPL]total = 105, [Grb2]total = 85, [Shc]total = 150, [SOS]total = 34. Medium
concentration [EGF]total was multiplied by the factor
Vm/Vcw = 33.3 to formally rescale
it to the cytoplasmic water volume.
|
|
Conserved Moieties--
In the reaction network described by the
equations listed in Table I, the EGF moiety and the protein moieties
are conserved. This assumption is justified for the short term
responses considered here. Let [EGFR]total be the total
concentrations of EGFR forms. Then the following is true.
|
(Eq. 2)
|
Assuming that 60-80% out of the total of
1-3·105 EGF receptors/cell (35-37) is displayed on the
cell membrane, the total concentration of surface-expressed EGFR,
translated to the cytoplasm water volume, is about 100 nM.
Five other moieties conserved in the EGFR signaling reactions include
the total concentrations of PLC
, Grb2, Shc, and SOS proteins and
EGF, designated below by [PLC
]total,
[Grb2]total, [Shc]total,
[SOS]total, and [EGF]total, respectively
(Table II).
|
(Eq. 3)
|
|
(Eq. 4)
|
|
(Eq. 5)
|
|
(Eq. 6)
|
|
(Eq. 7)
|
Thermodynamic Restrictions along Cyclic Pathways in the Kinetic
Scheme--
If a kinetic scheme includes "true" cycles, in which
the initial and final states are identical, the equilibrium constants of the reactions along any cycle satisfy so-called "detailed
balance" relationships (e.g. see Refs. 38 and 39). These
detailed balance relations require the product of the equilibrium
constants along a cycle to be equal to 1, since at equilibrium the net
flux through any cycle vanishes. Therefore, such relations decrease the
number of independent rate constants in a kinetic model. The kinetic scheme in Fig. 1 demonstrates that the progression along steps 9-12
(in the positive direction) completes a cycle without any concomitant
transformations and changes in the free energy. Hence, the following
restriction exists on the kinetic constants.
|
(Eq. 8)
|
Further examination of the kinetic scheme in Fig. 1 shows
additional reaction cycles that imply the following constraints.
|
(Eq. 9)
|
|
(Eq. 10)
|
|
(Eq. 11)
|
|
(Eq. 12)
|
EGF Binding Constants--
Reported Kd values
for EGF binding to the solubilized extracellular domain of the receptor
(40, 41) range from 100 to 500 nM, whereas full-length EGFR
in plasma membrane vesicles has a substantially higher affinity for
EGF, with an apparent Kd of 0.45-1 nM
(42, 43). In binding studies carried out on intact hepatocytes,
Kd values of 0.4 nM (37) and of 0.03 and
0.29 nM for high and low affinity sites (36), respectively,
have been reported. Our recent data also demonstrate that in intact
hepatocytes, EGFR autophosphorylation saturates at EGF concentrations
of 5-10 nM (25), whereas in Triton-solubilized cells
maximal activation of EGFR tyrosine kinase activity requires 500-1000
nM EGF. These findings indicate that the
Kd for EGF in intact hepatocytes should be well
below the value of 100-500 nM measured for the solubilized
receptor. In the kinetic model, we have used Kd = 0.6 nM for EGF binding to intact liver cells. This
represents an average value of literature data on binding studies in
hepatocytes and is compatible with our experimental data on
EGFR autophosphorylation.
Whereas the Kd values are important for the
(quasi)equilibrium conditions, a knowledge of the rate constants of the forward and backward reactions is required to describe the temporal (and steady-state) behavior. The association and dissociation steps are
characterized by second-order and first-order rate constants, respectively. For EGF binding to the recombinant soluble extracellular binding domain of EGF receptor, the "on" (association) and
"off" (dissociation) rate constants were reported to be
k1 = 1.5·10
4
nM
1 s
1 and
k-1 = 0.06 s
1, and the
Kd = k-1/k1 = 400 nM (43). The Kd value of 0.6 nM, characteristic for membrane-bound receptor can be
obtained if the reported (43) magnitude of k1 is
increased or k-1 is decreased by a factor of
about 600. The characteristic (relaxation) time of the EGF binding
reaction is 1/(k-1 + k1·[EGF]). A decrease in
k-1 by a factor of 600 leads to a relaxation
time equal to about 2500 s (for 2 nM EGF), which is
about 3 orders of magnitude higher than the characteristic time of
experimentally observed responses of the entire signaling network (see
Figs. 2 and 3). Therefore, we conclude that the value of the off rate constant, k-1, is unlikely to be much less than
the value reported in Ref. 43. On the other hand, the on rate constant,
k1, could be substantially higher for the
receptor in situ because of the decreased orientation
restrictions on the positions of encountering molecules. Indeed, the
values of this constant determined in intact fetal rat lung cells (44)
and in human fibroblasts (45) were 20 and 35 times greater than the
value reported by Zhou et al. (43). Taking
k-1 = 0.06 s
1 (43, 45) and
Kd = 0.6 nM gives
k1 = 0.1 nM
1
s
1. With these values of the rate constants, the
characteristic time of the binding reaction with 2 nM EGF
is less than 4 s.
Receptor Dimerization--
Aggregation of activated receptor
monomers (Ra) into a dimer (R2) is brought
about by the random lateral diffusion of Ra in the cell
membrane. The lateral diffusion coefficient (DR) reported for EGFR is about 1-2·10
10 cm2
s
1 (46), in line with the values determined for various
membrane proteins, which are typically in the range of
5·10
9 to 10
10 cm2
s
1 (47-49). Substituting the reported value of
DR into equations for diffusion-limited rate
constants in two dimensions (50-53) and relating the collision rate to
a unit of cytoplasmic water volume, we calculated the diffusion limit
for the second-order rate constant k2 to be
1-0.02 nM
1 s
1. Assuming that
the dimerization rate is below the lower limit of the encounter rate,
we have taken k2 = 0.01 nM
1 s
1. Given a
Kd of EGFR dimerization of 10 nM,
k-2 = 0.1 s
1.
Rate Constants of Phosphorylation and Protein Binding--
In a
living cell, the ATP concentration is much higher than the Michaelis
constant of the receptor kinase for ATP (54, 55). Therefore, the rate
of tyrosine phosphorylation of the receptor (as in step 3) or bound
target proteins (as in steps 6 and 14) can be kinetically characterized
by pseudo-first-order rate constants. Importantly, the standard free
energy differences of the tyrosine phosphorylation reactions are low,
so that the equilibrium constants are of the order of unity (56-58).
Consequently, the phosphorylation steps catalyzed by EGF receptor
kinase are considered reversible (Table II), and the effective rate
constants will depend on the ATP:ADP ratio, which is assumed constant.
By contrast, the phosphatase reactions (steps 4, 16, 8) can be
considered as (kinetically) irreversible. The phosphatases are assumed
to follow Michaelis-Menten kinetics (29, 59), and the concentration of
inorganic phosphate is considered constant.
The association of protein molecules into dimers or larger complexes
occurs with typical rate constants on the order of 10
4 to
10
1 nM
1 s
1
(60-62). The rate constants reported for the association of the p85
subunit of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase with two different phosphopeptides, corresponding to phosphotyrosine sites of the platelet-derived growth factor
-receptor were
1.9·10
3 and 9.2·10
3
nM
1 s
1 (63). The binding of SH2
domains of the p85 subunit to phosphotyrosine sequences derived from
the insulin receptor substrate-1 was characterized by association rate
constants of 3·10
2 to 4·10
1
nM
1 s
1 for two different
phosphopeptides and N-terminal and C-terminal SH2 domains of p85 (64).
The dissociation rate constants were observed to be 0.1 s
1 for platelet-derived growth factor
-receptor-derived peptides (63) and 0.1-0.2 s
1 for
insulin receptor substrate-1-derived sequences (64). The dissociation
equilibrium constants appeared to be 14-50 nM for platelet-derived growth factor-derived peptides (63) and 0.3-3 nM for insulin receptor substrate-1 peptides (64). In a
recent study (65), a much higher Kd of 300 nM for the interaction of a platelet-derived growth factor
-receptor-derived peptide with the N-terminal SH2 domain of the p85
subunit of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase has been reported. The
discrepancy between these and some other literature data (66-69)
regarding the binding affinities of the SH2 domains can be explained by
the differences in the experimental techniques, the SH2 domains, and
the phosphopeptide sequences studied (65). Since data for on and off
rate constants for the EGFR interactions with its target proteins
in situ are unavailable, the corresponding rate constants
were assumed to be in the same range as those reported for the binding
of SH2 domains to phosphopeptides (see Table II).
Grb2 interacts with SOS (step 12) with a high affinity through the
N-terminal SH3 domain (70). The off rate constant of Grb2-SOS complex
is orders of magnitude slower than the off rate constants for the
interactions of SH2 domains with phosphotyrosine peptides (70). Fast
dissociation rates at the phosphorylated receptor sites are important
for rapid exchange of ligands (63, 64). It has been reported that the
Grb2-SOS complex binds to both EGFR- and Shc-derived phosphopeptides
with higher affinity than Grb2 alone (71). These experimental data
restrict the Kd values of the corresponding
reactions in the kinetic scheme (Fig. 1) as follows:
Kd9/Kd11 = 2.5;
Kd21/Kd23 = 7;
Kd17/Kd24 = 7. The rate expressions and kinetic constants of all of the reactions
shown in Fig. 1 are collected in Table II.
 |
RESULTS |
Experimental Analysis of EGFR Signaling
The time course of the cellular response to EGF was followed in
freshly isolated hepatocytes by measuring tyrosine phosphorylation and
protein-protein interactions of signaling intermediates described in
Fig. 1 after stimulation with different EGF concentrations (20, 2, or
0.2 nM) for 15, 30, 45, 60, and 120 s. EGFR
phosphorylation was determined by two different approaches. First, EGFR
protein was immunoprecipitated using an anti-EGFR antibody that
recognized both phosphorylated and unphosphorylated receptor, and EGFR
phosphorylation was determined by probing Western blots with
anti-Tyr(P) antibody (25). Alternatively, tyrosine-phosphorylated
proteins were immunoprecipitated using an anti-Tyr(P) antibody, and
membranes were probed for EGFR protein by Western blotting using an
anti-EGFR antibody (or, for other phosphorylated proteins, using
appropriate antibodies). In some experiments, EGFR protein in the
anti-Tyr(P) immunoprecipitates was compared with EGFR protein in
samples of the total lysate run in parallel on the same membranes, or
the anti-Tyr(P) immunoprecipitates were compared on the same membranes
with the anti-EGFR immunoprecipitates, using the same anti-EGFR
antibody for detection. These experiments provided estimates of the
phosphorylated EGFR protein as a fraction of total EGFR protein in the lysate.
Fig. 2 shows total phosphorylated EGFR as a fraction of the total EGFR
protein in the lysate at different times after stimulation with EGF.
The kinetic scheme in Fig. 1 indicates
that the following EGFR forms contributed to the bands of the
phosphorylated receptor.
|
(Eq. 13)
|
Activation of hepatocytes with a saturating concentration of EGF
(20 nM) elicited a rapid response of receptor
autophosphorylation. The peak EGFR phosphorylation level was reached
within 15 s and was equivalent to 50-70% of the total detectable
receptor protein in the cells. It declined to reach a
quasi-steady-state phosphorylation level of 15-20% of the total
receptor population by 2 min. This sustained level was maintained
during further incubation up to 30 min (not shown). A lower EGF
concentration (2 nM) also induced a transient receptor
phosphorylation response, but the peak level was significantly less
(35% of total EGFR). A much lower peak phosphorylation level (less
than 10%) was obtained at 0.2 nM EGF. The peak
phosphorylation level detected in anti-EGFR immunoprecipitates and in
anti-Tyr(P) immunoprecipitates after a 15-s stimulation with EGF was
not significantly different, indicating that conditions used for
immunoprecipitation were equally effective with either antibody and
that the data describing early events in EGFR signaling were not
significantly affected by the method of measurement.

View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Kinetic scheme of EGFR signaling mediated by
adapter and target proteins. Numbering of individual steps is
arbitrary.
|
|
Fig. 3 shows the time course of the EGF (20 nM)-induced
activation of several downstream signaling events, as detected by tyrosine phosphorylation of PLC
and Shc proteins (A and
B), and by Grb2 coprecipitation with EGFR and Shc
(C). Tyrosine phosphorylation of PLC
(Fig. 3A)
was measured by immunoprecipitation with anti-Tyr(P) antibody and
detection by Western blotting with anti-PLC
antibody. The quantity
of PLC
protein detected in these immunoprecipitates was compared
with total PLC
protein obtained after immunoprecipitation with
anti-PLC
antibody and run in parallel on the same gels. The PLC
band in the anti-Tyr(P) immunoprecipitates includes the following
complexes (see Fig. 1).
|
(Eq. 14)
|
The time course of tyrosine phosphorylation of Shc (Fig.
3B) was also measured in anti-Tyr(P) immunoprecipitates
using anti-Shc antibodies for detection. The predominant Shc isoforms
detected in the liver cell lysate include a 46- and a 52-kDa form. Both isoforms become tyrosine-phosphorylated in response to EGF with approximately similar kinetics (72). The density of the corresponding bands was compared with the Shc protein bands detected in the total
lysate analyzed in parallel on the same gel. The phosphorylated Shc
protein detected in these analyses reflects the sum of the following
concentrations (see Fig. 1).
|
(Eq. 15)
|
Grb2 coprecipitation with EGFR and with Shc (Fig. 3C)
was measured by immunoprecipitating cell lysates with anti-EGFR
antibody and with anti-Shc antibody and detecting coprecipitated Grb2
by Western blotting with Grb2 antibody. According to the kinetic scheme
of Fig. 1, the corresponding bands in the gels include the following
complexes.
|
(Eq. 16)
|
|
(Eq. 17)
|
Quantification of the bands was done by comparison with the total
cell lysates analyzed in parallel on the same gels. In agreement with
our earlier findings (25), a larger fraction of Grb2 was bound to Shc
than to EGFR (Fig. 3C).
A striking feature of the early responses to EGF is the pronounced
maximum in the concentrations of phosphorylated EGFR, Grb2 coprecipitated with EGFR, and phosphorylated PLC
(see Figs.
2 and 3).
Interestingly, the time course of EGFR phosphorylation correlates with
the time course of Grb2 bound to EGFR and of phosphorylated PLC
,
suggesting that the events occurring in the different branches of the
kinetic scheme of Fig. 1 were partially synchronized. The observed
pattern of early EGFR signaling raises several questions, such as the
following. Why do tyrosine phosphorylated EGFR and PLC
, as well as
the total concentration of Grb2-EGFR complexes, exhibit pronounced
peaks and then descend to relatively low sustained levels despite
continuous EGF stimulation? At the same time, why does the total
concentration of phosphorylated forms of Shc and of Grb2-Shc complexes
increase monotonically, reaching a quasistationary level? Why does the
amount of Grb2 bound to Shc significantly exceed that of Grb2 bound to
EGFR? Computational kinetic analysis provides a tool to answer these
questions.

View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Time course of EGFR autophosphorylation in
hepatocytes. A, Western blots of EGFR in anti-Tyr(P)
immunoprecipitates run in parallel to anti-EGFR immunoprecipitates
(1:2.5 dilution). Detection by anti-EGFR antibody is shown.
B, phosphorylated EGFR as a fraction of the total EGFR in
cell lysate at different times after stimulation with 20 nM
( ), 2 nM ( ), or 0.2 nM EGF ( ). Data
are mean ± S.E. from three different immunoprecipitates,
representative of five similar experiments. PY,
phosphotyrosine.
|
|

View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Time course of EGF-induced tyrosine
phosphorylation. A, phosphorylated PLC , ([EGF] = 20 nM ( ) or 2 nM ( )); B,
phosphorylated Shc, [EGF] = 20 nM; C, Grb2
coprecipitation with Shc ( ) and with EGFR ( ), [EGF] = 20 nM. All proteins were quantified as percentage of the total
corresponding protein in lysates. IP,
immunoprecipitation.
|
|
Computational Kinetic Analysis of EGFR Signaling
Time Course of Receptor Phosphorylation and Target Protein
Recruitment--
The time course of responses to EGF was computed and
compared with the experimental observations. Fig.
4A (solid
lines) illustrates how the total concentrations of
phosphorylated receptor forms depend on the duration of hepatocyte
stimulation by 20, 5, and 2 nM EGF. These transients
demonstrate a good fit to the experimentally observed time course (Fig.
2B), exhibiting a marked decline in the total phosphorylated
EGFR following an initial peak. Taking into account that there were
107 cells in 1 ml of incubation medium, computational
analysis confirmed that 20 nM EGF in the medium is a
saturating concentration for EGFR signaling (cf.
lines 1 and 2 in Fig. 4A).
The peak level of total phosphorylated EGFR, normalized to cytoplasmic
water space was about 80 nM at saturating EGF concentration
(i.e. 80% of the surface-expressed EGFR, corresponding to
about 50% of the total EGFR population) and 50 nM with 2 nM EGF. Previously, in order to explain the early peaks in
the transients, the rapid burst of tyrosine phosphorylation of EGFR
and/or some cytosolic targets was assumed to cause the activation of
tyrosine phosphatases that dephosphorylate Tyr(P) residues
(e.g. Ref. 25). Importantly, the kinetic model indicates
that this assumption is not required if binding of a target molecule to
a Tyr(P) residue of EGFR protects the residue against a constitutive
phosphatase activity. During the time interval when the phosphorylated
EGFR proceeds through its duty cycles (steps 5-20 in Fig. 1), Tyr(P)
residues occupied by their ligand proteins are protected against
dephosphorylation. The total concentration of these receptor forms
begins to significantly exceed the concentration of the ligand-free
form, RP (which is rapidly dephosphorylated), resulting in an effective
increase in tyrosine phosphorylation of the receptor. The completion of receptor cycles returns the receptor to the ligand-free RP form, hence
increasing the RP concentration relative to that of nonphosphorylated dimer R2. Since the phosphatase(s) continue to
dephosphorylate RP, the dephosphorylation rate (Fig. 4B,
line 2) begins to exceed the rate of
R2 phosphorylation by tyrosine kinase (line
1), and the level of tyrosine phosphorylation of EGFR
decreases. By contrast, when we assumed that Tyr(P) residues occupied
by ligands are still accessible to phosphatase (which, therefore,
effectively competes with the ligands), the experimentally observed
maxima did not appear in the simulated responses to EGF (Fig.
4A, dashed line).

View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Computation of the time course of EGFR
autophosphorylation. A, stimulation with 20 nM (line 1), 5 nM
(line 2), and 2 nM of EGF
(line 3). The dashed line
corresponds to the assumption that binding of ligands does not protect
Tyr(P) residues of EGFR against the phosphatase. B,
1, rate of EGFR autophosphorylation (step 3 in Fig. 1),
2, dephosphorylation rate (step 4).
|
|
The total concentrations of phosphorylated Shc and of Grb2
coprecipitated with phosphorylated Shc do not exhibit a marked maximum
(Fig. 5A), and they reach a
quasistationary level, in agreement with our experimental observations
(Fig. 3B). Importantly, the kinetic model explains why these
transients differ so markedly from the transients of the total
phosphorylated EGFR (Fig. 4A) and Grb2 coprecipitated with
EGFR (Fig. 5B). Computations show that the total
phosphorylated Shc bound to EGFR (i.e. [R-ShP] + [R-Sh-G] + [R-Sh-G-S]) exhibits a pronounced peak, descending then
to a low sustained level (Fig. 5B). We conclude that the almost monotonic increase in the total phosphorylated Shc is brought about by the accumulation of the phosphorylated forms dissociated from
the receptor, i.e. [ShP] + [Sh-G] + [Sh-G-S].

View larger version (32K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Computation of the time course of downstream
EGF signaling in hepatocytes. A, total phosphorylated
Shc (lines 1 and 2) and total Grb2
coprecipitated with Shc (lines 3 and
4). B, total phosphorylated Shc bound to EGFR
(lines 1 and 2) and total Grb2 bound
to EGFR (lines 3 and 4). C,
total (activated) SOS bound to EGFR (lines 1 and
2) and the concentration of Sh-G-S complex (lines 3 and 4). D, total phosphorylated
PLC . The dashed line shows the time course in
the absence of the PLC P translocation step (step 25 in Fig. 1).
Shown is stimulation with 20 nM (A-C,
lines 1 and 3; D,
line 1) and with 2 nM of EGF
(A-C, lines 2 and 4;
D, line 2).
|
|
The progress of phosphorylated receptor through its cycles can be
described in terms of a wave propagation. Indeed, the transients of the
concentration of phosphorylated EGFR forms and of the target proteins
bound to EGFR behave as a single wave. A decrease in free
(nonactivated) forms of the target proteins after EGF stimulation prevents the repetition of such waves, driven by tyrosine
phosphorylation of the receptor at the expense of ATP hydrolysis.
Because the computational model does not include the process of EGFR
internalization, the completion of this transient process leads to
steady-state signaling. Computations show that the quasistationary
levels reached by about 2 or 3 min are maintained during the following
30 min, and this is confirmed by experimental observations (25).
It is believed that a key component of the activation of SOS is its
recruitment by EGFR to the plasma membrane, where Ras protein is
located (73-75). The binding of SOS to EGFR is mediated by Grb2, which
forms a stable complex with SOS (step 12) even in the absence of EGF
stimulation (70). Since the reported Kd for this
interaction is in the nanomolar range (70), a substantial fraction of
SOS (more than 50%) should exist in complex with Grb2 in resting cells
(G-S in Fig. 1). The kinetic model shows that after EGF stimulation the
concentration of the free complex G-S decreases, as G-S binds to
phosphorylated receptor. The total concentrations of SOS bound to EGFR
(R-G-S and R-Sh-G-S) and to the phosphorylated Shc (Sh-G-S) exhibit
transient and monotonic increases, respectively (Fig. 5C).
The interaction of SOS with Ras may be more effective (in terms of the
formation of the productive complex) when SOS is brought in close
vicinity to the membrane-bound Ras protein than it would have been when
it depends on collisions with Ras from the cytosol (76). Hence, the
transient response of SOS complexed with EGFR (Fig. 5C) may
result in a transient activation of Ras. It is also possible that SOS
can be targeted (through Shc) to other scaffolding proteins to generate
additional Ras activation signals, which can be separately controlled.
Using the kinetic model, it is instructive to monitor how the rates of
individual steps change with time. The rates of steps of the receptor
cycles involving EGFR interaction with PLC
and Shc increase to peak
values and then decrease to low (less than 1 nM/s) or close
to zero sustained (stationary) values. Remarkably, the rates of
phosphorylation of the receptor (by EGFR intrinsic tyrosine kinase in
step 3) and its dephosphorylation by phosphotyrosine phosphatase(s)
(step 4) do not decrease to zero with time (Fig. 4B). On the
contrary, they reach rather high sustained values. The phosphorylation
and dephosphorylation cycle involving steps 3 and 4 is an ATP consumer.
Our computations showed that during a sustained EGFR signaling, the
energy demand is less than 0.1% of the total ATP production in
hepatocytes. The stationary rates of dephosphorylation of ShP (step 16)
or PLC
P (step 8) are relatively low (less than 1 nM/s).
Origin of the Transient Response of PLC
--
The computational
model indicates that the experimentally observed rapid transient
phosphorylation of PLC
(Fig. 3A) would require some form
of deactivation of phosphorylated PLC
after its dissociation from
EGFR in step 7 or the disabling of recurrent phosphorylation of PLC
after its dephosphorylation in step 8 (Fig. 1). If PLC
P
concentration would accumulate and increase significantly above the
R-PLP concentration, the time course of accumulation of total
phosphorylated PLC
should be monotonic (similar to that of total
phosphorylated ShP). Computations show that the dynamics of the PLC
cycle does not fit the experimentally observed transients, unless it is
assumed that PLC
P undergoes an additional transformation preventing
the immediate conversion to free unphosphorylated PLC
. Binding of
PLC
P to the cytoskeleton or membranes, or to any other structural
component of the cell can function as such a transformation. Indeed,
binding of PLC
P to the cytoskeleton has been proposed in
experimental studies carried out on hepatocytes, maintained in culture
for 24 h (32, 33). Another possibility is that after its
dephosphorylation in step 8, PLC
would no longer be available for
interactions with EGFR, which impedes its further tyrosine
phosphorylation by the receptor kinase. Fig. 5D compares the
time course of the total phosphorylated PLC
when we assume a
translocation (step 25) of PLC
P to a structural element of the cell
(solid lines) and in the absence of such a
process (dashed line).
We tested experimentally to what extent binding of PLC
to cellular
constituents could account for this response pattern. In the experiment
of Fig. 6, isolated hepatocytes were
stimulated with EGF (20 nM) for periods ranging from
15 s to 60 min, and cells were permeabilized with digitonin (150 µg/ml, equivalent to approximately 7 µg/mg of protein). At this
concentration, digitonin selectively permeabilizes the plasma membrane
and causes release of soluble proteins from the cytoplasm, while bound
or compartmentalized proteins are retained in the particulate fraction.
Specifically, all EGFR protein is recovered from the particulate
fraction, indicating that digitonin treatment caused no significant
solubilization of plasma membrane proteins.

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Distribution and tyrosine phosphorylation of
PLC after EGF stimulation. Isolated
hepatocytes were stimulated with EGF (20 nM) for periods of
15 s to 60 min and permeabilized with digitonin. Supernatants were
removed (soluble fraction), and pellets were reextracted with lysis
buffer containing 0.1% SDS, 1% deoxycholate (particulate fraction).
Immunoprecipitation of PLC or tyrosine-phosphorylated proteins was
carried out with antibodies against PLC (A) and
phosphotyrosine (B), respectively, as described under
"Experimental Procedures" and analyzed by Western blotting using
anti-PLC antibodies (anti-PLC Ab).
|
|
The analysis of PLC
in the soluble and particulate fraction of
digitonin-treated hepatocytes is shown in Fig. 6. The data of Fig. 6
demonstrate that the vast excess (>90%) of PLC
is available free
in the cytosol in the dephosphorylated form, yet is excluded from
sustained EGFR-mediated phosphorylation. This finding suggests that
other modifications of PLC
or EGFR occur following EGF stimulation of the cells that prevent their interaction. However, analysis of
PLC
with phosphoserine or phosphothreonine antibodies detected only
a modest level of serine/threonine phosphorylation that was entirely
confined to the PLC
bound to the particulate fraction. Another
possible mechanism is suggested by a recent report (77) that
demonstrates that phosphatidylinositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate, the product
of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase, can bind to the PLC
SH2 domain and
inhibit its binding to phosphotyrosine residues on growth factor
receptors. This mechanism may be involved in localizing PLC
in the
vicinity of its substrate and also result in suppressing PLC
availability for binding to the phosphorylated growth factor
receptor. To what extent this mechanism contributes to restricting
access of PLC
to the activated EGFR in hepatocytes is currently
under investigation.
Sensitivity of the Dynamic Pattern to Variations in Rate
Constants--
The dynamics of the EGFR signaling appears to be robust
to significant changes in the rate constants of the protein
interactions involved (cf. Ref. 78). Typically, a
severalfold (in many cases 1 or even 2 orders of magnitude) variation
of a rate constant does not result in significant changes of the
response to EGF. However, not all of the rate constants can be
arbitrarily changed, and certainly, a simultaneous alteration of all of
the rate constants does result in a marked change of the response
dynamics. To come to grips with the latter issue, we return to the
equations in Table I that describe the time course of signal
propagation. The time derivative of the concentration of a component
enters the left-hand side of these equations, and each term on the
right-hand side is the rate of production or consumption of that
component in a particular process. A simultaneous, say 2-fold, change
in all of the rate constants results in multiplication of the
right-hand side of every equation in Table I by a factor of 2 (note
that Vmax of the phosphatases also increase
twice after a 2-fold increase in all of the elemental rate constants,
whereas Michaelis constants