![]()
|
|
||||||||
J Biol Chem, Vol. 274, Issue 45, 32055-32062, November 5, 1999
,From the Department of Medicine, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, California 92093-0682
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The physiological cellular responses to monocyte
chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1), a potent chemotactic and activating
factor for mononuclear leukocytes, are mediated by specific binding to CCR2. The aim of this investigation is to identify receptor
microdomains that are involved in high affinity agonist binding and
receptor activation. The results from our functional studies in which
we utilized neutralizing antisera against CCR2 are consistent with a
multidomain binding model, previously proposed by others. The first
extracellular loop was of particular interest, because in addition to a
ligand-binding domain it contained also information for receptor
activation, crucial for transmembrane signaling. Replacement of the
first extracellular loop of CCR2 with the corresponding region of CCR1
decreased the MCP-1 binding affinity about 10-fold and prevented
transmembrane signaling. A more detailed analysis by site-directed
mutagenesis revealed that this receptor segment contains two distinct
microdomains. The amino acid residues Asn104 and
Glu105 are essential for high affinity agonist binding but
are not involved in receptor activation. In contrast, the charged amino
acid residue His100 does not contribute to ligand binding
but is vital for receptor activation and initiation of transmembrane
signaling. We hypothesize that the interaction of agonist with this
residue initiates the conformational switch that allows the formation
of the functional CCR2-G protein complex.
The recruitment of leukocytes to sites of inflammation is
initiated by locally produced chemotactic cytokines also called chemokines that interact with specific chemoattractant receptors. Chemokines are a rapidly growing family of small proteins that share a
high homology in their primary structure and are characterized by their
ability to recruit and activate various types of leukocytes (1). Based
on the position of the first two cysteine residues, they are subdivided
into several subfamilies. In the Two isoforms of the human receptor for MCP-1 that differ only in the
sequence of the cytosolic carboxyl-terminal tail, CCR2A and CCR2B, have
been identified (9, 10). Like all other known leukocyte chemoattractant
receptors, CCR2 belongs to the family of seven transmembrane-spanning
receptors that are coupled to heterotrimeric G proteins (11, 12). The
non-redundant role of the receptor in the host defense mechanism has
recently been demonstrated in a CCR2-deficient mouse model. A targeted
disruption of the CCR2 gene resulted in a drastic reduction
in MCP-1-induced monocyte chemotaxis, and the mice were unable to
resolve bacterial infections (13-15).
Although the magnitude of an inflammatory response is generally
proportional to the concentration of MCP-1, monocyte recruitment is at
least in part controlled by the level of CCR2 expression. Recent
studies in our laboratory demonstrated that pro-inflammatory cytokines
including MCP-1 itself rapidly down-regulated the expression of CCR2,
which may aid the retention of monocytes at sites of inflammation after
their recruitment from the circulation (16). These cytokines also
induced the secretion of MCP-1 by monocytes and initiated the switch
from the MCP-1-responsive state to the MCP-1-unresponsive state, which
coincided with the loss of CCR2. In contrast, plasma levels of low
density lipoproteins that are characteristic for hypercholesterolemia
increased monocyte CCR2 expression. As a consequence the chemotactic
activity of monocytes was enhanced, which may result in their excessive
recruitment to the vessel wall in chronic inflammation and
atherogenesis (17, 18).
In analogy to the thrombin receptor (19) or the receptors for
interleukin-8 CXCR1 and CXCR2 (20), the amino-terminal tail of CCR2
appears to be a determinant for chemokine binding as well as
selectivity (21). However, the binding of peptide agonists to
chemoattractant receptors is very complex. More detailed analyses of
the ligand-binding domains of CXCR1, CXCR2 (22, 23), and of the
N-formyl-methionyl-leucyl-phenylalanine receptor (24, 25)
suggested that multiple receptor segments are involved in the
functional receptor-ligand interaction. Similarly, the interaction of
MCP-1 with multiple domains of CCR2 may be necessary for intact transmembrane signaling.
In this report we describe the functional characterization of the first
extracellular loop of CCR2. Our results suggest a dual role for this
receptor segment. It contains a site that supports high affinity
binding of MCP-1. In addition to this ligand-binding domain, we have
identified a primary structure that appears essential for
ligand-induced activation of G proteins without affecting the binding
affinity. This study provides the first evidence that an extracellular
domain of CCR2 distinct from the ligand-binding site is required for
functional transmembrane signaling.
Materials--
HEK 293 cells were purchased from American Type
Culture Collection (Manassas, VA). LipofectAMINE, G418 sulfate, and all
tissue culture reagents were from Life Technologies, Inc. Restriction enzymes and other reagents for the manipulation of DNA were from Roche
Molecular Biochemicals, Life Technologies, Inc., and Promega Corp.
(Madison, WI). Recombinant MCP-1 was purchased from R & D Systems, Inc.
(Minneapolis, MN), 125I-MCP-1 (specific activity, 2200 Ci/mmol) and [35S]GTP Construction of Mutant Receptors--
The cDNAs for CCR2B
and CCR1 were obtained from the human THP-1 cell line. Total RNA was
isolated, reverse-transcribed, and amplified by polymerase chain
reaction (PCR). Their nucleotide sequence was confirmed by DNA
sequencing and matched the published results (9, 26). For the creation
of the chimeric receptor with the first extracellular loop exchanged,
the CCR2B cDNA was digested with BalI and
ClaI which deleted a fragment between nucleotides 254 and
407 of the open reading frame. This fragment corresponds to the first
extracellular loop including portions of the adjacent transmembrane
domains of the translated protein. A similar fragment was obtained from
CCR1 by PCR. No restriction site for ClaI is present in
CCR1, and the primers contained a BalI and a ClaI
site to yield a PCR product with these restriction sites at the 5' and
3' end, respectively. The fragment was inserted into the digested CCR2B
cDNA, subcloned into the expression vector pcDNA3.1
(Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA), and the construct was analyzed by DNA
sequencing. The resulting chimeric receptor CH1 was composed primarily
of CCR2B with the first extracellular loop exchanged. The chimeric receptor also contained some sequence changes in the adjacent transmembrane domains. They were introduced together with the loop, but
they were minor because of the high sequence homology G protein-coupled
receptors display particularly within these domains and, most likely,
did not contribute to any changes in receptor function.
Oligonucleotide-directed mutagenesis according to the method of Kunkel
(27) was used for the exchange of selected amino acid residues as
described previously (25). CCR2B cDNA in the uracil-containing
bacteriophage vector M13mp19 (New England Biolabs, Inc., Beverly, MA)
was used as a single-stranded template. The selection of the mutants
was carried out using the dut Transfection--
HEK 293 cells were maintained in minimal
essential medium with Earle's balanced salt solution containing 10%
horse serum, 100 µg/ml streptomycin, and 100 units/ml penicillin. The
coding sequence of the wild type and mutant CCR2B including the optimal sequence for initiation of translation (28) was subcloned into the
expression vector pcDNA3.1. Cells were transfected with
LipofectAMINE (Life Technologies, Inc.) according to the
manufacturer's protocol and placed under antibiotic selection with 800 µg/ml G418 sulfate. Cells expressing high levels of CCR2B were
identified by reverse transcriptase-coupled PCR, and the surface
expression was determined by flow cytometry or by
125I-MCP-1 binding analysis.
Membrane Preparation--
Cells were detached from the culture
flask with protease-free dissociation buffer (Life Technologies, Inc.),
collected by centrifugation, and washed twice with phosphate-buffered
saline (PBS). Cells were suspended in 20 mM HEPES, pH 7.4, containing 5 mM MgSO4 and a mixture of protease
inhibitors (50 units/ml aprotinin, 5 mM benzamidine, 14.5 µM pepstatin, 0.1 mM leupeptin, and 0.1 mM phenylmethanesulfonyl fluoride), placed on ice, and
homogenized. Unbroken cells and cell nuclei were removed by
centrifugation at 1500 × g for 10 min at 4 °C, and
crude membranes were then isolated by centrifugation at 48,000 × g for 30 min at 4 °C. The membranes were either used
immediately or stored at Generation of Antisera and Flow Cytometry--
Two antisera
directed against the first (AbTM23) and second (AbTM45) extracellular
loops and one against the intracellular carboxyl-terminal tail (AbTM7C)
of CCR2B were generated. The cDNAs encoding the regions between the
amino acid residues Ile93 to His124,
Pro174 to Met205, and Gly309 to
Leu360, representing the first, second extracellular loops,
and the carboxyl-terminal tail, respectively, were amplified by PCR.
The amplified fragments were subcloned in frame into the pGEX-2T vector (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech), sequenced, and expressed as fusion proteins in E. coli. The fusion proteins were isolated with
glutathione-Sepharose 4B beads (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech), antisera
generated in guinea pigs, and IgG fractions were then isolated. For
flow cytometry, 1 × 106 cells were suspended in 100 µl of PBS, 0.1% bovine serum albumin (BSA), and 0.01%
NaN3 (buffer A) and incubated for 20 min at 4 °C with 5 µg of primary IgG. After two washes with buffer A the cells were
incubated for another 20 min with fluorescein-labeled secondary
antibody at a 1:200 dilution, washed twice with buffer A, and analyzed
on a flow cytometer (Becton Dickinson).
Intracellular Calcium Measurement--
Cells were grown to
confluence in a T75 flask, washed once with PBS, and labeled with 5 µM Indo-1 AM (Molecular Probes, Inc., Eugene, OR) in RPMI
1640 without phenol red, 10 mM HEPES, 0.1% BSA, pH 7.4, for 30 min at 37 °C in the dark. The cells were then washed twice
with PBS, harvested with protease-free dissociation buffer, and
suspended at a density of 1.5 × 106 cells/ml in
Hank's balanced salt solution containing 1.25 mM calcium
and 0.1% BSA. Changes in the concentration of intracellular calcium
([Ca2+]i) in response to various concentrations
of MCP-1 were monitored as described (24). Fluorescence was
continuously measured simultaneously at 400 and 490 nm on an LS50B
luminescence spectrophotometer (Perkin-Elmer) with the excitation set
at 340 nm. The change in [Ca2+]i was expressed as
change of the fluorescence ratio F400 nm/F490 nm.
Equilibrium Binding Analysis--
Binding assays were performed
essentially as described previously (16). Briefly, the cells were
washed with PBS and 0.3 × 106 cells were suspended in
100 µl of RPMI 1640 containing 0.5% BSA. The cell suspension was
incubated with 0.02 nM 125I-MCP-1 and varying
concentrations of unlabeled ligand for 60 min at room temperature. At
the end of the incubation the cells were separated from the buffer by
centrifugation through 300 µl of an equal mixture of dibutyl
phthalate and dioctyl phthalate (Aldrich), and the radioactivity
associated with the cell pellet was measured. In the competition
assays, the cells were preincubated with IgG fractions of the various
antisera (10 µg/ml) at 4 °C for 30 min prior to the addition of
radioactive ligand. Nonspecific binding was determined in the presence
of 30 nM unlabeled MCP-1, and the specific binding was
determined by subtracting nonspecific binding from total binding. All
assays were done in triplicate, and the binding data and binding
isotherms were determined using the LIGAND program (29).
GTP Chemotaxis Assay--
THP-1 monocytes were suspended at a
concentration of 2 × 106 cells/ml in chemotaxis
buffer which consisted of Tyrode's salt buffer (Sigma), 1%
NaHCO3, 0.1% BSA, pH 7.4. The cell suspension (51 µl)
was loaded into the upper chamber of the 48-well microchemotaxis Boyden
chamber (Neuroprobe, Gaithersburg, MD), and 10 nM MCP-1 in
chemotaxis buffer was added to the lower chamber. Both chambers are
separated by a 5-µm pore-size polycarbonate membrane (Poretics Corp.,
Livermore, CA). After 1 h at 37 °C in a 5% CO2
atmosphere, the side of the membrane that was in contact with the cell
suspension was washed to remove any cells. The migrated cells adhering
to the underside of the membrane were fixed in 1% glutaraldehyde, stained with crystal violet, and counted in four × 400 high power fields of three replica filters. To determine the inhibitory effects of
the antisera AbTM23 and AbTM45 on chemotaxis, THP-1 monocytes were
first incubated with the IgG fractions of the individual antisera or
with a combination of both (10 µg/ml) for 30 min at 4 °C before
their placement into the Boyden chamber. Nonspecific migration was
determined by including 1 µg/ml neutralizing mouse anti-human MCP-1
monoclonal antibody (R & D Systems Inc., Minneapolis, MN). All data
were expressed as chemotaxis index defined as the number of cells that
migrated in response to MCP-1 divided by the number of cells that
migrated in the presence of neutralizing anti-MCP-1 antibody.
Other Analytical Analyses--
Protein was determined by the
method of Lowry et al. (31). Data are expressed as the
mean ± S.D.
Inhibition of Receptor Function by Antibodies--
A hypothetical
model for binding of MCP-1 by CCR2 that involves the amino-terminal
tail was proposed recently (32). To identify other extracellular
domains that are fundamental for receptor function, we generated
antisera against the first (AbTM23) and second (AbTM45) extracellular
loops of CCR2. The specificity of the antisera was tested by flow
cytometry, and both AbTM23 and AbTM45 IgG recognized CCR2B stably
expressed in HEK 293 cells but did not react with mock-transfected
cells (Fig. 1). Next we tested if the
antisera can interfere with ligand binding indicating that these
receptor domains are involved in the recognition of MCP-1. The
transfected HEK 293 cells expressed on average 6.3 ± 0.6 fmol of
CCR2B/106 cells, which was determined by
125I-MCP-1 binding analysis. Incubation of the cells with
preimmune IgG affected MCP-1 binding only insignificantly. In contrast, AbTM23 or AbTM45 IgG inhibited ligand binding substantially by about
60% when used individually, and by about 80% when used in combination
(Fig. 2).
The results from the binding studies indicated that the first and
second extracellular loops might be important for MCP-1 binding and
receptor function. Therefore the effect of the antisera on
MCP-1-induced chemotaxis of THP-1 monocytes was examined. As shown in
Fig. 3, AbTM23 or AbTM45 IgG reduced the
chemotactic response by about 50-70% compared with preimmune IgG or
no antibody control. The combination of AbTM23 and AbTM45 IgG appeared
to reduce chemotaxis even further, but the difference was statistically not significant and reflected the incomplete inhibition of MCP-1 binding by the antisera.
Identification of First Extracellular Loop as a Key Element for
Receptor Function--
To establish more directly that the first
extracellular loop is involved in ligand binding and receptor function,
we constructed a chimeric CCR2B. The first extracellular loop and the
adjacent transmembrane domains between the restriction sites
BalI and ClaI were exchanged with the
corresponding region taken from CCR1 (Fig. 4A). Although the amino acid
sequence of the first extracellular loop of these two receptors is 50%
identical, CCR1 does not bind MCP-1. The chimeric receptor CH1 was
stably expressed in HEK 293 cells, and ligand binding analysis was
performed. Replacement of the first extracellular loop had a profound
effect on the binding affinity (Fig. 4B) and increased the
dissociation constant by about 10-fold compared with that of wild type
CCR2B (Table I).
Identification of Amino Acid Residues of the First Extracellular
Loop that Are Important for Receptor Function--
To identify the
individual amino acid residues that are necessary for receptor
function, we compared the sequences of the wild type CCR2B and the
chimeric receptor. We found several non-conservative differences in the
amino acid sequence of the first extracellular loop that may be
responsible for the diminished function associated with the chimeric
receptor. They were located predominantly in the amino-terminal half of
the loop proximal to the second transmembrane domain (Table I). This
information was the basis for the selection of target amino acid
residues, and their relative importance for receptor function was
determined by site-directed mutagenesis and functional characterization
of the mutant receptors expressed in HEK 293 cells. Three mutant
receptors were generated in which amino acid residues of the wild type
receptor were replaced by those of the chimeric receptor in clusters of
two to three residues at a time. Substitution of the residues
Ala99-His100 with Ile-Asp-Tyr in MU1 or
Ser101-Ala102-Ala103 with
Lys-Leu-Lys in MU2 had no effect on the binding affinity, and the
resulting dissociation constants were similar to that of the wild type
receptor (Fig. 5). In contrast, changing
the residues Asn104-Glu105 to Asp-Asp, as in
MU3, increased the dissociation constant significantly by about 10-fold
(Table I).
Next we examined the ability of the mutant receptors to stimulate
agonist-induced transmembrane signaling. MCP-1 induced a dose-dependent mobilization of intracellular calcium in
transfected HEK 293 cells expressing the wild type CCR2B. In contrast,
the chimeric receptor CH1 did not respond to MCP-1, and little change in [Ca2+]i was observed, even at MCP-1
concentrations well in excess of that of the dissociation constant
(Fig. 6). Although the mutations in MU1
and MU2 did not affect the ligand binding affinity, they affected
transmembrane signaling. These mutant receptors were less efficient
than the wild type CCR2 to mediate translocation of
[Ca2+]i, and they required higher MCP-1
concentrations for the induction of a signaling event. Although the
mutant MU3 displayed impaired ligand binding activity, it showed intact
transmembrane signaling when stimulated with MCP-1 at concentrations
above that of the dissociation constant, and the magnitude of the
calcium response was higher than that seen with MU1 or MU2 (Fig. 6).
These results suggested that amino acid residues of CCR2B that were mutated in MU1 and MU2 are important for transmembrane signaling, although they are not directly involved in MCP-1 binding.
Activation of G Protein by the Mutant
Receptors--
Receptor-mediated activation of G proteins requires
both binding of agonist to the receptor and optimal interaction between receptor and G protein. If the necessary conformational rearrangement of the receptor protein is restricted, the productive coupling to G
protein may be limited and may affect transmembrane signaling. To
determine the relative efficacies with which wild type CCR2B and the
mutant receptors activate G protein, plasma membranes were prepared
from cells stably expressing the receptors, and the binding affinity of
[35S]GTP
The mutations in MU1 and MU2 did not affect the ligand binding
affinities (Table I); however, they greatly decreased the efficacies
for receptor-mediated G protein stimulation (Fig.
8 and Table II). Both mutant receptors
stimulated only a low affinity GTP Chemokines play a fundamental role in host defense mechanisms.
They induce a diverse array of biological responses in leukocytes through a distinct, structurally related family of seven-transmembrane domain G protein-coupled receptors. The functional interaction of
chemokines with their specific receptors is generally very complex and
may involve several distinct receptor segments (1, 33). A similar
structural concept, in which the amino-terminal tail appears to play an
essential role in the selective recognition of MCP-1, was also proposed
for CCR2B (21). Additional evidence suggested that other extracellular
receptor segments including the 3rd extracellular domain might be
necessary for high affinity MCP-1 binding and possibly transmembrane
signaling (34). Our results presented in this report support a
multidomain binding model and demonstrate a critical role of the first
extracellular loop in receptor function.
A CCR2-specific antiserum that was made against the first extracellular
loop inhibited MCP-1 binding significantly by about 60%, which clearly
indicated that this receptor segment is important for agonist
recognition. A similar degree of inhibition was also found with the
antiserum against the second extracellular loop, suggesting an
equivalent contribution to agonist binding. In some cases antibodies
may indirectly prevent receptor function by blocking ligand access
through steric hindrance. To confirm that our antibodies prevented
ligand binding by specifically masking the ligand-binding domain rather
than indirectly through steric hindrance, we constructed a chimeric
CCR2B. Of particular interest was the first extracellular loop because
we found a dual function associated with this segment that we wanted to
explore further. The results from the ligand binding studies clearly
supported a critical role for this receptor segment. The substitution
of this 15-residue domain including portions of the adjacent
transmembrane helices with the corresponding sequence from CCR1
resulted in a 10-fold decrease in the ligand binding affinity. The
signaling properties of the chimeric receptor in transfected HEK 293 cells were also greatly impaired. Little transmembrane signaling was
detectable even after stimulation of the chimeric receptor with
saturating concentrations of MCP-1. These results suggested that the
first extracellular loop of CCR2B was not only required for high
affinity agonist binding but was also importantly involved in receptor activation.
This hypothesis was consistent with our results obtained on a set of
mutant receptors that were constructed to dissect the functional
properties of this loop in greater detail. The difference in the amino
acid sequence of the first extracellular loop that may be responsible
for the functional impairment associated with the chimeric receptor was
particularly pronounced in the amino-terminal half of the loop adjacent
to the second transmembrane domain. This information was used as the
basis for the selection of the residues for point mutations. Analyses
of the mutant receptors suggested that the mechanisms by which MCP-1
initiates transmembrane signaling involve several residues with very
distinct functions for either agonist binding or receptor activation.
The replacement of Asn104-Glu105 with Asp-Asp
in MU3 lowered the agonist binding affinity significantly by about
10-fold but did not affect the transmembrane signaling of
agonist-activated receptor. Although the ligand binding affinity was
lower compared with CCR2B, the mutant receptor MU3 very efficiently activated G protein, which was reflected by its high affinity for
GTP It should be noted that any exchange of amino acid residues could
potentially perturb the local conformation and thereby indirectly affect receptor function. Although some of the mutations may change the
physical properties within the microenvironment, unwanted conformational changes are probably not the cause for the specific effects of the mutations on transmembrane signaling or ligand binding,
because they would more globally affect receptor function and
presumably disrupt both to the same degree. The mutations in MU1 and
MU2, however, very specifically affected only transmembrane signaling
without changes in the ligand binding affinity, whereas MU3 showed
impaired ligand binding but intact transmembrane signaling. Taken
together these observations strongly suggest a direct role of the
mutated amino acid residues in either signal transduction or ligand binding.
Our finding that ligand binding can be dissociated from receptor
activation is consistent with a hypothetical model that predicts a
two-step mechanism for CCR2 activation (32). In this model, MCP-1 binds
first to the amino-terminal tail before it interacts in the second step
with other extracellular domains to initiate signal transduction.
Multiple activation steps were also proposed for other chemoattractant
receptors. A single point mutation in the second transmembrane domain
of the N-formyl peptide receptor was shown to inhibit the
signaling pathway without changing the ligand binding affinity,
demonstrating that distinct amino acid residues are involved in these
activation steps (35).
These results were rather unexpected since extracellular loops of G
protein-coupled receptors are generally not believed to be associated
with signaling events. Because G proteins are located on the
cytoplasmic face of the plasma membrane, it seems logical that
intracellular hydrophilic receptor segments would form the most likely
sites of interaction with a G protein. Results from a limited study
suggested the carboxyl-terminal tail and third intracellular loop of
CCR2B as candidate sites for the selective G protein coupling (12, 36).
This model is in agreement with our finding that the antiserum AbTM7C,
which is directed against the intracellular carboxyl-terminal tail of
CCR2B, blocked quite effectively the MCP-1-induced activation of G
protein. In the free form, the receptor is thought to exist in an
inactive conformation, ineffectual for G protein activation. The
binding of agonist then induces the change of the receptor conformation
that is required for functional coupling to G protein. Although the
exact molecular mechanisms are still unknown, our data suggest a model
in which the interaction of MCP-1 with specific amino acid residues of the first extracellular loop is central for the activation of CCR2 and
subsequent transmembrane signaling. Charged amino acid residues appear
functionally critical, and their replacement may prevent the effective
change of the receptor conformation.
Important information on ligand binding and mechanisms of receptor
activation was also obtained by mutational analyses of MCP-1. The
results demonstrated that the deletion of the first 8 amino acids
destroyed its activity, suggesting that the amino-terminal region of
the ligand is necessary for chemoattractant function (37). The
integrity of the residues 1-6 was required for functional activity but
did not appear to be important for binding (38, 39). The truncated form
binds to CCR2 with high affinity but does not cause transmembrane
signaling and proved to be an experimentally useful antagonist (40).
Inspection of the amino acid sequence revealed the presence of an
acidic amino acid residue (Asp) at position 3 of the mature form of the
protein. We propose that this residue could form an ionic-type
interaction with His100 of CCR2 and force the
conformational change that would then allow the formation of the
functional receptor-G protein complex. A disruption of this interaction
by replacing the positive charge with a negative one as in MU1 or by
introducing positive charges at inappropriate locations as in MU2
(Ser101-Ala102-Ala103 In summary, our studies show that the functional interaction of MCP-1
with CCR2 involves multiple receptor domains including the first
extracellular loop. Our data further suggest that this receptor segment
contains two distinct microdomains, one that supports high affinity
ligand binding and one that is central to receptor activation. The
critical components for ligand binding and receptor activation lie
between amino acids 100 and 105, although other regulatory segments may
be involved. In addition to providing insights into the mechanisms of
receptor activation, the identification of an extracellular regulatory
sequence distinct from the ligand-binding sites may offer a new
pharmacological approach to the synthesis of non-peptide antagonists
for therapeutic use.
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
- or CXC subfamily, the first two
cysteines are separated by an amino acid residue that is missing in the
- or CC subfamily. Lymphotactin lacks some of the cysteine residues
and may be the first identified member of a new chemokine subfamily
(2). A fourth human chemokine type, called fractalkine, was recently
identified (3). Unlike other chemokines, fractalkine consists of a
chemokine domain attached to a mucin-like extension that can function
as a membrane anchor. Monocyte chemoattractant protein 1 (MCP-1)1 belongs to the
-subfamily and is a potent chemoattractant for monocytes, basophils,
and certain subsets of T cells (4-7). It is secreted by a variety of
cells in response to stimulation by cytokines and participates in the
inflammatory response by binding to distinct receptors (8).
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
S (1300 Ci/mmol) were from NEN
Life Science Products. All other reagents were of highest purity available.
ung
Escherichia coli strain CJ236. The
nucleotide sequence of all mutants was confirmed by dideoxy sequencing.
80 °C.
S Binding Assay--
Cell membranes were prepared from
transfected cells and resuspended at a protein concentration of 20 µg/ml in 200 µl of reaction buffer consisting of 20 mM
HEPES, pH 7.4, 3 µM GDP, 10 mM
MgCl2, and 100 mM NaCl. The membranes were
prewarmed to 37 °C; [35S]GTP
S was added at various
concentrations; and the reaction was started with 30 nM
MCP-1. After 30 min at 37 °C, the reactions were cooled to 4 °C;
10 µM unlabeled GTP
S (Sigma) was added; and the tubes
were kept on ice for 60 min to reduce the nonspecific binding (30). At
the end of the incubation period, the membranes were filtered through
GF/B filters (Whatman) and washed several times with ice-cold reaction
buffer. The radioactivity associated with the filters was determined by
scintillation counting. To control for CCR2B-specific GTP
S binding,
MCP-1 was omitted, and the values were subtracted from the total
binding seen in the presence of MCP-1. In separate experiments, the IgG
fraction of the neutralizing antiserum AbTM7C, which is directed
against the carboxyl-tail of CCR2B, was included to determine
CCR2B-specific activation of G protein. Inclusion of AbTM7C IgG in the
binding experiment inhibited receptor-mediated activation of G protein. All assays were done in triplicate, and the binding data were analyzed
with the LIGAND program (29).
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (14K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Specific recognition of CCR2B by the antisera
AbTM23 and AbTM45. Two antisera were made against the first
(AbTM23) and second (AbTM45) extracellular loops of CCR2, and IgG
fractions were prepared. To test their specificity, CCR2B-transfected
HEK 293 cells (bold line) and mock-transfected controls
(fine line) were incubated with either AbTM23 IgG
(A) or AbTM45 IgG (B), followed by a
fluorescein-labeled secondary antibody and analyzed by flow cytometry
as described under "Experimental Procedures."

View larger version (26K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Inhibition of MCP-1 binding to CCR2B by the
antisera AbTM23 and AbTM45. Transfected HEK 293 cells expressing
CCR2B were incubated with 125I-MCP-1 and various
concentrations of unlabeled ligand for 60 min at room temperature.
Ligand binding analysis was performed as described under
"Experimental Procedures" in the absence of antibody (
) or in
the presence of preimmune IgG (
), AbTM23 IgG (
), AbTM45 IgG
(
), and a combination of both (
). The cells were preincubated for
30 min at 4 °C with the IgG fractions at a final concentration of 10 µg/ml, after which radiolabeled ligand was added. Shown in the
inset is the specific inhibition, which was determined after
subtraction of nonspecific binding assessed in the presence of 30 nM unlabeled ligand from the total binding. In the absence
of antibody, the transfected HEK 293 cells bound on average 6.3 ± 0.6 fmol MCP-1/106 cells which was taken as 100%.
No, MCP-1 binding in the absence of antibody;
pre, 23, 45, and 23 + 45, MCP-1 binding in the presence of
preimmune IgG, AbTM23 IgG, AbTM45 IgG and AbTM23+AbTM45 IgG,
respectively. Data represent mean ± S.D. of three
experiments.

View larger version (16K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Inhibition of MCP-1-mediated monocyte
chemotaxis by antisera specific for CCR2. THP-1 monocytes were
incubated for 30 min at 4 °C either with preimmune IgG (pre
Ab) or with IgG fractions of the antisera against the first
(AbTM23) and second (AbTM45) extracellular loops,
as well as with a combination of both (AbTM23+45) at a final
concentration of 10 µg/ml. For the no antibody control (no
Ab), the cells were kept under identical conditions without
antibody. The cells treated under the various conditions were placed in
the upper compartment of the Boyden chamber. The chemoattractant MCP-1
was placed in the lower section at a concentration of 10 nM, and chemotaxis assays were conducted as outlined under
"Experimental Procedures." A neutralizing mouse anti-human MCP-1
monoclonal antibody (1 µg/ml) was added in control experiments to
determine nonspecific migration. The number of migrated cells was
assessed by counting four random high power microscope fields. The
chemotactic activity was expressed as migration index defined as the
number of cells that migrated in response to MCP-1 divided by the
number that migrated in the presence of the neutralizing anti-MCP-1
antibody. Data represent the mean ± S.D. of three individual
experiments.

View larger version (18K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Binding of 125I-MCP-1 to wild
type and chimeric CCR2B. A, schematic representation of
the chimeric receptor CH1. The first extracellular loop of CCR2B
(open cylinders) was replaced by the corresponding segment
from CCR1 (shaded cylinders). B, ligand binding
analysis. Transfected HEK 293 cells expressing wild type CCR2B (
) or
CH1 (
) were incubated with 125I-MCP-1, and various
concentrations of unlabeled ligand and binding analyses were performed
as described under "Experimental Procedures." Background binding
was determined on mock-transfected controls (
). Data represent
mean ± S.D. of three experiments. Binding parameters were
calculated with the LIGAND program and are given in Table I.
Binding and signaling parameters of wild type and mutant receptors

View larger version (26K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Ligand binding analysis of mutant CCR2B.
Mutant receptors were generated and the changes in their primary
sequence are shown in Table I. Transfected HEK 293 cells expressing MU1
(
), MU2 (
), and MU3 (
) were incubated with
125I-MCP-1, and binding analyses were performed as
described in Fig. 4. Background binding was determined on
mock-transfected controls (
). Data represent mean ± S.D. of
three experiments. Binding parameters were calculated with the LIGAND
program and are summarized in Table I.

View larger version (23K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
Agonist-dependent increase of
intracellular calcium in cells expressing wild type and mutant
receptors. Transfected HEK 293 cells expressing wild type and the
various mutant receptors were loaded with Indo-1 AM. Receptor-mediated
change in [Ca2+]i after stimulation with the
indicated concentrations of MCP-1 was measured as the fluorescence
ratio F400 nm/F490 nm
with the excitation set at 340 nm. Data are expressed as percent change
of the fluorescence ratio relative to that achieved with wild type
CCR2B after stimulation with a saturating dose of MCP-1 (300 nM), which was set at 100%.
S to G protein was determined. MCP-1 (30 nM) stimulated the binding of [35S]GTP
S to
membranes prepared from cells expressing CCR2B (Fig. 7A). Agonist-occupied chimeric
receptor CH1 also stimulated binding of [35S]GTP
S but
with a lower affinity (Fig. 7A). The stimulation of G
protein was specific for CCR2B because AbTM7C IgG, which is directed
against the intracellular carboxyl-tail of CCR2B, largely blocked the
MCP-1-induced binding of GTP
S to G protein in the CCR2B (and mutant
receptor)-transfected cells (Fig. 7, A and B). The binding affinities for [35S]GTP
S stimulated by
CCR2B and CH1 were 1.87 ± 0.35 and 7.58 ± 0.93 nM, respectively (Fig. 7, C and D,
Table II).

View larger version (27K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 7.
Analysis of
[35S]GTP
S binding to cell
membranes stimulated by agonist-activated wild type and chimeric CCR2B
and its inhibition by the neutralizing anti CCR2B antiserum
AbTM7C. A, [35S]GTP
S binding
experiments were carried out on membranes of transfected HEK 293 cells
expressing wild type CCR2B (
) or the chimeric receptor CH1 (
)
after stimulation with 30 nM MCP-1. Shown is the specific
MCP-1-dependent binding of [35S]GTP
S to G
protein determined as described under "Experimental Procedures." In
separate experiments, the specificity of the CCR2B-mediated stimulation
was established. The IgG fraction of the neutralizing anti-CCR2B
antiserum AbTM7C (10 µg/ml) was included in the incubation mixture
which contained the membranes from the CCR2B-transfected cells (
).
B, extent of inhibition of [35S]GTP
S
binding by AbTM7C. To determine the specific inhibition of maximal
[35S]GTP
S binding by the antibody, membranes from
CCR2B transfected cells were incubated with 15 nM
[35S]GTP
S in the presence of 10 µg/ml AbTM7C
(AbTM7C) or 10 µg/ml preimmune IgG (pre Ab) and stimulated
with 30 nM MCP-1. Data are expressed as percent binding
relative to no antibody control (no Ab), which was taken as
100%. C, Scatchard plot of the specific
[35S]GTP
S binding data obtained from membranes of
CCR2B-expressing cells. D, Scatchard plot of the specific
[35S]GTP
S binding data obtained from membranes of
CH1-expressing cells. The average values of the binding parameters are
summarized in Table II. Data are expressed as mean ± S.D. of
three experiments.
Binding constants of [35S]GTP
S binding to cell membranes
stimulated by wild type and mutant CCR2B
S binding to G protein that was
comparable to that mediated by the chimeric receptor CH1 (Fig. 8,
A and B and Table II). In contrast, the mutant
receptor MU3 stimulated GTP binding as efficiently as the wild type
CCR2B (Fig. 8C and Table II). Evidently, the mutation in MU3
did not prevent any ligand-induced conformational changes that are
critical for functional interaction between receptor and G protein.
These observations indicate that the first extracellular loop may play
an important role in both ligand binding and transmembrane signaling.

View larger version (15K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 8.
Analysis of
[35S]GTP
S binding to cell
membranes stimulated by mutant receptors.
[35S]GTP
S binding experiments were carried out on
membranes of transfected HEK 293 cells expressing MU1 (A),
MU2 (B), or MU3 (C). The membranes were incubated
with the indicated concentrations of [35S]GTP
S, and
the binding in response to MCP-1 was determined as described under
"Experimental Procedures." Shown is the specific,
MCP-1-dependent binding of [35S]GTP
S. Data
are expressed as mean ± S.D. of three experiments.
Insets, Scatchard plot analysis of the binding data. The
binding parameters are summarized in Table II.
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
S. The mutant receptor also induced a change of
[Ca2+]i in the transfected HEK 293 cells,
although, as expected, at higher MCP-1 concentrations to compensate for
the lower binding affinity. In contrast, the poor calcium response
mediated by MU1 and MU2 cannot be explained by a low ligand binding
affinity but was most likely caused by their very ineffective
activation of G protein. The replacement of a positively charged
residue (His100
Tyr) together with the introduction of
a negative charge (Asp99) in MU1, or the introduction of
two positively charged residues in MU2
(Ser101-Ala102-Ala103
Lys-Leu-Lys) did not significantly affect the binding affinity but
greatly reduced the efficacy of transmembrane signaling. These results
suggest that the first extracellular loop contains microdomains with
distinct properties that are necessary for optimal receptor function.
Lys-Leu-Lys) may prevent the switch to a fully active receptor conformation. In this conformation, the receptor is a very inefficient activator of G protein. Although the receptor conformation was not
optimal, a partial ineffective activation of G protein was possible,
which caused the low affinity binding of GTP. Only a disruption of the
interaction between the carboxyl-terminal tail of CCR2B and G protein
by AbTM7C prevented G protein activation, which resulted in a
substantial reduction of GTP binding. Alternatively, specific residues
of the first extracellular loop could be involved in receptor
dimerization that has been suggested as a possible concept of G
protein-coupled receptor activation (41). However, the exact molecular
basis of the receptor-ligand interaction and the mechanisms of receptor
activation are still unknown, and in the absence of crystallographic
data all binding models remain hypothetical.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* This work was supported in part by National Institutes of Health Grants HL56989-01 (SCOR in Molecular Medicine and Atherosclerosis) and AI41719-01A1 (to O. Q.) and by the Tobacco-related Disease Research Program, California, Grant 6IT-0133 (to O. Q.).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.
Supported by an American Heart Association Fellowship.
§ Present address: Dept. of Medicine/Cardiology, University of Pennsylvania Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA 19104.
¶ Established Investigator of the American Heart Association. To whom correspondence should be addressed: University of California, San Diego, Dept. of Medicine, 0682, 9500 Gilman Dr., La Jolla, CA 92093-0682. Tel.: 858-534-4401; Fax: 858-534-2005; E-mail: oquehen berger{at}ucsd.edu.
| |
ABBREVIATIONS |
|---|
The abbreviations used are:
MCP-1, monocyte
chemoattractant protein-1;
BSA, bovine serum albumin;
CCR2, MCP-1
receptor;
G protein, GTP-binding protein;
PBS, phosphate-buffered
saline;
PCR, polymerase chain reaction;
GTP
S, guanosine
5'-3-O-(thio)triphosphate.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Baggiolini, M., Dewald, B., and Moser, B. (1997) Annu. Rev. Immunol. 15, 675-705[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 2. |
Kelner, G. S.,
Kennedy, J.,
Bacon, K. B.,
Kleyensteuber, S.,
Largaespada, D. A.,
Jenkins, N. A.,
Copeland, N. G.,
Bazan, J. F.,
Moore, K. W.,
Schall, T. J.,
and Zlotnik, A.
(1994)
Science
266,
1395-1399 |
| 3. | Bazan, J. F., Bacon, K. B., Hardiman, G., Wang, W., Soo, K., Rossi, D., Greaves, D. R., Zlotnik, A., and Schall, T. J. (1997) Nature 385, 640-644[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 4. |
Rollins, B. J.,
Morrison, E. D.,
and Stiles, C. D.
(1988)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
85,
3738-3742 |
| 5. |
Yoshimura, T.,
Robinson, E. A.,
Tanaka, S.,
Appella, E.,
Kuratsu, J.,
and Leonard, E. J.
(1989)
J. Exp. Med.
169,
1449-1459 |
| 6. |
Kuna, P.,
Reddigari, S. R.,
Rucinski, D.,
Oppenheim, J. J.,
and Kaplan, A. P.
(1992)
J. Exp. Med.
175,
489-493 |
| 7. |
Carr, M. W.,
Roth, S. J.,
Luther, E.,
Rose, S. S.,
and Springer, T. A.
(1994)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
91,
3652-3656 |
| 8. | Yoshimura, T., and Leonard, E. J. (1990) J. Immunol. 145, 292-297[Abstract] |
| 9. |
Charo, I. F.,
Myers, S. J.,
Herman, A.,
Franci, C.,
Connolly, A. J.,
and Coughlin, S. R.
(1994)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
91,
2752-2756 |
| 10. | Yamagami, S., Tokuda, Y., Ishii, K., Tanaka, H., and Endo, N. (1994) Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 202, 1156-1162[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 11. |
Myers, S. J.,
Wong, L. M.,
and Charo, I. F.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
5786-5792 |
| 12. |
Kuang, Y.,
Wu, Y.,
Jiang, H.,
and Wu, D.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
3975-3978 |
| 13. |
Kuziel, W. A.,
Morgan, S. J.,
Dawson, T. C.,
Griffin, S.,
Smithies, O.,
Ley, K.,
and Maeda, N.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
12053-12058 |
| 14. | Boring, L., Gosling, J., Chensue, S. W., Kunkel, S. L., Farese, R. V. J., Broxmeyer, H. E., and Charo, I. F. (1997) J. Clin. Invest. 100, 2552-2561[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 15. |
Kurihara, T.,
Warr, G.,
Loy, J.,
and Bravo, R.
(1997)
J. Exp. Med.
186,
1757-1762 |
| 16. |
Tangirala, R. K.,
Murao, K.,
and Quehenberger, O.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
8050-8056 |
| 17. |
Han, K. H.,
Tangirala, R. K.,
Green, S. R.,
and Quehenberger, O.
(1998)
Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol.
18,
1983-1991 |
| 18. |
Han, K. H.,
Han, K. O.,
Green, S. R.,
and Quehenberger, O.
(1999)
J. Lipid Res.
40,
1053-1063 |
| 19. | Vu, T. K., Hung, D. T., Wheaton, V. I., and Coughlin, S. R. (1991) Cell 64, 1057-1068[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 20. |
LaRosa, G. J.,
Thomas, K. M.,
Kaufmann, M. E.,
Mark, R.,
White, M.,
Taylor, L.,
Gray, G.,
Witt, D.,
and Navarro, J.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
25402-25406 |
| 21. |
Monteclaro, F. S.,
and Charo, I. F.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
23186-23190 |
| 22. |
Hebert, C. A.,
Chuntharapai, A.,
Smith, M.,
Colby, T.,
Kim, J.,
and Horuk, R.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
18549-18553 |
| 23. |
Ahuja, S. K.,
Lee, J. C.,
and Murphy, P. M.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
225-232 |
| 24. |
Quehenberger, O.,
Prossnitz, E. R.,
Cavanagh, S. L.,
Cochrane, C. G.,
and Ye, R. D.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
18167-18175 |
| 25. | Quehenberger, O., Pan, Z. K., Prossnitz, E. R., Cavanagh, S. L., Cochrane, C. G., and Ye, R. D. (1997) Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 238, 377-381[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 26. | Neote, K., DiGregorio, D., Mak, J. Y., Horuk, R., and Schall, T. J. (1993) Cell 72, 415-425[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 27. | Kunkel, T. A., Roberts, J. D., and Zakour, R. A. (1987) Methods Enzymol. 154, 367-382[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 28. |
Kozak, M.
(1991)
J. Biol. Chem.
266,
19867-19870 |
| 29. | Munson, P. J., and Rodbard, D. (1980) Anal. Biochem. 107, 220-239[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 30. | Lazareno, S. (1997) Methods Mol. Biol. 83, 107-116[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 31. |
Lowry, O. H.,
Rosebrough, N. J.,
Farr, A. L.,
and Randall, R. J.
(1951)
J. Biol. Chem.
193,
265-275 |
| 32. |
Monteclaro, F. S.,
and Charo, I. F.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
19084-19092 |
| 33. | Ye, R. D., Quehenberger, O., Prossnitz, A. Z., Schreiber, R. E., Bokoch, G. M., and Cochrane, C. G. (1994) in Molecular Basis of Inflammation (Navarro, J., ed) , pp. 141-154, Ares-Serono Symposia Publications, Rome, Italy |
| 34. | Frade, J. M. R., Llorente, M., Mellado, M., Alcami, J., Gutierrez-Ramos, J. C., Zaballos, A., Real, G., and Martinez-A, C. (1997) J. Clin. Invest. 100, 497-502[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 35. | Prossnitz, E. R., Gilbert, T. L., Chiang, S., Campbell, J. J., Qin, S., Newman, W., Sklar, L. A., and Ye, R. D. (1999) Biochemistry 38, 2240-2247[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 36. |
Arai, H.,
and Charo, I. F.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
21814-21819 |
| 37. |
Zhang, Y. J.,
Rutledge, B. J.,
and Rollins, B. J.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
15918-15924 |
| 38. |
Gong, J.-H.,
and Clark-Lewis, I.
(1995)
J. Exp. Med.
181,
631-640 |
| 39. |
Gong, J. H.,
Uguccioni, M.,
Dewald, B.,
Baggiolini, M.,
and Clark-Lewis, I.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
10521-10527 |
| 40. |
Gong, J. H.,
Ratkay, L. G.,
Waterfield, J. D.,
and Clark-Lewis, I.
(1997)
J. Exp. Med.
186,
131-137 |
| 41. | Haebert, T. E., and Bouvier, M. (1998) Biochem. Cell Biol. 76, 1-11[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
Y. Chen, S. R. Green, F. Almazan, and O. Quehenberger The Amino Terminus and the Third Extracellular Loop of CX3CR1 Contain Determinants Critical for Distinct Receptor Functions Mol. Pharmacol., March 1, 2006; 69(3): 857 - 865. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. R. Ott, A. Pahuja, S. A. Nickolls, D. G. Alleva, and R. S. Struthers Identification of CC Chemokine Receptor 7 Residues Important for Receptor Activation J. Biol. Chem., October 8, 2004; 279(41): 42383 - 42392. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. H. Han, Y. Chen, M. K. Chang, Y. C. Han, J.-H. Park, S. R. Green, A. Boullier, and O. Quehenberger LDL activates signaling pathways leading to an increase in cytosolic free calcium and stimulation of CD11b expression in monocytes J. Lipid Res., July 1, 2003; 44(7): 1332 - 1340. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Akal-Strader, S. Khare, D. Xu, F. Naider, and J. M. Becker Residues in the First Extracellular Loop of a G Protein-coupled Receptor Play a Role in Signal Transduction J. Biol. Chem., August 16, 2002; 277(34): 30581 - 30590. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. T. Seet and G. McFadden Viral chemokine-binding proteins J. Leukoc. Biol., July 1, 2002; 72(1): 24 - 34. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. Martinelli, I. Sabroe, G. LaRosa, T. J. Williams, and J. E. Pease The CC Chemokine Eotaxin (CCL11) Is a Partial Agonist of CC Chemokine Receptor 2b J. Biol. Chem., November 9, 2001; 276(46): 42957 - 42964. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. T. Seet, R. Singh, C. Paavola, E. K. Lau, T. M. Handel, and G. McFadden Molecular determinants for CC-chemokine recognition by a poxvirus CC-chemokine inhibitor PNAS, July 19, 2001; (2001) 171069398. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Govaerts, C. Blanpain, X. Deupi, S. Ballet, J. A. Ballesteros, S. J. Wodak, G. Vassart, L. Pardo, and M. Parmentier The TXP Motif in the Second Transmembrane Helix of CCR5. A STRUCTURAL DETERMINANT OF CHEMOKINE-INDUCED ACTIVATION J. Biol. Chem., April 13, 2001; 276(16): 13217 - 13225. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||