|
J Biol Chem, Vol. 275, Issue 19, 14124-14131, May 12, 2000
Primary Structure Requirements for Xenopus
Nodal-related 3 and a Comparison with Regions Required by
Xenopus Nodal-related 2*
Carin Hansen
Ezal,
Christopher D.
Marion, and
William C.
Smith
From the Department of Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental
Biology, and the Neuroscience Research Institute, University of
California, Santa Barbara, California 93106
 |
ABSTRACT |
Transforming growth factor- superfamily
members play important roles in the early development of animals.
Activin and the Xenopus nodal related proteins 1, 2, and 4 induce muscle actin from Xenopus ectodermal explants,
whereas the bone morphogenetic proteins 4 and 7 induce ectoderm to
differentiate as epidermis. Bone morphogenetic proteins are antagonized
by soluble binding proteins such as noggin and chordin, which leads to
expression of neural cell adhesion molecule in animal caps. The
transforming growth factor- superfamily member Xenopus
nodal-related 3 also induces the neural cell adhesion molecule through
inhibition of bone morphogenetic proteins. Therefore, whereas
Xenopus nodal-related 2 and 3 share a high amount of
sequence homology, they lead to very different cell fates. This study
investigates the functional domains that distinguish the activities of
these two factors. It was found that mutually exclusive regions of
nodal-related 2 and 3 were required for activity. The central region of
the mature domain is required for nodal-related 2 to induce muscle actin, whereas the N- and C-terminal ends of the mature domain are
required for nodal-related 3 to induce neural cell adhesion molecule.
These results help to define the minimal domains required for the
unique activities of these factors.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The transforming growth factor-
(TGF- )1 superfamily is
composed of a myriad of related secreted proteins that are important regulators of development and physiology in both vertebrates and invertebrates (1). Most TGF- s are synthesized as proproteins that
are biologically inactive until proteolytically processed at
R-X-(K/R)-R and R-X-X-R consensus
sequences by subtilisin-like proprotein convertases (2-4). Active
TGF- proteins consist of two 12-16-kDa peptides that show varying
ability to function as homo- and heterodimers. Superfamily members have
seven highly conserved cysteines in the C-terminal mature domain that
form intra- and interchain disulfide bonds. Within the monomer,
disulfide bond pairs are formed between the first and fifth, second and sixth, and third and seventh cysteines. The fourth conserved cysteine makes an interchain bond between dimer subunits. Another conserved feature of the superfamily is a glycine residue between the second and
third cysteines, within the consensus sequence
CXGXC. It is thought that steric hindrance would
require a glycine (Fig. 1, indicated by an asterisk) in this
position for proper folding, because two disulfide bonds form a closed
ring on either side of this residue, which prevents its substitution
(5, 6).
Three-dimensional structural studies of TGF- s 1, 2, and 3, as well
as bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) 2 and 7 predict a conserved
"cysteine knot" structure that has been described as a "left
hand" (Fig. 1) (5-10). The "heel" of the hand structure is an
-helix formed by the amino acids between the third and fourth
cysteines. Extending out from this are two long loops consisting of
-sheets that form "fingers." The N-terminal amino acid region of
the mature domain extending from the cleavage site to the first conserved cysteine represents the "thumb" (also referred to as the
proknot sequence, (10)). Members of the TGF- subfamily (TGF- s
1-5) and activin have two additional conserved cysteines in this
region, which form a disulfide bond anchoring a short -helix to the
first -sheet of finger 1. Because most other superfamily members
share only the seven conserved cysteines, they lack this additional
disulfide bond. In BMP2 and BMP7, the thumb region is disordered and
cannot be resolved in electron density maps, so the structure of this
region in these superfamily members is unknown.
Members of the nodal subfamily of the TGF- s play important roles in
vertebrate mesoderm induction and patterning (11-13). Whereas the
mouse and chick appear to have single members of the nodal gene family,
duplications have led to at least four family members in
Xenopus (Xnr1-4) and two in zebrafish (squint
and cyclops) (14-16). Comparison of predicted amino acid
sequences indicates that Xnr1, Xnr2, and Xnr3 are more closely related
to each other than to Xnr4. Most notably, Xnr1, Xnr2, and Xnr3 share
the unique feature of having the sequence CXXC between the
fourth and fifth conserved cysteines. This sequence is also found in
chick nodal and zebrafish squint. Xnr4, mouse nodal, and zebrafish
cyclops, as well as the majority of other TGF- superfamily members,
have the sequence CC for these two cysteines. Xenopus
nodal-related 3 (Xnr3) is unique among the nodal subfamily in having
several primary structure features that diverge from the TGF-
superfamily consensus (17). First, Xnr3 is missing the last of the
seven conserved cysteines. Second, whereas all other superfamily
members have a glycine located between the second and third cysteines, Xnr3 has a serine in this position. Perhaps this substitution is
allowed because Xnr3 lacks one of the two disulfide bonds that constrains this residue to a glycine in other superfamily members. Together these observations suggest that Xnr3 does not form the characteristic knot structure (Fig.
1).

View larger version (57K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
A, alignment of the mature domains from
the five TGF- superfamily members that have been crystallized
(TGF- s 1, 2, and 3 and BMPs 2 and 7), Xnr2, and Xnr3. Sequences that
comprise specific features of the known structures are indicated, and
the seven highly conserved cysteines are numbered. B, ribbon
diagram of BMP7 illustrating the features used to describe the
structure as a left hand. The numbers correspond to the numbered
cysteines in A above and the intrachain disulfide bonds are
shown. Cysteine four joins the dimer subunits, and the conserved
glycine is indicated by an asterisk. It should be noted that
the thumb domain is only two residues long because the structure for
the N-terminal residues was not determined (14).
|
|
Xnr3 also has biological activity in developing Xenopus
embryos that differ markedly from the other nodal-related factors. In
Xenopus animal cap induction assays, Xnr1, 2, and 4 induce the mesodermal markers brachyury (when assayed at early gastrula stage)
and muscle actin (MA) at tailbud stage (11, 18). All three also have
the ability to rescue mesoderm in VegT-depleted embryos (19). The
related factors in the mouse and zebrafish (nodal, squint, and cyclops)
induce mesodermal markers in the Xenopus assay (11, 16, 20).
However, Xnr3 blocks the activities of the TGF- family members BMP4
and activin, does not induce brachyury or MA, and instead induces the
neural cell adhesion molecule (NCAM). Based on these and other
findings, we have speculated that Xnr3 may function as a BMP4 and
activin receptor antagonist (21). Although there are several possible
mechanisms by which Xnr3 could inhibit these TGF- superfamily
members, observations that Xnr3 can inhibit soluble activin protein
excludes a mechanism by which dysfunctional dimers were formed. Also,
the fact that Xnr3 does not inhibit a constitutively active receptor
supports the receptor antagonist model (21). In addition to Xnr3,
several other TGF- s have been postulated to be antagonists,
including lefty, inhibin, and antivin (22-25). A comparison of the
primary structure of these putative antagonists does not readily
suggest common features to account for their activities. Thus, it is
possible that the putative TGF- receptor antagonists evolved
independently and may use different strategies for binding, but not
activating, receptors.
The nodal-related factors in Xenopus present a unique model
system for studying structural features that are responsible for divergent activities of closely related TGF- superfamily members. Among the nodal-related genes, Xnr3 is most closely related to Xnr2.
Using a Xenopus animal cap assay and Northern blotting, the
NCAM-inducing activity of Xnr3 and the MA-inducing activity of Xnr2 are
easily distinguished. We have used this assay to characterize a number
of chimeras and mutations of these two factors to determine which
regions are required for specifying their divergent activities. The
results show that the regions needed for NCAM and MA induction are
different and that these regions are different from those found to be
important for TGF- activity.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Xenopus Embryos and Explants--
Induced ovulation of female
Xenopus and fertilization of eggs was as described
previously (26). Embryos were staged according to Nieuwkoop and Faber
(27). Twenty animal caps were cultured together in ~100 µl of 1/3X
MMR (1X MMR: 0.1 M NaCl, 2 mM KCl, 1 mM MgSO4, 2 mM CaCl2, 5 mM HEPES, pH 7.8, 0.1 mM EDTA, 1.5 mM sodium phosphate pH 7.5, 0.75 mM
NaHCO3) with 25 mg/ml gentamicin and bovine serum albumin
added to 1 mg/ml.
Site-directed Mutagenesis--
Oligonucleotide-mediated
site-directed mutagenesis was performed using a dut- ung
strain of Escherichia coli (28). Single-stranded uracil-containing templates were prepared from Xnr3 and Xnr2 and annealed with the following oligonucleotides to make the
indicated mutants: cmXnr3,
5'-GGTGAATGGATTTCGGAAGCTTAGCAGCAACAAGAAAGAGAAAACAC-3'; delete 22 amino
acids of Xnr3, 5'-AAGGTGAATGGATTTCCTATTGAAGAGA-3'; chimeras 1-12
(Xnr2 + NsiI), 5'-CAATGCATATAGGTGTGAGGG-3';
chimeras 1-12 (remove endogenous NsiI site from
Xnr2), 5'-GAACATGCACGAGAGAGCC-3'; chimeras 7 and 8 (Xnr2 + AvaI),
5'-GCGTTGGGAAACCCGGGTGCAGGAGAGTGG-3'; chimeras 3-12 (Xnr3 + BanII), 5'-CCCCATGAAGATGAGCCCCATGTC-3'; chimera 9 (Xnr3
S-G), 5'-GCATATAGATGTGAAGGCACTTGTGCAGTTCCACAG-3'; substitution of amino
acids 386-390 of Xnr2 with the Xnr3 sequence NEDFI,
5'-GCCCACTGTCCATGTTACTGTATGAAAACGAAGATTTTATACTGAAGCATCACGAGG-3'.
For making epitope-tagged Xnr3, polymerase chain reaction was used to
introduce a SalI site into Xnr3. The 5'-end (nucleotides 1-940 of Xnr3) was amplified using the M13 reverse primer and the oligonucleotide 5'-CGCGGTCGACAGGTTTAGGTGGAACGG3' (the
SalI site is underlined). The 3'-end of Xnr3 was
amplified with the oligonucleotide
5'-CCGGGTCGACGAGATCAAACCCGAGTG-3' to create the other half
of the SalI site and the oligonucleotide
5'-GGCCCTCGAGTTACATGTCCTTGAATCC-3' at the 3'-end. Oligonucleotides
encoding Myc (5'-TCGAGCAGAAGCTGATATCCGAGGAGGACC-3' and
5'-TCGAGGTCCTCCTCGGATATCAGCTTCTGC-3') or hemagglutinin
(5'-TCGATTACCCATACGACGTCCCAGACTACGCAC-3' and
5'-TCGAGAGCGTAGTCTGGGACGTCGTATGGGTAA-3') tags were ligated into
the SalI site.
For making the C terminus of Xnr2 resemble Xnr3 in chimera 8, a pair of
complementary oligonucleotides was used to fill in between
BamHI and Eco57I sites,
5'-TTGTGGATGAGTGTGGATTCAAGGACATGTAAG-3' and
5'-GATCCTTACATGTCCTTGAATCCACACTCATCCACAATC-3'.
For making chimera 11 (the mutation changing amino acids ENA to FKP), a
three part ligation was done using the following: 1) a ~570-base pair
fragment produced using polymerase chain reaction from construct 9 with
the T7 promoter primer and the mutagenic oligonucleotide
5'-TATCCTTTAAATGAAACCGAGAATGCAACGAACCATGCC-3'; 2) a pair of
complementary oligonucleotides synthesized to fill in between
DraI and NsiI sites,
5'-TATAGGTGTGAGGGAGCCTGTCCTATTCCTTT-3' and
5'-AAAGGAATAGGACAGGCTCCCTCACACCTATAGGCA-3'; and 3) a construct 9 vector linearized with NsiI and ApaI.
The presence of the desired mutations was confirmed by dideoxy
sequencing using Sequenase (US Biochem) or Big Dye Terminator cycle
sequencing (Applied Biosystems). In cases where a chimera was made by
ligating fragments, the regions where two pieces were joined within the
coding region of the gene was also sequenced to verify the ligation had
maintained the frame (Table I).
RNA Synthesis and Injection--
Capped RNAs were synthesized
from linearized plasmid templates using the mMessage mMachine (Ambion).
Transcripts were checked by formaldehyde-containing agarose gel
electrophoresis. Xnr3 template was linearized as described previously
(17). The Xnr2 template consisted of a 1.4-kilobase cDNA insert
(clone UDL3) in pBluescript SK- (Stratagene) (11). The Xnr2 plasmid was
linearized by XhoI digestion and RNA-transcribed with T3 RNA
polymerase. Injection of 1 ng of RNA was at one cell stage 1, and
animal cap explants were isolated at stages 8-9.
RNA Extraction and Analysis--
Total RNA was isolated from
animal cap explants and embryos using Trizol Reagent (Life
Technologies, Inc.). For Northern analysis, 20 caps were used/sample
and electrophoresed on formaldehyde-containing agarose gels (29). Gels
were transferred to Hybond-N nylon membrane (Amersham Pharmacia
Biotech) by capillary action overnight and hybridized with QuikHyb
(Stratagene). Random-primed 32P-labeled probes were
prepared using the Prime-a-gene system (Promega) with isolated
fragments from NCAM (30), elongation factor 1 (31), and MA (also
referred to as cardiac actin) (32).
Western Blotting--
Xenopus embryos were injected with 2.5 ng
of RNA, and 20 animal caps were isolated and grown to stages 20-25.
Animal caps were homogenized in reducing Laemmli sample buffer (33) and run on a 12% polyacrylamide gel at 175 V for an hour. Gels were transferred to Hybond-ECL nitrocellulose (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) for 1 h at 40 V and blocked for 90 min in TBS with 3% dried milk (filtered through Whatman 4 paper) and 0.1% Tween (TBSM-T). Anti-Xnr3 antibody was diluted 1:2500 and incubated overnight. The blots were
then washed 4 times for 10 min in TBSM-T, incubated with goat
anti-rabbit horseradish peroxidase secondary diluted 1:5000 in TBSM-T
for 40 min, and washed 6 times for 10 min in TBS-T with a final 10 min
wash in TBS without detergent. Detection was done with SuperSignal (Pierce).
Antibodies--
The Xnr3 antibody was made in rabbit against the
synthetic peptides HVSTVPPKPIEEIKPEC and CHVSTVPPKPIEEIKPE, which
correspond to the amino acids at the N terminus of the putative mature
domain (the thumb domain). These peptides were linked to keyhole limpet hemocyanin and were used to immunize two rabbits. Serum from both rabbits was tested for binding of antibody to antigen using an alkaline
phophatase-linked secondary and detection with p-nitrophenyl phosphate. Antibody was purified from serum of the rabbit producing the
higher titer using the antigenic peptides coupled to agarose (Pierce
SulfoLink Kit).
 |
RESULTS |
Xnr3 Requires N-terminal Domain of Predicted Mature
Protein--
Epitope tagging is a commonly used technique in the study
of the structure and function of TGF- superfamily members. Epitope tags have been successfully inserted into the thumb regions of many
TGF- superfamily members, including dorsalin, Xnr1, Vg1, and activin
(34, 35).2 However,
construction of similarly modified versions of Xnr3 yielded surprising
results that provide clues to the structural requirements for Xnr3
activity. The addition of tags (Myc or hemagglutinin) into an
equivalent position of the Xnr3 thumb blocked NCAM-inducing activity
(Fig. 2), even though Western blotting
indicated that the epitope-tagged Xnr3 proteins were synthesized (data
not shown). In contrast to other TGF- superfamily members, this
domain in Xnr3 is sensitive to alteration and therefore appears to play a role in protein function.

View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
A, diagram of Xnr3 showing the sequence
around the putative cleavage site, location of epitope tag insertion,
and fusion protein junction. B, Northern blot for NCAM and
elongation factor 1 (EF1 ) (loading control) from
Xenopus animal caps injected with RNAs encoding wild-type
Xnr3 or Xnr2, epitope-tagged versions of Xnr3 (hemagglutinin and Myc),
a cleavage site mutation (cmXnr3), or a Xnr2·Xnr3 fusion protein. For
cmXnr3, ribosomal bands were used as a loading control in place of
elongation factor 1 .
|
|
A second protein modification that is commonly used in the study of the
TGF- s is the exchange of prodomains between two family members. This
is done because various expression and in vivo assay systems
process TGF- superfamily members with varying efficiencies (36, 37).
These fusion proteins are usually made to take advantage of the
optimized cleavage site of the heterologous prodomain. Prodomains can
be successfully swapped between distantly related family members to
yield active protein (35-38). Fusion proteins have been successfully
made joining the proregion of activin to the Xnr2 mature domain (38).
However, the primary sequence of the mature domain of Xnr3 has a number
of unusual features, and the prodomain plays a role in protein
secretion, processing, and stability (39, 40). Therefore, we sought to
determine if there was a strict requirement of the Xnr3 prodomain for
biological activity. A chimera was made with the activin prodomain and
cleavage site-linked to the Xnr3 mature domain. This activin·Xnr3
fusion protein had no biological activity when assayed in the
Xenopus animal cap induction assay for NCAM (data not
shown). To test a prodomain from a more closely related superfamily
member, the Xnr2 prodomain was fused to the Xnr3 mature domain. Because
the results with epitope tagging suggested that some feature of the thumb region was important for activity, the fusion of the pro- and
mature domains was made 18 amino acids N-terminal of the Xnr3 putative
cleavage site. As with the activin fusion protein, no NCAM activity of
the fusion protein could be detected (Fig. 2). Although negative data
are by their nature not conclusive, our observations suggest that the
ability to swap prodomains both within the nodal family and between
more distantly related superfamily members does not extend to Xnr3.
These and previous experiments with epitope tags indicate that certain
features within the Xnr3 prodomain are required for biological activity.
The most likely processing site for Xnr3 is the sequence RRLRR (amino
acids 270-274), although another less likely site is found in the
flanking region (residues 179-182). The processing site at residues
270-274 was mutated to RKLSS (cmXnr3) to assess the importance of the
site for activity. We hoped to use this strategy to make a dominant
negative cleavage mutant Xnr3, as had been done successfully with
TGF- 1, activin, BMPs, and Xnr2 (41-45). Surprisingly, cmXnr3 is
still functional as a neural inducer (Fig. 2). Western blotting of
extracts from mRNA-injected animal caps using a polyclonal antibody
directed at a mature domain peptide showed that the cleavage site
mutation dramatically reduced the amount of processed prodomain, with
the subsequent appearance of the unprocessed proprotein (Fig.
3). Even though it is possible that some
processing could occur at amino acids 179-183, it would be unlikely.
Therefore, the unprocessed protein or a protein containing a
significant amount of prodomain has biological activity.

View larger version (40K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Xnr3 cleavage mutant (cmXnr3) is
proteolytically processed at lower levels than wild-type. Extracts
from Xenopus animal caps injected with mRNA encoding
either wild-type or cmXnr3 were analyzed by Western blotting using an
antibody against a synthetic peptide from the Xnr3 mature domain. Both
the proprotein (uncleaved) and the processed, mature protein are
indicated. The same result was obtained in each of three independent
experiments.
|
|
We further examined the importance of the Xnr3 thumb region, including
the putative processing site and surrounding residues. A chimera was
made in which a 22-amino acid sequence was deleted (residues 270-291),
extending from the 5 residues in the putative cleavage site toward the
C terminus to include an additional 17 amino acids. This deletion
mutant was therefore lacking the region immediately N-terminal of the
location where epitope tags were inserted and has seven amino acids
before the first conserved cysteine. This chimera had no apparent
activity when injected into whole Xenopus embryos (data not
shown) or when assayed in explanted animal caps for NCAM induction
(Fig. 2). Together these results point to structural requirements
around the cleavage site for Xnr3 activity that are not found in Xnr2
or nodal.
Chimeras of Xnr3 and Xnr2 Reveal Different Domains for
Activity--
To further characterize regions of Xnr3 required for its
unique NCAM-inducing activity, we made chimeric proteins fusing regions of Xnr3 to the closely related factor Xnr2, which does not have direct
NCAM-inducing activity (46). First, we divided the mature region of
Xnr2 and Xnr3 approximately into thirds by making a set of six chimeras
(Fig. 4A). Because prior
experiments indicated that Xnr3 likely required different regions for
activity than TGF- s, this approach was used to narrow down the
possible sequences that might be involved in the activity of Xnr3. The
N-terminal one-third includes the thumb and "finger 1," the center
region the -helix heel, and the C-terminal portion contains
"finger 2". To make the fusion chimeras, we added a number of
restriction sites, most of which resulted in no change in amino acid
sequence. However, a BanII site was added to Xnr3 at
nucleotide 1127 to correspond with a BanII site found in
Xnr2, which resulted in changing methionine 371 to a serine. This
substitution alone resulted in no apparent change in Xnr3 activity
(data not shown). The activity of the chimeras was examined by
injecting in vitro transcribed mRNA into the animal pole
of Xenopus embryos at the one-cell stage. For each chimera,
20 animal caps were dissected at late blastula stage and grown until
stage 25. RNA isolated from the animal caps was analyzed by Northern
blotting for presence of NCAM, MA, and elongation factor 1 transcript, which was used as a loading control (Fig.
4B).

View larger version (48K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Inductive activities of Xnr3 and Xnr2
chimeras in Xenopus animal caps. A,
chimeras 1-6 divide the mature domain into approximately three equal
parts. The data from a number of experiments are tabulated in the two
columns on the right. The number in brackets following the plus or
minus sign shows how many independent experiments resulted in that
outcome. A plus sign indicates that the chimera had NCAM- or
MA-inducing activity comparable to wild-type Xnr3 or Xnr2. A
minus sign signifies no signal for NCAM or MA transcripts.
The symbol +/ is used in cases where activity was slightly above
background, but much weaker than the activity of the controls.
B, representative Northern blots. Each Northern blot is
shown with four controls: whole embryo, uninjected animal caps, Xnr2
RNA-injected animal caps, and Xnr3 RNA-injected animal caps.
Experimental lanes that are grouped together are from the same
experiment and were assayed together. In some cases it was necessary to
cut out intervening lanes that were not relevant to the figure. The MA
probe cross-reacts to a lesser extent with cytoskeletal actin; the
MA-specific signal is the lower band. EF1 , elongation
factor 1 .
|
|
Chimera 1 contained the prodomain and first third of the mature domain
of Xnr2 fused to the C-terminal two-thirds of Xnr3. It was not an
active MA inducer and had very little to no NCAM-inducing activity
(Fig. 4). Chimera 2 is the reverse of chimera 1 and contains the
prodomain and first 51 residues of Xnr3 with the C-terminal region of
Xnr2. This chimera was consistently active in MA induction (n = 6) indicating that the C-terminal 74 residues are
sufficient for Xnr2-like MA-inducing activity. This chimera was judged
to be negative for NCAM induction because it had little, or no,
activity five of six times tested, and the low level of NCAM transcript most likely resulted from secondary induction (46).
In the complementary chimeras 3 and 4, domain swaps between Xnr2 and
Xnr3 were restricted to the C-terminal one-third. All but the last 30 residues of chimera 3 were from Xnr2, and chimera 4 had Xnr3 sequence
except for 28 amino acids at the C terminus. Neither of these chimeras
had NCAM- or MA-inducing activity. The low level of MA seen in one case
with chimera 4 was perhaps because of contamination. Thus, whereas the
C-terminal 74 residues of Xnr2 were able to confer MA-inducing activity
to the fusion protein, a smaller segment consisting of only the
C-terminal 28 residues was inactive. When the middle third of the
mature domain of Xnr2 was replaced with the corresponding domain of
Xnr3 (chimera 5; Fig. 4A), MA-inducing activity was also
lost and there was no detectable NCAM-inducing activity. However, a
reciprocal fusion protein that replaced the middle third of Xnr3 with
Xnr2 (chimera 6; Fig. 4A) retained near wild-type Xnr3
NCAM-inducing activity in the absence of MA transcript. In summary,
these experiments showed that Xnr2 and Xnr3 have different structural
requirements for activity. In Xnr3, the prodomain and all or part of
the first and last thirds of the mature protein are necessary for NCAM
induction, whereas Xnr2 requires the C-terminal two-thirds of the
mature domain to act as an MA inducer.
Xnr3 Requires 22 Amino Acids at the N Terminus and Four Residues at
the C Terminus of the Mature Domain for NCAM-inducing
Activity--
The domain swaps detailed in Fig. 4 pointed to large
domains required for activity. In further experiments we were able to narrow these regions to smaller domains. Because the results presented in Fig. 1 indicated that the residues surrounding the cleavage site of
Xnr3 were required for activity, we examined this area in greater
detail. To allow for domain swaps in the proximity of the thumb domain,
an AvaI restriction site was added to Xnr2 in a location
equivalent to one found in Xnr3 (Fig. 5).
The addition of this restriction site required changing amino acids 303 and 304 of Xnr2 from TL to PG, which by itself did not alter Xnr2 activity (data not shown). We made chimera 7 to test if the region closest to the cleavage site was required, as suggested by the results
summarized in Fig. 2. This chimera resembled chimera 6, except that a
larger segment of Xnr2 extending past the first conserved cysteine
replaced the middle region of Xnr3, and the resulting fusion protein
had 22 amino acids of Xnr3 between the cleavage site and the Xnr3/Xnr2
junction (Fig. 5A). This chimera was still active for NCAM
induction at wild-type levels (Fig. 5B).

View larger version (53K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
A, Xnr2/Xnr3 chimeras indicate that 22 amino acids at the N terminus and four residues at the C terminus of
the mature domain are sufficient for NCAM-inducing activity (chimera
8). B, representative Northern blots. Samples were processed
and scored as in Fig. 3. EF1 , elongation factor 1 .
|
|
The results of experiments with chimeras 6 and 7 point to regions at
the C- and N-terminal regions of the mature domain of Xnr3 that are
important for activity. We made an additional chimera (Fig.
5A; chimera 8) to examine the C-terminal region of Xnr3 more
closely. The C-terminal four amino acids of Xnr3 were hypothesized to
be important for activity because this region was most divergent between Xnr3 and the consensus sequence for TGF- superfamily members. Chimera 8 is identical to chimera 7, except that chimera 8 has
only the four C-terminal amino acids of Xnr3. This fusion protein
combining the Xnr3 proregion, N-terminal 22 amino acids of the Xnr3
mature domain, and four C-terminal residues had NCAM-inducing activity
comparable to that of wild-type Xnr3 (Fig. 5, A and
B).
Residues Important for Proper Folding of other TGF- Family
Members Appear Unimportant for Xnr3--
As detailed in the
Introduction, Xnr3 has several features that differ from the consensus
for TGF- superfamily members, including the lack of the seventh
conserved cysteine and the substitution of a serine for a glycine
residue between the second and third conserved cysteines. Mutation of
this serine back to glycine did not alter the biological activity of
Xnr3, even in chimeras in which a seventh cysteine was added (data not
shown). We used chimera 9 to test whether the substitution of the
conserved glycine residue by serine in Xnr3 was responsible for the
lack of activity of chimera 4, which contains the center region of
Xnr3. Chimera 9 was identical to chimera 4 except that the serine to
glycine substitution had been made (Fig. 5A). This chimera
yielded an unexpected result. The fusion protein consistently induced
high levels of NCAM transcript (Fig. 5B). This result, and
the fact that Xnr3 can tolerate changes to positions known to be
crucial in other TGF- superfamily members (47), suggest fundamental
structural differences.
The Center Third of the Xnr2 Mature Domain Is Sufficient for Muscle
Actin Induction--
Whereas the presence or absence of the seventh
cysteine did not alter the activity of wild-type Xnr3, the importance
of this alteration to the activity became evident in the context of the Xnr2/Xnr3 chimeras. In chimera 6, which had strong NCAM- and no MA-inducing activity, only the middle third of the mature domain of
Xnr3 was substituted with the Xnr2 sequence (Fig. 4). However, when the
seventh cysteine was added back (chimera 10; Fig.
6A), the chimera acquired
strong MA-inducing activity in three and weak activity in one of six
independent trials (Fig. 6B). Despite the variability in the
induction of MA transcript, chimera 10 induced NCAM above background
levels in all six trials (Fig. 6). We speculate that chimera 10 may
possess both NCAM- and MA-inducing activity, and the relative induction
of these two differentiated states may result in the variability seen
for MA induction (see below and "Discussion"). This result
identified a 46-amino acid stretch that is able to confer MA-inducing
activity to Xnr3, provided that all of the cysteines are present.

View larger version (44K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
A, the center third of the Xnr3 mature
region is sufficient for MA-inducing activity provided a seventh
cysteine is added (compare chimeras 6 and 10). B,
representative Northern blots. Samples were processed and scored as in
Fig. 3. C, alignment of the 46 residues comprising the
center one-third of all four Xenopus nodal-related genes.
The three amino acids in bold are those selected for
mutagenesis in Xnr2 (in chimera 11). EF1 , elongation
factor 1 .
|
|
Additional mutations were made to determine if the sequences
responsible for conferring MA-inducing activity could be narrowed further. Within this 46-amino acid segment, 28 amino acids are identical between Xnr2 and Xnr3. To find out which of the remaining 18 remaining amino acids were critical, we hypothesized that necessary residues would be ones conserved among Xnr1, 2, and 4, which all induce
MA, but not with Xnr3. The amino acid sequence FKP found in this region
of Xnr2 (residues 346-348) would appear to be a likely candidate (Fig.
6C). The identical sequence is found in Xnr1, whereas the
corresponding sequence in Xnr4 is VKP, representing one conservative
change. However, in Xnr3, the analogous amino acids are ENA, which
substitutes a charged residue in the first position, and does not
include a proline. To test the importance of these residues, chimera 11 was made to substitute the Xnr3 sequence at this region into chimera 10 (Fig. 6A). Although chimera 10 induced MA to levels
comparable to Xnr2 half of the times tested, chimera 11 never induced
MA to this extent. No MA transcript was seen in two cases, and a third
independent experiment induced a reduced level of MA relative to Xnr2,
although the signal was still above "+/ " levels (Fig.
6B).
A Chimera That Induces Both Neural and Mesoderm Reveals That These
Are Two Distinct, Separable Activities--
Chimeras 6 and 10 are
identical except for the presence of the seventh conserved cysteine in
chimera 10 (Fig. 6). Whereas chimera 6 was a strong NCAM inducer only,
chimera 10 strongly induced both NCAM and MA markers. In
Xenopus animal cap assays, dorsal mesoderm inducers will
often secondarily induce neural tissue. The degree of secondary neural
induction is variable because of the amount of uncommitted animal cap
ectoderm remaining to be induced by factors derived from the dorsal
mesoderm. Whereas secondary neural induction may explain the presence
of both neural and dorsal mesoderm markers in some of the assays with
chimera 10, in other assays no MA was detected. It is thus possible
that chimera 10 possessed both direct mesoderm (MA) and neural (NCAM) inducing activities simultaneously. To investigate this possibility further, a Myc tag was added back in the region known to eliminate NCAM-inducing activity from Xnr3 (Fig. 2) but which does not interfere with the MA-inducing activity of Xnr2. The resulting fusion protein, chimera 12, had strong MA-inducing activity in two of three trials and
greatly reduced, or eliminated, NCAM-inducing activity (Fig. 7).

View larger version (43K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
NCAM-inducing activity can be separated from
MA induction. Chimera 10 illustrates how adding the seventh
cysteine is sufficient to change chimera 6 into a MA inducer. Insertion
of a Myc tag eliminates the neural but not MA-inducing activities
(chimera 12). B, representative Northern blots. Samples were
processed and scored as in Fig. 3. In some cases Xnr2 and chimeras with
MA activity also induce NCAM to a lesser extent through secondary
neural induction. Secondary neural induction varies in intensity but is
always significantly less than direct neural induction by Xnr3. For
example, in Fig. 6 both Xnr2 control lanes have a low level of NCAM,
probably because of secondary induction; however, in Fig. 4 the Xnr2
control had no NCAM signal. Other experiments where NCAM was considered
to be +/ are Fig. 3 chimera 1 and Fig. 6 chimera 12.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Requirements for Xnr3 NCAM-inducing Activity--
Experimental
manipulation of Xnr3 primary structure helped to reveal regions
important for activity. Specifically, proregion fusions, epitope tags,
and site-directed mutations indicated that the thumb domain (48) was
sensitive to amino acid additions or deletions. Three-dimensional
structure predictions of BMP7 indicate that the thumb domain has
minimal interactions with the remainder of the folded mature domain
(5). It is likely that the thumb domain of Xnr3 is similarly
unstructured. Therefore, Xnr3 would appear to be unique among related
family members in having such strict structural requirements for this
domain. This domain may be involved in a receptor interaction or it
could play an indirect role in the overall folding of the protein, in
which case disruption of this domain would affect the structure of
another region.
Although many other TGF- s, including nodal and Xnr2, are able to
function when produced as fusion proteins with heterologous proregions,
this does not appear to be the case for Xnr3. Xnr3 fusions failed to
produce active protein when the junction was in the thumb domain, which
is done commonly for other TGF- s, or even N-terminal of the putative
cleavage site. Surprisingly, even fusion of Xnr3 to the prodomain of
the closely related Xnr2 failed to make an active protein. In contrast,
the Xnr3 prodomain can be substituted into Xnr2 (e.g.
chimera 2, Fig. 4). Previous studies on nodal have shown that
prodomains play a crucial role in determining stability of the mature
domain (39). Therefore, one possibility is that the strict requirements
for Xnr3 prodomain relate to protein stability and that the presumed
structural anomalies of Xnr3 can not be stabilized by other prodomains.
Mutations to the putative cleavage site appear to indicate that
processing is not required for Xnr3 activity, even though residues
surrounding this region are necessary for activity. Because there are
other distal potential cleavage sites, it is possible that Xnr3 may still be processed to a lesser extent. Mutations of the putative cleavage site in Xnr2 result in a protein with dominant negative activity, whereas similar mutations to Xnr1 and Xnr4 do not diminish activity (44). It was speculated that the residual activities of the
mutant Xnr1 and Xnr4 were because of processing at alternative sites.
The results of the initial domain swaps between Xnr2 and Xnr3 (Fig. 4)
showed that the prodomain, first, and last one-third of the Xnr3 mature
domain were required for activity. Additional chimeras revealed that
NCAM-inducing activity required the thumb domain but not the region
between the first and second cysteines. Residues at the C terminus are
required as well, as indicated by the first series of chimeras.
However, just the most C-terminal four amino acids appear to be
sufficient for NCAM induction in combination with the Xnr3 pro- and
thumb domains (chimera 8). Structural predictions of Xnr3 based on BMP7
predict that the C-terminal region is in close proximity to the thumb
domain, and that it is possible these two areas interact (49-51).
The activity of chimera 9 is particularly hard to explain. Chimera 9 differs from chimera 4 only by the substitution of a glycine for a
nonconsensus serine residue found between the second and third cysteine
residues of Xnr3 (Fig. 5A). Whereas chimera 4 had virtually
no MA- or NCAM-inducing activity, chimera 9 had strong NCAM-inducing
activity. Thus with chimera 9, NCAM-inducing activity was present even
though the chimera lacked an Xnr3 sequence at the C terminus. It is
possible that changing serine to glycine allows disulfide bonds to form
between the second and sixth and the third and seventh cysteines, as in
most TGF- s, which could mimic the folding of Xnr3 in the absence of
the N-terminal 4 amino acids.
Requirements for Xnr2 MA-inducing Activity--
Unlike Xnr3, Xnr2
has the conserved features of a typical TGF- superfamily member,
including all seven conserved cysteines and the sterically required
glycine between cysteines two and three. Tertiary modeling based on the
BMP7 and TGF- 2 structures predict that Xnr2 has a very similar
structure (49-51). In chimera 2, the entire prodomain and first third
of the mature domain of Xnr2 was substituted with the corresponding
region of Xnr3. This chimera retained MA-inducing activity similar to
that of wild-type Xnr2. On the other hand, chimera 1, which contained
the reciprocal swaps between Xnr2 and Xnr3, had very little or no
activity. The results from chimera 10 showed that the requirements for
MA-inducing activity could be reduced even further to the center
one-third of the mature domain provided that a C-terminal seventh
cysteine was added. Without the seventh cysteine (chimera 6), the
fusion protein had strong NCAM-inducing activity but no MA-inducing
activity. Having identified the central third of the Xnr2 mature domain as containing essential features for MA-inducing activity, we compared
the sequences of the four Xenopus nodal-like genes within this region to find differences that might account for the divergent activities of Xnr3 versus Xnr1, -2, and -4. Near the center
of this region we identified the 3-amino acid sequence (F/V)KP in Xnr1,
-2, and -4, which was substituted as ENA in Xnr3. Site-directed mutations to change these three amino acids in Xnr2 to the
corresponding sequence in Xnr3 resulted in a fusion protein with
greatly reduced MA-inducing activity but that retained strong
NCAM-inducing activity. If the alignment of Xnr2 with the
three-dimensional structures of BMP7 and TGF- is used to model Xnr2,
these three amino acids would be just N-terminal of the -helix
forming the heel of the hand-shaped fold (49-51).
The domain that we have identified as being essential for MA-inducing
activity by Xnr2 differs from regions known to be required for the
activity of TGF- 1 and TGF- 2. Similar domain swapping studies have
identified residues that are responsible for the divergent activities
in TGF- 1 and TGF- 2 (52, 53). It was shown that exchanging
residues 92-98 of the mature domain was sufficient to change the
activity of TGF- 1 to resemble that of TGF- 2 in a LS513 cell
growth assay. In addition, this protein no longer bound to the TGF- 1
receptor, T RII, which TGF- 1 recognizes, but TGF- 2 does not.
Significantly, this part of the protein forms an extended surface loop
forming the end of finger 2 and therefore is likely to be involved in
receptor interactions (52). To test if similarly positioned residues
played a role in distinguishing Xnr2 and Xnr3 activities, the sequences
of Xnr2, Xnr3, TGF- -1, and TGF- -2 were first compared to
determine which residues in the Xnrs were analogous to positions 92-98
of TGF- . In Xnr2, the corresponding amino acid sequence is EDGEVVL,
whereas in Xnr3 it is ENEDFIL. We were confident in the alignment of
these sequences because all four proteins share a tyrosine immediately
preceding this sequence, and it is followed in 12 residues by the sixth conserved cysteine. Because the first and last amino acids are already
shared between the two proteins, mutagenesis was done to change
residues DGEVV in Xnr2 to NEDFI. Surprisingly, this mutant Xnr2 protein
retained wild-type MA-inducing activity (data not shown). Whereas it is
possible that the residues in Xnr2 analogous to those identified in
TGF- 1 and TGF- 2 lie slightly more N- or C-terminal to those
mutated, our Xnr2/Xnr3 chimera results suggest that very different
regions of the nodal and TGF- s may be required for activity. Recent
results consistent with this possibility have suggested that signaling
by Xnr2 might be atypical for a TGF- superfamily member. It has been
found that a mutant Xnr2 with the fourth cysteine changed to a serine
retains MA-inducing activity (44). This cysteine forms the interchain
bond in the ligand dimer in other TGF- superfamily members (5-10).
In activin, mutation of this residue results in protein with only 2%
of wild-type biological activity (47).
Both Direct Neural and Mesoderm Inducing Activities may Co-exist in
One Molecule--
Chimera 10 had properties consistent with both Xnr2
and Xnr3 activities. Although it induced MA in three of six independent assays, it had strong NCAM-inducing activity every time it was tested.
Alterations to the structure of chimera 10 appear to independently disrupt one type of activity or the other. When the seventh cysteine was absent (chimera 6), making the protein more Xnr3-like, MA-inducing activity was lost, but NCAM-inducing activity remained strong. Likewise, as discussed above, if the amino acid sequence FKP in the
central domain of Xnr2 was mutated to ENA as in Xnr3 (chimera 11), MA
inducing but not NCAM-inducing activity was reduced. Finally, if an
epitope tag was added in a position known to disrupt Xnr3 activity,
MA-inducing activity was retained, but NCAM-inducing activity was
greatly reduced or absent (chimera 12).
Fig. 8 summarizes this work and shows the
regions necessary for NCAM- or MA-inducing activity. The shaded areas
required for activity are mutually exclusive. We show that a protein
containing both domains has NCAM- and MA-inducing functions (chimera
10). We speculate that chimera 10 may be able to bind both as an
agonist to the putative nodal receptor and as an antagonist to the BMP4 receptor. As suggested by chimera 11, mutation of critical residues in
this middle portion of the protein may interfere with binding to the
hypothetical nodal receptor and therefore prevent MA induction but
without reducing NCAM induction. Conversely, the addition of an epitope
tag in the thumb domain would block the inhibitory binding to the BMP
receptor but not the activation of a nodal receptor.

View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
Summary of the regions of Xnr2 and Xnr3 that
are required for NCAM- and MA-inducing activity. Essential regions
are shaded.
|
|
The nodal-related proteins are a distinct subfamily of the TGF- s.
There is a single nodal protein in mouse, whereas duplications have led
to multiple nodal-like genes in zebrafish and Xenopus, which
have two and four nodal-related genes, respectively. Xenopus has the most diverged family member, Xnr3. The structure and function of Xnr3 is unique among the nodal relateds, and a similar protein has
yet to be found in any other animal. Perhaps Xnr3 was able to evolve
its unusual characteristics because Xenopus has several redundant copies of the nodal gene. Xnr2 has an activity similar to the
other nodals. However, this work has shown that the regions necessary
for Xnr2 activity are different than those required by TGF- itself
and that the nodals may have evolved a different signaling strategy
from other members of the superfamily.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank Chris Wright for the gift of the
Xnr2 plasmid, Shannon Davis and Lisa Belluzzi for their comments on the
manuscript, and Rolf Christoffersen for expert computer assistance.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by Grant GM52835 from the National
Institutes of Health and the Beckman Young Investigators Program (to
W. C. S.).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.
To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: (805) 893-7698;
Fax: (805) 893-2005; E-mail: w_smith@lifesci.ucsb.edu.
2
W. Smith, unpublished observations.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
TGF- , transforming growth factor- ;
BMP, bone morphogenetic protein;
Xnr, Xenopus nodal-related;
MA, muscle actin;
NCAM, neural cell
adhesion molecule;
TBS, Tris-buffered saline;
TBSM-T, TBS with 3%
dried milk and 0.1% Tween.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Heldin, C.-H.,
Miyazono, K.,
and ten Dijke, P.
(1997)
Nature
390,
465-471[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 2.
|
Creemers, J. W.,
Kormelink, P. J.,
Roebroek, A. J.,
Nakayama, K.,
and Van de Ven, W. J.
(1993)
FEBS Lett.
336,
65-69[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 3.
|
Hosaka, M.,
Murakami, K.,
and Nakayama, K.
(1994)
Biomed. Res.
16,
383-390
|
| 4.
|
Molloy, S. S.,
Bresnahan, P. A.,
Leppla, S. H.,
Klimpel, K. R.,
and Thomas, G.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
16396-16402[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 5.
|
Griffith, D. L.,
Keck, P. C.,
Sampath, T. K.,
Rueger, D. C.,
and Carlson, W. D.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
878-883[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 6.
|
Schlunegger, M. P.,
and Grutter, M. G.
(1992)
Nature
358,
430-434[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 7.
|
Daopin, S.,
Li, M.,
and Davies, D. R.
(1993)
Proteins Struct. Funct. Genet.
17,
176-192[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 8.
|
Hinck, A. P.,
Archer, S. J.,
Qian, S. W.,
Roberts, A. B.,
Sporn, M. B.,
Weatherbee, J. A.,
Tsang, R.,
Lucas, M. L.-S.,
Zhang, B.-L.,
Wenker, J.,
and Torchia, D. A.
(1996)
Biochemistry
35,
8517-8534[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 9.
|
Mittl, P. R.,
Priestle, J. P.,
Cox, D. A.,
McMaster, G.,
Cerletti, N.,
and Grutter, M. G.
(1996)
Protein Sci.
5,
1261-1271[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 10.
|
Scheufler, C.,
Sebald, W.,
and Hulsmeyer, M.
(1999)
J. Mol. Biol.
287,
103-115[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 11.
|
Jones, M.,
Hogan, B. L. M.,
Kuehn, M. R.,
Smith, J. C.,
and Wright, C. V. E.
(1995)
Development
121,
3651-3662[Abstract]
|
| 12.
|
Toyama, R.,
O'Connell, M. L.,
Wright, C. V. E.,
Kuehn, M. R.,
and Dawid, I. B.
(1995)
Development
121,
383-391[Abstract]
|
| 13.
|
Zhou, X.,
Sasaki, H.,
Lowe, L.,
Hogan, B. L.,
and Kuehn, M. R.
(1993)
Nature
361,
543-547[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 14.
|
Feldman, B.,
Gates, M. A.,
Egan, E. S.,
Dougan, S. T.,
Rennebeck, G.,
Sirotkin, H. I.,
Schier, A. F.,
and Talbot, W. S.
(1998)
Nature
395,
181-185[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 15.
|
Rebagliati, M. R.,
Toyama, R.,
Haffter, P.,
and Dawid, I. B.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
9932-9937[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 16.
|
Sampath, K.,
Rubinstein, A. L.,
Cheng, A. M. S.,
Liang, J. O.,
Fekany, K.,
Solnica-Krezel, L.,
Korzh, V.,
Halpern, M. E.,
and Wright, C. V.
(1998)
Nature
395,
185-189[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 17.
|
Smith, W. C.,
McKendry, R. M.,
Ribisi, S.,
and Harland, R. M.
(1995)
Cell
82,
37-46[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 18.
|
Joseph, E. M.,
and Melton, D. A.
(1997)
Dev. Biol.
184,
367-372[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 19.
|
Kofron, M.,
Demel, T.,
Xanthos, J.,
Lohr, J.,
Sun, B.,
Sive, H.,
Osada, S.,
Wright, C.,
Wylie, C.,
and Heasman, J.
(1999)
Development
126,
5759-5770[Abstract]
|
| 20.
|
Erter, C. E.,
Solnica-Krezel, L.,
and Wright, C. V.
(1998)
Dev. Biol.
204,
361-372[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 21.
|
Hansen, C. S.,
Marion, C. D.,
Steele, K.,
George, S.,
and Smith, W. C.
(1997)
Development
124,
483-492[Abstract]
|
| 22.
|
Lebrun, J. J.,
and Vale, W. W.
(1997)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17,
1682-1691[Abstract]
|
| 23.
|
Meno, C.,
Ito, Y.,
Saijoh, Y.,
Matsuda, Y.,
Tashiro, K.,
Kuhara, S.,
and Hamada, H.
(1997)
Genes Cells
8,
513-524
|
| 24.
|
Thisse, C.,
and Thisse, B.
(1999)
Development
126,
229-240[Abstract]
|
| 25.
|
Xu, J.,
McKeehan, K.,
Matsuzaki, K.,
and McKeehan, W. L.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
6308-6313[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 26.
|
Condie, B. G.,
and Harland, R. M.
(1987)
Development
101,
93-105[Abstract]
|
| 27.
|
Nieuwkoop, P. D., and Faber, J.
(eds)
(1994)
Normal Table of Xenopus laevis (Daudin)
, pp. 163-170, Garland, New York
|
| 28.
|
Kunkel, T. A.
(1985)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
82,
488-492[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 29.
|
Sambrook, J.,
Fritsch, E. F.,
and Maniatis, T.
(1989)
Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual
, 2nd Ed.
, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, New York
|
| 30.
|
Kintner, C. R.,
and Melton, D. A.
(1987)
Development
99,
311-325[Abstract]
|
| 31.
|
Krieg, P. A.,
Varnum, S. M.,
Wormington, W. M.,
and Melton, D. A.
(1989)
Dev. Biol.
133,
93-100[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 32.
|
Dworkin-Rastl, E.,
Kelly, D. B.,
and Dworkin, M. B.
(1986)
J. Embryol. Exp. Morph.
91,
153-168[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 33.
|
Laemmli, U. K.
(1970)
Nature
227,
680-685[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 34.
|
Basler, K.,
Edlund, T.,
Jessell, T. M.,
and Yamada, T.
(1993)
Cell
73,
687-702[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 35.
|
Piccolo, S.,
Agius, E.,
Leyns, L.,
Bhattacharyya, S.,
Grunz, H.,
Bouwmeester, T.,
and De Robertis, E. M.
(1999)
Nature
397,
707-710[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 36.
|
Dale, L.,
Matthews, G.,
and Colman, A.
(1993)
EMBO J.
12,
4471-4480[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 37.
|
Thomsen, G. H.,
and Melton, D. A.
(1993)
Cell
74,
433-441[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 38.
|
Jones, C. M.,
Armes, N.,
and Smith, J. C.
(1996)
Curr. Biol.
6,
1468-1475[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 39.
|
Constam, D. B.,
and Robertson, E. J.
(1999)
J. Cell Biol.
144,
139-149[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 40.
|
Gray, A. M.,
and Mason, A. J.
(1990)
Science
247,
1328-1330[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 41.
|
Hawley, S. H. B.,
Wunnenberg-Stapleton, K.,
Hashimoto, C.,
Laurent, M. N.,
Watabe, T.,
Blumberg, B. W.,
and Cho, K. W.
(1995)
Genes Dev.
9,
2923-2935[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 42.
|
Lopez, A. R.,
Cook, J.,
Deininger, P. L.,
and Derynck, R.
(1992)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
12,
1674-1679[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 43.
|
Nishimatsu, S.,
and Thomsen, G. H.
(1998)
Mech. Dev.
74,
75-88[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 44.
|
Osada, S. I.,
and Wright, C. V.
(1999)
Development
126,
3229-3240[Abstract]
|
| 45.
|
Wittbrodt, J.,
and Rosa, F. M.
(1994)
Genes Dev.
8,
1448-1462[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 46.
|
Harland, R.
(1994)
Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev.
4,
543-549[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 47.
|
Mason, A.
(1994)
Mol. Endo.
8,
325-332[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 48.
|
Daopin, L.,
Piez, K. A.,
Ogawa, Y.,
and Davies, D. R.
(1992)
Science
257,
369-373[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 49.
|
Guex, N.,
and Peitsch, M. C.
(1997)
Electrophoresis
18,
2714-2723[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 50.
|
Peitsch, M. C.
(1996)
Biochem. Soc. Trans.
24,
274-279[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 51.
|
Peitsch, M. C.
(1995)
Bio/Technology
13,
658-660[CrossRef]
|
| 52.
|
Burmester, J. K.,
Qian, S. W.,
Ohlsen, D.,
Phan, S.,
Sporn, M. B.,
and Roberts, A. B.
(1998)
Growth Factors
15,
231-242[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 53.
|
Qian, S. W.,
Burmester, J. K.,
Tsang, M. L.-S.,
Weatherbee, J. A.,
Hinck, A. P.,
Ohlsen, D. J.,
Sporn, M. B.,
and Roberts, A. B.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
30656-30662[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
Copyright © 2000 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

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

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. Yokota, M. Kofron, M. Zuck, D. W. Houston, H. Isaacs, M. Asashima, C. C. Wylie, and J. Heasman
A novel role for a nodal-related protein; Xnr3 regulates convergent extension movements via the FGF receptor
Development,
May 15, 2003;
130(10):
2199 - 2212.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 2000 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
|