![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 275, Issue 28, 21453-21459, July 14, 2000
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From the Program for Developmental Biology, Stahlman Cardiovascular
Research Laboratories, Division of Cardiovascular Medicine, Vanderbilt
University, Nashville, Tennessee 37232-6300
Received for publication, January 24, 2000, and in revised form, February 23, 2000
Disruption of the CMF1 function in anterior
mesoderm inhibits cardiac myogenesis in avian embryos. In the present
study, we show that CMF1 is a member of an emerging family of proteins
that includes centromeric protein-F, mitosin, and LEK1. These proteins are characterized by their large size (350 kDa), dynamic subcellular distribution, and potential functions in cell division and
differentiation. The current data suggest that CMF1 is a unique member
of this family by virtue of its restricted protein expression and
variant subcellular distribution. Immunochemical analysis demonstrates that CMF1 protein is expressed in cardiogenic cells prior to the activation of cardiac structural gene products. In addition, we show
that expression of CMF1 is not dependent on the bone morphogenetic protein (BMP) signaling pathway during development. Still, CMF1 cannot
direct cardiomyogenesis in the absence of such factors as NKX-2.5.
Taken with our previous data, this study suggests that CMF1 is a
BMP-independent component of the cardiomyogenic pathway.
Cardiac progenitors are some of the first cells to gastrulate in
developing chicken embryo (2). These cells are specified to the
cardiogenic cell lineage significantly in advance of the formation of a
definitive heart tube (3, 4). Studies investigating the expression of
contractile proteins indicate that differentiation of cardiac myocytes
occurs after approximately 25 h of development and progresses from
anterior to posterior within the cardiogenic mesoderm (5-8). In recent
years, several genes encoding transcription factors have been
implicated in the restriction of anterior mesodermal cells to the
cardiogenic cell lineage. For example, the NKX, MEF2, GATA, and HAND
gene families clearly play important and interacting roles in the
regulation of vertebrate cardiac myogenesis (9, 10). The expression of
regulators such as NKX-2.5 is dependent upon an interaction of
cardiogenic mesoderm with endoderm that is mediated by
BMP1 signaling (11, 12).
Although none of these genes regulates cardiogenic commitment and/or
differentiation individually, the deletion of any one of them leads to
a deviation in the cardiomyogenic differentiation pathway. The specific
cellular mechanisms that are regulated by these factors remain unresolved.
Our laboratory has recently identified a novel transcript, CMF1, that
is expressed at high levels in early embryonic hearts (1). Our previous
studies have shown that retrovirally mediated disruption of CMF1
function inhibits the expression and/or accumulation of sarcomeric
myosin heavy chain proteins (MHC) in differentiating cardiac myocytes.
These data suggest that CMF1 may play a regulative role in the
commitment and/or differentiation of cardiogenic cells.
Preliminary sequence analysis has determined that CMF1 is related to a
recently identified group of proteins, CENP-F, mitosin, and LEK1, which
are expressed in a wide variety of cell types and have a generally
conserved structure and size (13-15). The predicted secondary
structure is also conserved among these proteins consisting mainly of
Immunocytological analyses of CENP-F and mitosin suggest that these
proteins are expressed in all dividing cells in vitro and
that they have a dynamic subcellular localization (13, 14). During S
phase, these proteins become localized to the nucleus. During mitosis
they associate with the kinetochore, and subsequently with the spindle
apparatus and midbody, and are rapidly degraded after mitosis. This
intriguing expression pattern suggested that CENP-F and mitosin could
be involved in the regulation of mitosis. Initial functional analyses
support this hypothesis, because a dominant-negative construct of
mitosin inhibits the G2/M transition of the cell cycle
(14).
Although there is an obvious similarity of predicted structure
among these proteins, preliminary studies suggest a heterogeneity of
function within this family. Although murine LEK1 is more than 80%
homologous to human CENP-F and mitosin, it has a vastly different pattern of expression and subcellular localization. LEK1 is
ubiquitously expressed in early mouse development, but there is a
general cessation of expression throughout the embryo as cell division
subsides (15). Although LEK1 is present in all cardiac myocytes early in heart development, its expression sharply declines after 4 days
postpartum when mitosis in myogenic cells ceases (15-17). LEK1 is not
expressed in adult proliferative cells such as skin and intestinal
epithelia. Additionally, the subcellular distribution of LEK1 varies
from that of CENP-F and mitosin, as LEK1 is present in the nucleus of
interphase cells. During mitosis, it is not detected in the kinetochore
and midbody but is detected in the cytosol. Preliminary functional
analysis indicates that LEK1 influences proliferation and skeletal
muscle differentiation (15).
The present study suggests that CMF1 is a member of the
CENP-F/mitosin/LEK1 family. Despite the significant similarities among this group of proteins, CMF1 is unique in that its expression is highly
restricted and its subcellular localization is vastly different from
other family members. In addition, we show that CMF1 RNA is expressed
before cardiogenic differentiation. The current data also demonstrate
that CMF1 protein is present in cardiogenic cells before the appearance
of structural proteins, and its expression precedes that of muscle
structural proteins along the anteroposterior axis of the
differentiating heart. Interestingly, early CMF1 expression is not
dependent upon BMP signaling. Taken with our previous data indicating
that CMF1 is an essential regulator of cardiac myogenesis (1), our
current data reveal an essential BMP-independent component in the
regulation of cardiac myogenesis.
Animals and Tissues--
White Leghorn chicken eggs were
purchased from Truslow Farms, Charlestown, MD. Eggs were maintained
under high humidity in a 37 °C incubator. Embryos were staged
according to Hamburger and Hamilton (18), and all tissues were
dissected and processed immediately postmortem. For analysis of BMP
signaling, stage 4 cardiogenic mesendoderm was isolated using standard
techniques (19) and cultured in the presence or absence of the BMP
antagonist, noggin (12). Medium conditioned by noggin-producing or
nontransfected COS cells (kindly provided by Dr. Tom Schultheiss,
Harvard University) was added to standard culture medium (50% v/v).
Cultures were maintained for 24 h and processed for RT-PCR analysis.
Cloning and Sequence Analysis of CMF1--
During the course of
the current study, we discovered that the 5'-most clone of CMF1
contained an inverted cDNA fused to CMF1 sequences. Therefore, we
recloned the 5' sequences of CMF1 using as a probe pCMF1.2.11.b.1 from
an embryonic chick heart library (1). Multiple overlapping clones were
identified, and both strands of all cDNA clones were sequenced and
analyzed using the MacVector and Expasy programs.
Immunohistochemical Analyses--
Rabbit antisera were
prepared against selected CMF1 peptide sequences (SGHILDSVKELRSSTPSKYN;
Biosynthesis). Antibodies were affinity purified with the immunopeptide
using standard techniques (20) and applied in Western blot and
immunofluorescence analyses. For Western blot analysis, tissues were
isolated from stage 6, day 11 embryos, sonicated in protein sample
buffer (50 mM Tris-Cl, pH 6.8, 2% SDS, 10% glycerol, 100 mM dithiothreitol, 0.1% bromphenol blue) and immediately
loaded on a 6% SDS-polyacrylamide gel after boiling. After
electrophoresis, proteins were transferred to an Immobilon membrane
(Millipore) using standard protocols. Membranes were blocked in 2.5%
nonfat dry milk, 1% bovine serum albumin, 1× TBST for 1 h at
room temperature and incubated with the affinity-purified anti-CMF1
antibody overnight at 4 °C. After extensive washing with 1× TBST,
the membrane was incubated with goat anti-rabbit alkaline phosphatase
(Sigma) for 1 h and reacted with nitro blue tetrazolium/5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl phosphate (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) from 1-5 min.
For immunofluorescence analysis, chicken and quail embryonic tissues
were isolated and immediately placed in O.C.T. compound (Sakura) and
frozen in isopentane/liquid nitrogen. Frozen tissues were cryosectioned
using a Jung CM 3000 cryostat (Leica) in 8-10 micron increments and
collected on gelatin coated slides. Slides were fixed with 70%
methanol for 10 min and treated with 0.25% Triton X-100 for 10 min.
Nonspecific binding was blocked using 2% bovine serum albumin for
1 h at room temperature or overnight at 4 °C. Monoclonal
antibodies MF20 and QH1 were incubated at room temperature for 1 h. Affinity-purified anti-CMF1 was incubated overnight at 4 °C.
After extensive washing in 1× phosphate-buffered saline, donkey
anti-rabbit IgG or donkey anti-mouse IgG conjugated to Cy2 or Cy3
(Jackson Laboratory) was incubated at room temperature for 1 h and
washed extensively in phosphate-buffered saline. These samples were
then visualized using epifluorescence or laser confocal microscopy.
Peptide competitions (100 molar excess of immune peptide) were
performed for Western blot and immunofluorescence analyses to ensure
antibody specificity. This treatment completely abolished antibody
binding in both assays (see Fig. 4A as an example).
RT-PCR--
Staged embryonic tissues and cultured cardiogenic
mesendoderm were collected, and total RNA was isolated using the Trizol reagent per the manufacturer's instructions (Life Technologies, Inc.).
The Access RT-PCR system (Promega) was used to amplify cDNAs from
100 ng of total RNA. Primers used to amplify CMF1 are 5'-GAGTTGAATCTGAAGGCACAACC-3' and 5'-CACCTTTTCTTGCAGGACCTC-3'. vMHC primers are 5'-GCTACAAACACCAAGCAGAG-3' and
5'-TCTTATATCTGGGAGCCAGG-3'. GAPDH primers are
5'-GGGTCTTATGACCACTGTCC-3' and 5'-GTAAGCTTCCCATTCAGCTCAG-3'. NKX-2.5
was amplified using primers designed by Schultheiss et al. (11). Conditions for amplification were: 48 °C, 45 min; [94 °C, 0.5 min; 53 °C, 0.75 min; 68 °C, 1 min] × 25; and
68 °C, 7 min. Negative controls including no template and no reverse transcriptase did not produce an amplification product under these conditions. Primer concentration, RNA input, and cycle numbers were
optimized to ensure amplification in the linear range.
Southern Blot Analysis--
Chicken genomic DNA was digested
overnight at 37 °C with each of the following restriction
endonucleases: EcoRI, HindIII, BamHI,
and PstI (Promega). This DNA was then electrophoresed in an
0.8% agarose gel and visualized with ethidium bromide. DNA was then
transferred via capillary action to a nylon membrane and
UV-cross-linked (Stratagene). The blot was prehybridized in RapidHyb
(Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) for 1 h at 65 °C and hybridized overnight with radiolabeled chicken pCMF1.29a.1 probe containing sequences for the carboxyl terminus of CMF1 at 65 °C. Blots were washed three times in 2× SSC, 0.1% SDS for 1 h at 65 °C. When corresponding murine LEK1 probe (pLEK1.29a.1) was used, hybridization was performed at 55 °C, and the blot was washed three times in 2×
SSC; 0.1% SDS for 1 h at 60 °C. After the specified washes, blots
were exposed using Biomax intensifying screen and Biomax film (Kodak).
Avian CMF1 Is Related to the Mammalian Proteins CENP-F, Mitosin,
and LEK1--
Sequence analyses indicate that CMF1 is related to an
emerging family of nucleoproteins that include CENP-F (13), mitosin (14), and LEK1 (15). The predicted chicken CMF1 protein is 65% similar
to human CENP-F/mitosin and mouse LEK1. An additional unifying
characteristic of these proteins is that approximately 40% of their
amino acid composition is leucine, glutamic acid, or lysine. These
proteins are also predicted to have a similar secondary structure that
is composed mainly of
Similarities in amino acid composition and conservation of putative
regulatory domains raise the possibility that CMF1, LEK1, CENP-F, and
mitosin are related members of a gene family. To determine whether
related sequences were present in the avian genome, chicken genomic
blots were probed with a well conserved 3' region of CMF1 and LEK1
cDNAs. Hybridizations with the CMF1 probe showed a single band at
both high and low stringencies (Fig.
2A). However, when LEK1 probe
was utilized, additional bands other than the CMF1-specific hybridization were observed (Fig. 2b). These results, along
with data presented below, suggest that CMF1 may not be the only avian member of this emerging gene family.
CMF1 Has a Tissue-restricted Protein Expression--
LEK1, CENP-F,
and mitosin are observed in a wide variety of cells. Nevertheless, only
the expression pattern and subcellular localization of LEK1 in embryos
have been reported (15). To better understand CMF1 function during
embryogenesis, we characterized the expression of CMF1 protein. Western
blot analyses using hearts of stage 15 chicken embryos show that CMF1
is significantly larger than the 200-kDa MHC protein (Fig.
3A, lanes 1 and
3, respectively). The predicted size of CENP-F/mitosin/LEK1
proteins is approximately 350 kDa. Competition analysis with the immune
peptide shows that the band detected in the Western blots is specific
to this CMF1 antibody (Fig. 3A, lane 2). Furthermore, the
expression of various CMF1 constructs in bacterial or eukaryotic cells
demonstrates that this antibody specifically detects a product derived
from the CMF1 transcript (data not shown).
To determine the spatial distribution of CMF1 protein, we analyzed
various regions of stage 15 chicken embryos. Western blot analyses show
that although CMF1 protein is expressed at high levels in the heart, it
is not detected in the anterior or posterior regions of early chicken
embryos (Fig. 3B). Immunofluorescence analyses were
performed to characterize the cellular distribution of CMF1 expression
in developing embryos. A transverse section of a stage 13 chicken
thorax demonstrates that CMF1 protein expression is restricted to the
heart (Fig. 3C). Phase and immunofluorescence analyses of a
day 7 chicken heart demonstrate that CMF1 expression is absent in
epicardial cells but is present in myogenic cells (Fig.
4, A and B). Double
immunostaining with the CMF1 antibody and the molecular marker of quail
endothelial cells QH1, demonstrates that CMF1 is absent from
endothelial cells within developing vessels and the endocardium (Fig.
4C). Cardiac expression of CMF1 is detected throughout
embryogenesis; however, it significantly decreases after day 7 (Fig.
5 and data not shown). These data suggest
that, unlike CENP-F, mitosin, and LEK1, with their broad expression patterns, CMF1 protein expression is confined to myocytes.
CMF1 Is Detected in the Cytoplasm of Differentiated
Myocytes--
Although disruption of CMF1 function inhibits the
expression and/or accumulation of cardiac structural proteins, the
cellular mechanisms regulated by this novel protein remain unknown.
However, the homology of CMF1 to CENP-F/mitosin/LEK1 and the presence
of a carboxyl-terminal bipartite NLS that is conserved among members of
this family suggest that CMF1 has the potential to perform its function
within the nucleus. The subcellular localization of CMF1 within
embryonic cardiac myocytes was analyzed using laser scanning confocal
microscopy. For this purpose, the distribution of CMF1 was compared
with known markers of nuclear and cytoplasmic compartments. As seen in
Fig. 4D, depicting the atrioventricular junction of a stage
15 chicken heart, CMF1 is detected in the cytoplasm of developing
cardiac myocytes. In these experiments, the nuclear stain YoPro
(Molecular Probes) was utilized to visualize the nucleus. Cytoplasmic
localization was maintained in differentiated myocytes. CMF1 did not
colocalize with any marker of thick, thin, or intermediate filaments or
any other marker of cytoplasmic organelles (data not shown). The
cytoplasmic localization of CMF1 differs significantly from the
subcellular distribution observed for CENP-F, mitosin, and LEK1 that
are present in the nucleus.
CMF1 Is Expressed prior to the Initiation of Expression of
Structural Muscle Genes--
Disruption of MHC expression as a result
of the retrovirally mediated inhibition of CMF1 function in cardiogenic
mesoderm indicated that this novel protein had a regulative role in
cardiac myogenesis (1). If CMF1 were to have a regulative role in the initial steps of heart development, its mRNA and/or protein
products should be expressed prior to the initiation of expression of
structural muscle genes. To characterize the temporal expression
pattern of CMF1 mRNA during early chicken embryogenesis, we
performed RT-PCR analyses using RNAs between stages 4 and 15. In these
experiments, the expression of CMF1 is detected as early as stages 4-5
(Fig. 5). During this time frame, progenitor cells are committed to the
cardiac myogenic lineage but have not differentiated into myocytes. The
onset of cardiac myogenic differentiation is marked by the expression
of structural genes such as vMHC (6, 8, 11). A comparison of
CMF1 and vMHC reactions in Fig. 5 shows that the expression of CMF1 is
detected prior to the initiation of vMHC expression. The consistent
levels of GAPDH demonstrate that equivalent amounts of RNA were
utilized in the embryonic stages analyzed. It should be noted that the
CMF1 transcript can be detected by RT-PCR in non-cardiogenic tissues
(data not shown). Therefore, analysis of CMF1 protein expression was
conducted during these early stages.
We examined the expression pattern of CMF1 protein with reference to
cardiac myogenesis, using the expression of sarcomeric MHC as a marker
of differentiation. Cardiogenic mesoderm or hearts from stages 6-14
and day 11 embryos were isolated and processed for Western blot
analysis. As seen in Fig. 5B, CMF1 is first detected in
stage 6 cardiogenic mesoderm and is maintained during the early stages
of heart development. The level of CMF1 expression falls after the
first week of development (Fig. 5B). In contrast, expression of sarcomeric MHC is first detected at stage 10 and is maintained throughout embryogenesis. It should be noted that Han et al.
(7) detected MHC protein expression in a minor group of cells flanking the anterior intestinal portal at stage 8 using immunofluorescence analysis. Our Western analyses included the entire cardiogenic field
and did not detect the expression of MHC in this group of cells. The
present data show that CMF1 protein is detected prior to cardiomyogenic
differentiation. To determine the cellular distribution of CMF1 protein
prior to the differentiation of cardiac myocytes, we conducted
immunofluorescence analysis of stage 5 embryos. As seen in Fig.
5C, CMF1 protein is observed at high levels in the anterior
mesoderm (panels a-c); however, it is absent from posterior mesoderm (panels d-f). CMF1 protein distribution is broad
within the anterior mesoderm, extending from midline laterally at this stage. At this early embryonic stage, we cannot determine whether all
CMF1-positive cells are cardiac precursors. The implications of these
observations are discussed below (see "Discussion").
CMF1 Protein Expression Precedes the Appearance of Sarcomeric MHC
Protein in the Heart along the Anteroposterior Axis--
CMF1 protein
is detected in the mesoderm prior to the differentiation of cardiac
myocytes. However, the previous data do not determine the relationship
of CMF1 protein expression relative to the expression of structural
proteins in the heart. To determine the pattern of CMF1 protein
expression during the initial phases of cardiac myogenic
differentiation, stage 10 hearts were serial sectioned and reacted with
anti-CMF1 and anti-MHC for double immunofluorescence analysis. At this
point in development, lateral anterior splanchnic mesoderm has fused to
form a single heart tube. Posteriorly, the paired heart tubes have not
yet fused (diagrammed in Fig.
6A). Cardiomyogenesis,
including the expression of muscle-specific genes and their protein
products, proceeds along the anteroposterior axis within cardiogenic
mesoderm (5, 7, 8, 21). An analysis of serial sections with MF20
reveals the anteroposterior wave of myogenic differentiation from the
fused heart tube (Fig. 6B, d) into the unfused, paired heart
tubes (Fig. 6B, h, and at minor levels in 6B, l).
The posterior regions of the unfused tubes are not positive for MHC
(Fig. 6B, p). Later, all myogenic cells of the heart tubes
express muscle-specific structural proteins. Interestingly, examination
of the same sections demonstrated that CMF1 protein is expressed
throughout the fused and unfused heart tubes (Fig. 6B,c, g,
k, and o). Taken together, these data demonstrate that
CMF1 protein expression precedes that of muscle-specific protein
expression in a temporal and spatial manner.
The Early Embryonic Expression of CMF1 Is Independent of the BMP
Signaling Pathway--
Our previous data demonstrated that disruption
of CMF1 function blocks cardiomyogenic differentiation (1). Schultheiss et al. (11) have shown that NKX-2.5 expression, which is
critical for the differentiation of avian cardiac myocytes, is
dependent upon BMP signaling. To determine whether CMF1 expression is
regulated in the same BMP-dependent manner as NKX-2.5,
cardiogenic mesoderm and associated endoderm were isolated, cultured in
the presence or absence of the BMP antagonist noggin (12), and assayed
for cardiomyogenic differentiation using RT-PCR and immunochemical analyses. RT-PCR analyses showed that control cultures expressed high
levels of NKX-2.5, CMF1, and vMHC (Fig.
7A). As previously reported by
Schultheiss et al. (11), noggin blocked the expression of
NKX-2.5 and the downstream gene product vMHC in the anterior mesendoderm. Interestingly, noggin treatment did not block the expression of CMF1 in these same cultures when assayed by RT-PCR (Fig.
7A). The sensitivity of RT-PCR assays raises the possibility that the CMF1 RNA detected after noggin treatment is derived from a
minor non-cardiogenic component of the embryonic explants. To address
the possibility that only non-cardiogenic cells express CMF1 following
noggin treatment, we analyzed cardiogenic mesendoderm explants at the
cellular level using the CMF1 antibody (Fig. 7B). Stage 4 anterior mesendoderm cultured for 24 h were reacted with anti-MHC
and anti-CMF1. As seen in Fig. 7B, a-d, anti-CMF1 and anti-MHC staining was colocalized in multilayered structures in control, nontreated cultures. As previously noted (19, 22, 23),
differentiating cardiac myocytes from intact anterior mesoderm tend to
form multilayered vesicles, whereas endoderm forms a flattened epithelial sheet. When stage 4 mesendoderm was grown in the presence of
noggin, cultures remained positive for anti-CMF1, but anti-MHC staining
was greatly reduced (Fig. 7B, e-h). A similar pattern was
observed in control and experimental cultures of stage 6 mesendoderm, although more MF20-positive cells were observed (data not shown). There
are many non-CMF1-positive cells present in both the control and
experimental cultures. These data suggest that BMP signaling is not
required for CMF1 RNA and protein expression. In addition, these
immunochemical analyses suggest that cells expressing CMF1 following
noggin treatment are not likely to be exclusively non-cardiogenic cells, as CMF1 colocalizes with MHC-expressing cells in control cultures. These experiments also show that CMF1 is not sufficient to
activate NKX-2.5 expression and cannot direct cardiogenic
differentiation in the absence of factors such as NKX-2.5.
CMF1 Is a Member of an Emerging Family of Proteins--
CMF1 is
related to a recently identified family of proteins characterized by
their large size and by an abundance of CMF1 Is a Novel Member within the CENP-F/Mitosin/LEK1
Family--
Sequence conservation and structural homology predict that
CMF1 is related to CENP-F, mitosin, and LEK1. Nevertheless, CMF1 appears to be distinct from other members of this emerging family. First, the protein expression pattern of CMF1 in the embryo is different from that of the mammalian proteins. Murine LEK1, which is
more closely related to CENP-F and mitosin, is ubiquitously expressed
in the early mouse embryo (15). Although analysis of CENP-F and mitosin
in developing embryos has not been reported, they are both expressed in
many non-myogenic cell lines. In contrast, our current data show that
CMF1 protein has a restricted expression pattern. While an
immunologically related protein is expressed in skeletal muscle
cells,2 it is clear that CMF1 does not have the broad
pattern of protein expression observed for LEK1, CENP-F, and mitosin.
It should be noted that RT-PCR analysis has detected CMF1 transcripts
in non-cardiogenic tissues (data not shown). Nevertheless, the overall
distribution of CMF1 protein varies significantly from that of the
related mammalian proteins.
Another major difference between CMF1 and other family members is in
the the subcellular distribution. A bipartite nuclear localization
domain is present in the carboxyl terminus of all four proteins. This
bipartite NLS has been shown to be functional in all three mammalian
proteins, and transfection analyses with the isolated CMF1 NLS also
demonstrate that it directs the efficient transport of a reporter
protein to the nucleus.2 However, in this report we show
that CMF1 localizes in the cytoplasm of differentiated myocytes even at
the earliest stages of cardiac differentiation (Fig. 6). This
cytoplasmic distribution raises the possibility that the NLS is not
functional in the context of additional sequences and that CMF1 is a
non-nuclear member of this family. It is known that mitosin can form
dimers (25). It is possible that CMF1 may interact with other members
of this family to regulate nuclear/cytoplasmic localization. Finally, different regions of CMF1 may have distinct subcellular localizations. We have evidence that LEK1 is proteolytically cleaved and that the
NLS-containing C-terminal region is translocated to the
nucleus.3 It is possible that
CMF1 undergoes a similar proteolytic cleavage and that its carboxyl
terminus, containing the NLS domain, localizes to the nucleus. CMF1
antibodies directed against the carboxyl-terminal domain will have to
be developed to test this hypothesis.
Another difference from CENP-F and mitosin is that the expression of
CMF1 is not cell cycle-regulated. CENP-F and mitosin accumulate at the
end of G1 phase and are quickly degraded at the end of
telophase (13, 14). In contrast, CMF1 appears to have a cell
cycle-independent expression pattern in vivo. In the avian
heart, all myocytes are initially mitotically active, whereas later
only subepicardial myocytes remain proliferative (Refs. 26 and 27 and
footnote 4). Myocytes located in the
trabeculae of the ventricle have exited the cell cycle and are
essentially in G0. CMF1 protein is present in all of these
cells, and thus mitotic and non-mitotic myogenic cells contain CMF1
protein (Fig. 4D). Although the subcellular distribution of
LEK1 varies from that of CMF1, its expression is also cell-cycle
independent (15). These data suggest a dynamic diversity in the
localization and accumulation of these proteins during the mitotic cycle.
Finally, the functions of these proteins appear to vary. Initial
functional analyses indicate that CENP-F, mitosin, and LEK1 regulate or
are fundamentally involved in the general process of cell division. The
introduction of dominant-negative forms of these three proteins into
cell lines alters the pattern of mitosis, generally slowing down or
inhibiting the process (14, 15). Their potential effects on cell
differentiation are less well understood. The disruption of CMF1
function inhibits MHC expression in differentiating cardiac mesoderm
(1), suggesting that CMF1 may play a role in the regulation of
cardiomyogenic differentiation. Although the present data detect the
central portion of CMF1 only in the cytoplasm, and mechanisms for
transient translocation of the C terminus to the nucleus are proposed
above, CMF1 may act in the cytoplasm to influence muscle protein
expression. This type of regulatory mechanism has also been proposed
for the intermediate filament protein desmin (28, 29). Experiments supporting this alternative show that the abrogation of desmin in
murine embryonic stem cells inhibits the expression of muscle markers
such as MyoD, myogenin, and MHC. Furthermore, non-nuclear factors such
as AKAP75 have been shown to significantly influence transcriptional
activation by modulating type II protein kinase A availability (30). It
is possible that CMF1 can regulate the availability of factors required
for differentiation via their interaction with leucine zipper domains.
The pattern of CMF1 expression and the diversity in its subcellular
localization suggest a restricted function in the developing embryo.
Still, the work of others and our own work suggest that CENP-F/mitosin/LEK1 play an essential role in mitosis in a multitude of
cell types derived from all three germ layers (13-15). Although CMF1
and related protein are expressed in developing striated muscle,
CENP-F, mitosin, and LEK1 are broadly expressed. Thus, one would
suspect that other proteins of this class are expressed in other cells
of the avian embryo. Indeed, chicken genomic blots probed with the
conserved 3' coding sequences of CMF1 and LEK1 suggest that other
related genes are present in the avian genome (Fig. 2 and data not
shown). It is possible that members of this gene family have different
patterns of expression and interact alone or together to participate
and/or regulate the mitotic process in diverse developmental settings.
The data presented in this report, in conjunction with the previously
reported effects of CMF1 on heart development and the effects of the
mammalian proteins on cell proliferation, suggest that this novel
protein family could provide developing cells with a mechanism that
interfaces cell division and differentiation.
CMF1 Is Expressed prior to the Activation of Cardiac Structural
Genes--
Our previous results show that disruption of CMF1 function
blocks the expression and/or accumulation of sarcomeric MHCs (1). If
CMF1 were to play a regulative role in differentiation, it should be
expressed prior to the onset of structural gene activation. The current
data show that CMF1 mRNA and protein are expressed prior to
sarcomeric MHC. Western blot analysis demonstrates that CMF1 is present
at stage 6 (Fig. 5). Immunohistochemical analyses of stage 5 embryos
show that CMF1 protein is detected at high levels in anterior
mesodermal cells, but it is absent from posterior mesodermal cells.
CMF1 expression at this stage extends from midline to the lateral
portions of the anterior mesoderm. Although later CMF1-positive cells
derived from anterior lateral mesoderm are restricted to cardiac
myocytes, the current data cannot determine whether all CMF1-positive
cells at stage 5 are cardiac precursors. It is possible that CMF1
protein expression is not confined to cardiac precursors at this stage.
Indeed, it is well documented that other known regulators of cardiac
development may have broader expression patterns early in
embryogenesis, whereas later they become highly enriched or restricted
to cardiac cells (11, 12, 31-33). A second possibility is that
cardiomyogenic cells are widely distributed in anterior mesoderm at
this stage of development. Previous studies have shown that cardiac
precursors move from midline to assume positions in lateral splanchnic
mesoderm (2). Ehrman and Yutzey (21) have recently reported that
cardiogenic cells migrate to the lateral most portion of anterior
mesoderm, whereas other studies have suggested that these progenitors
are more medially positioned (22, 34, 35). Indeed, when medial or
lateral anterior mesoderm is cultured in vitro, cardiac
myocytes readily differentiate from cell populations (compare fatemaps, 22 (Fig. 1) and 21 (Fig. 7)). Thus, it may be that cardiac progenitors are more widely distributed than previously thought and/or that progenitors are still migratory within developing mesoderm at this
time. Our data cannot distinguish between the two possibilities stated above.
Although the precise location of cardiac progenitors and molecular
regulation of commitment remain unresolved, the stage 10 heart can be
used to directly assay that factors are expressed prior to the
activation and/or accumulation of structural proteins. Previous studies
have shown that myogenic differentiation as defined by the expression
of structural gene products occurs as a wave along the anteroposterior
axis (5, 7, 8, 21). Clearly, NKX-2.5, GATA, and HAND gene products are
expressed in the heart tube prior to the activation of structural
genes. Our current data show that the wave of CMF1 protein expression
precedes differentiation of cardiogenic mesoderm along the
anteroposterior axis of the developing heart. These data along with
previous studies on the disruption of CMF1 function suggest that this
protein plays a role in the regulation of cardiac myogenesis.
CMF1 as a BMP-independent Regulator of Cardiac Muscle
Development--
Our current data show that the expression of CMF1
protein precedes the activation of cardiac structural gene products.
Previous data demonstrate that disruption of CMF1 function inhibits the expression of structural muscle proteins such as MHC, and thus CMF1
appears to be necessary for cardiac differentiation. These data along
with the current study showing the restricted expression of the CMF1
protein in myogenic cells suggest that CMF1 plays a role in the
regulation of cardiomyogenic differentiation. The activation of cardiac
differentiation is regulated by the interaction between anterior
mesoderm and endoderm (11, 36). Expression of NKX-2.5, which is thought
to be mediated by endodermally derived BMPs, is essential for the
activation of downstream structural genes such as vMHC and
the differentiation of cardiac myocytes (11, 12). The current study
shows the continued expression of CMF1 in the presence of the BMP
antagonist noggin and suggests that CMF1 expression is not dependent
upon the BMP signaling pathway. Still, expression of NKX-2.5 and vMHC
was inhibited in these same cultures (Fig. 7). The absence of
muscle-specific gene expression in noggin-treated cultures indicates
that CMF1 expression in the absence of factors such as NKX-2.5 is not
sufficient to activate terminal differentiation of cardiogenic
mesoderm. Taken together, these data suggest that CMF1 may act as a
critical BMP-independent component in the regulation of vertebrate
cardiac myogenesis.
We thank our laboratory co-workers for their
helpful comments. We are especially grateful to Brian Robertson for
assistance with the analysis of CMF1 expression in the early heart.
*
This work was supported by National Institutes of Health
(NIH) Grants HL37617 (to D. B.) and HL09916 (to R. L. G.) and NIH Training Grant HL07723 (to L. P-P.). The Vanderbilt University Medical
College Cell Imaging Resource is supported by National Institutes of
Health Grants CA68485 and DK20593.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.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, March 15, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M000518200
2
E. Dees, L. M. Pabón-Peña, R. L. Goodwin, and D. Bader, submitted for publication.
3
L. M. Pabón-Peña, R. L. Goodwin, L. J. Cise, and D. Bader, manuscript in preparation.
4
R. Thompson, personal communication.
The abbreviations used are:
BMP, bone
morphogenetic protein;
CENP, centromeric protein;
Rb, retinoblastoma;
NLS, nuclear localization signal;
RT-PCR, reverse
transcription-polymerase chain reaction;
MHC, myosin heavy chain;
vMHC, ventricular MHC;
GAPDH, glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase.
Analysis of CMF1 Reveals a Bone Morphogenetic
Protein-independent Component of the Cardiomyogenic Pathway*
![]()
ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-helices separated by loops with a globular carboxyl terminus. HeLa
cell-derived CENP-F and mitosin are identical except for a perfect
repeat in the 5'-end of CENP-F and a slightly longer 3'-end in mitosin
(13, 14).
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-helices separated by loops and a globular
carboxyl terminus. In addition, this novel protein family has a
conserved collinear array of potential regulatory domains. All domains
depicted in Fig. 1 are conserved in all
proteins. Similar to CENP-F, mitosin, and LEK1, CMF1 contains multiple
putative leucine zippers located throughout its length. A
carboxyl-terminal bipartite nuclear localization signal (NLS) that has
been shown to be functional in the mammalian proteins is also present
within CMF1. The isolated NLS of CMF1 can direct the efficient nuclear transport of a reporter
protein.2 Adjacent to the
NLS, all four proteins have an atypical Rb binding site. Ligand
screening and fusion protein-binding assays have shown that mitosin can
interact with Rb using this atypical domain (14).

View larger version (19K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
CMF1 is a member of the CENP-F/mitosin/LEK1
protein family. The positions of conserved protein domains are
illustrated.

View larger version (85K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Southern blot analysis of chicken genomic DNA
with CMF1 and LEK1. Chicken genomic DNA was cut with the denoted
restriction endonucleases and blotted using standard methods with
chicken CMF1 (A) and mouse LEK1 (B). Probing with
CMF1 at high stringency reveals a single hybridizing band. When the
same blot was reprobed with LEK1 at lower stringency (see
"Experimental Procedures"), multiple hybridizing bands were
detected. With the exception of the CMF1-positive band, these
additional bands did not hybridize with LEK1.

View larger version (32K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Analysis of the CMF1 protein in developing
chicken embryos. A, Western blot analysis was preformed
on stage 15 chicken embryonic hearts. Lane 1 shows the
protein product detected by the affinity-purified CMF1 polyclonal
antibody (Ab). Lane 2 shows that anti-CMF1
antibody activity is abolished after competition with the immune
peptide (100 molar excess). In lane 3, the same protein
extract was probed with MF20, showing the relative migration of
sarcomeric MHC. B, Western blot analysis detects the
cardiac-specific expression of CMF1 protein in stage 15 chicken
embryos. Lanes 1 and 2 show the anterior and
posterior regions, respectively, of the embryo. Lane 3 shows
the CMF1 protein detected in the heart. C, a transverse
section of a stage 13 chicken thorax shows the heart-specific
expression of CMF1. Phase (a) and fluorescence
(b) images demonstrate that CMF1 protein is expressed at
high levels in the heart tube.

View larger version (84K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Characterization of CMF1 protein expression
within the heart. A section through the day 7 embryonic heart
(phase (A) and anti-CMF1 immunofluorescence (B))
demonstrates that CMF1 expression is present in the myocardium
(m) and not the epicardium (ep). In panel
C, double immunolabeling with QH1 antibody (green) and
anti-CMF1 (red) indicates that CMF1 protein is not expressed
in the endocardium (e) or vascular endothelium
(ve). Laser scanning confocal microscopy was performed on
sections of the atrioventricular junction of the stage 15 chicken heart
(D). CMF1 expression is depicted in red with
YoPro (green) utilized to visualize the nucleus.

View larger version (55K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Analysis of CMF1 expression during early
cardiogenesis. A, RT-PCR was performed using RNAs from
stage 4-15 cardiogenic tissues with CMF1, vMHC, and GAPDH primers.
CMF1 is detected prior to the onset of vMHC expression. B,
Western blot analysis of stage 6, 8, 10, 14 and day 11 heart.
Equivalent amounts of protein at each stage were analyzed for
sarcomeric MHC and CMF1. CMF1 is detected at stages 6-14 but is absent
at day 11. MHC is detected by MF20 beginning at stage 10. C,
immunohistochemical analysis of stage 5 embryos. Panels a-c
show a transverse section through the anterior portion of a stage 5 embryo (a, phase; b, anti-CMF1; c,
YoPro; double arrows, ectoderm; single arrows,
endoderm). Panels d-f show a transverse section through the
posterior portion of a stage 5 embryo (d, phase;
e, anti-CMF1; f, YoPro; double arrows,
epiblast; single arrows, endoderm). The diagram of a stage 5 embryo in the lower right panel illustrates the relative
positions of the sections analyzed in C.

View larger version (30K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
Analysis of CMF1 expression in the stage 10 heart. A, 8-µ serial sections were cut through the
entire stage 10 heart. The approximate positions (numbered
1-4) of the sections along the anteroposterior axis, shown
in B, are given. B, position 1 is at
the level of the fused heart tube and has strong staining of anti-CMF1
and anti-MHC. Positions 2-4 are increasingly posterior
levels in the unfused tubes, showing decreasing levels of anti-MHC
staining and nearly constant levels of anti-CMF1. Phase,
4,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI), anti-CMF1, and anti-MHC
images are shown for each section. Ab, antibody.

View larger version (33K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 7.
CMF1 expression is independent of BMP
signaling. A, RT-PCR analysis was used to detect the
presence of CMF1, NKX-2.5, vMHC, and GAPDH in control and
noggin-treated cultures. Although noggin blocks expression of NKX-2.5
and vMHC, CMF1 expression is not inhibited by this BMP-antagonist.
B, immunohistochemical analysis of stage 4 cardiac
mesendoderm grown for 24 h in the absence (a-d) or
presence (e-h) of noggin. Phase (a and
e), 4,6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI,
b and f), anti-CMF1 (c and
g), and anti-MHC (d and h) show
positive CMF1 staining in both situations, whereas anti-MHC staining is
greatly diminished with noggin treatment.
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-helices with intervening
loops and conserved regulatory domains. CENP-F and mitosin have been
isolated from HeLa cells by two independent laboratories (13, 14).
Recently, our laboratory has identified a related protein, LEK1, that
is ubiquitously expressed in early murine embryos (15). LEK1 is
approximately 80% homologous to CENP-F and mitosin. Here we show that
avian CMF1 has a 65% amino acid similarity to human CENP-F, mitosin,
and murine LEK1. In addition, CMF1 has the conserved collinear array of
predicted functional domains characteristic of this family. Multiple
leucine zippers are present in the same relative positions within each molecule. Li et al. (24) have used yeast two-hybrid analysis to demonstrate the potential of these zippers to homo- and
heterodimerize, suggesting that protein-protein interactions may be
regulated via these conserved domains. This novel protein family also
has a conserved atypical Rb-binding site. Mitosin was first identified by its ability to bind Rb, and further analyses have shown that this
atypical Rb-binding domain mediates the interaction between these two
proteins (14). Although their precise function is unresolved,
disruption of any of these proteins leads to an alteration of cell
division and/or differentiation of specific cell lineages. Although
significant variation in expression and potential function exists, the similarities in amino acid composition, overall structural homology, and conservation of regulatory protein motifs have led us to
hypothesize that CMF1 is a member of the emerging CENP-F/mitosin/LEK1 family of proteins.
![]()
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
![]()
FOOTNOTES
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Stahlman
Cardiovascular Research Labs., Div. of Cardiovascular Medicine,
Vanderbilt University, Rm. 338, MRB II, 2220 Pierce Ave., Nashville, TN
37232-6300. Tel.: 615-936-1976; Fax: 615-936-3527; E-mail:
david.bader@mcmail.vanderbilt.edu.
![]()
ABBREVIATIONS
![]()
REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
1.
Wei, Y.,
Bader, D.,
and Litvin, J.
(1996)
Development
122,
2779-2789
2.
Garcia-Martinez, V.,
and Schoenwolf, G. C.
(1993)
Dev. Biol.
159,
706-719
3.
Sater, A.,
and Jacobson, A. G.
(1989)
Development
105,
821-830
4.
Gonzalez-Sanchez, A.,
and Bader, D.
(1990)
Dev. Biol.
139,
197-209
5.
Ruzicka, D. L.,
and Schwartz, R.
(1988)
J. Cell Biol.
107,
2575-2586
6.
Bisaha, J. G.,
and Bader, D.
(1990)
Dev. Biol.
148,
355-364
7.
Han, Y.,
Dennis, J. E.,
Cohen-Gould, L.,
Bader, D. M.,
and Fischman, D. A.
(1992)
Dev. Dynam.
193,
257-265
8.
Yutzey, K. E.,
Rhee, J. T.,
and Bader, D.
(1994)
Development
120,
871-883
9.
Fishman, M. C.,
and Chien, K. R.
(1997)
Development
124,
2099-2117
10.
Fishman, M. C.,
and Olson, E. N.
(1997)
Cell
91,
153-156
11.
Schultheiss, T. M.,
Xydas, S.,
and Lassar, A. B.
(1995)
Development
121,
4203-4214
12.
Schultheiss, T. M.,
Birch, J.,
and Lassar, A.
(1997)
Genes Dev.
11,
451-462
13.
Liao, H.,
Winkfein, R. J.,
Mack, G.,
Rattner, J. B.,
and Yen, T. J.
(1995)
J. Cell Biol.
130,
507-518
14.
Zhu, X.,
Mancini, M. A.,
Chang, K.-H.,
Liu, C.-Y.,
Chen, C-F.,
Shan, B.,
Jones, D.,
Yang-Feng, T. L.,
and Lee, W.-H.
(1995)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15,
5017-5029
15.
Goodwin, R. L.,
Pabón-Peña, L. M.,
Foster, G. C.,
and Bader, D.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
18597-18604
16.
Soonpaa, M. H.,
Kim, K. K.,
Pajak, L.,
Franklin, M.,
and Field, L. J.
(1996)
Am. J. Physiol.
271,
H2183-H2189
17.
Soonpaa, M. H.,
and Field, L. J.
(1998)
Circ. Res.
83,
15-26
18.
Hamburger, V.,
and Hamilton, H. L.
(1951)
J. Morphol
88,
49-67
19.
Gannon, M.,
and Bader, D.
(1995)
Development
121,
2439-2450
20.
Bader, D.,
Masaki, T.,
and Fischman, D. A.
(1982)
J. Cell Biol.
95,
763-770
21.
Ehrman, L. A.,
and Yutzey, K. E.
(1999)
Dev. Biol.
207,
163-175
22.
Antin, P. B.,
Taylor, R. G.,
and Watskievych, T.
(1994)
Dev. Dyn.
200,
144-154
23.
Sugi, Y.,
and Lough, J.
(1994)
Dev. Dyn.
200,
155-162
24.
Li, S.,
Ku, C. Y.,
Farmer, A. A.,
Cong, Y. S.,
Chen, C. F.,
and Lee, W.-H.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
6183-6189
25.
Zhu, X.,
Chang, K.-H.,
He, D.,
Mancini, M. A.,
Brinkley, W. R.,
and Lee, W.-H.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
19545-19550
26.
Jeter, J. R., Jr.,
and Cameron, I. L.
(1971)
J. Embryol. Exp. Morph.
25,
405-422
27.
Consigli, S. A.,
and Joseph-Silverstein, J.
(1991)
J. Cell. Physiol.
146,
379-385
28.
Li, H.,
Choudhary, S. K.,
Milner, D. J.,
Munir, M. I.,
Kuisk, I. R.,
and Capetanaki, Y.
(1994)
J. Cell Biol.
124,
827-841
29.
Weitzer, G.,
Milner, D. J.,
Kim, J. U.,
Bradley, A.,
and Capetanaki, Y.
(1995)
Dev. Biol.
172,
422-439
30.
Feliciello, A.,
Li, Y.,
Avvedimento, E. V.,
Gottesman, M. E.,
and Rubin, C. S.
(1997)
Curr. Biol.
7,
1011-1014
31.
Cleaver, O. B.,
Patterson, K. D.,
and Krieg, P. A.
(1996)
Development
122,
3549-3556
32.
Kelley, C.,
Blumberg, H.,
Zon, L. I.,
and Evans, T.
(1993)
Development
118,
817-827
33.
Srivastava, D.,
Cserjesi, P.,
and Olson, E. N.
(1995)
Science
270,
1995-1999
34.
DeHaan, R. L.
(1965)
in
Organogenesis
(DeHaan, R. L.
, and Ursprung, H., eds)
, pp. 377-419, Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, New York
35.
Cohen-Gould, L.,
and Mikawa, T.
(1996)
Dev. Biol.
177,
265-273
36.
Jacobson, A. G.
(1960)
Dev. Biol.
2,
138-154
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:
![]() |
R. D. Pooley, K. L. Moynihan, V. Soukoulis, S. Reddy, R. Francis, C. Lo, L.-J. Ma, and D. M. Bader Murine CENPF interacts with syntaxin 4 in the regulation of vesicular transport J. Cell Sci., October 15, 2008; 121(20): 3413 - 3421. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
V. Soukoulis, S. Reddy, R. D. Pooley, Y. Feng, C. A. Walsh, and D. M. Bader Cytoplasmic LEK1 is a regulator of microtubule function through its interaction with the LIS1 pathway PNAS, June 14, 2005; 102(24): 8549 - 8554. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
X. Zhou, R. Wang, L. Fan, Y. Li, L. Ma, Z. Yang, W. Yu, N. Jing, and X. Zhu Mitosin/CENP-F as a Negative Regulator of Activating Transcription Factor-4 J. Biol. Chem., April 8, 2005; 280(14): 13973 - 13977. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Ashe, L. Pabon-Pena, E. Dees, K. L. Price, and D. Bader LEK1 Is a Potential Inhibitor of Pocket Protein-mediated Cellular Processes J. Biol. Chem., January 2, 2004; 279(1): 664 - 676. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||