![]()
|
|
||||||||
J Biol Chem, Vol. 275, Issue 3, 2115-2122, January 21, 2000
From the Laboratory of Cell Regulation and Carcinogenesis, NCI,
National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892-5055, the
§ Laboratory of Tumor Biology, Massachusetts General
Hospital Cancer Center, Charleston, Massachusetts 02129-2060, and the
Transforming growth factor- TGF- Receptor-activated Smads (R-Smads) interact transiently with specific,
ligand-activated type I receptors and are phosphorylated on highly
conserved carboxyl-terminal (COOH-terminal)-SS(V/M)S motifs. Smad2 and
Smad3 are specific mediators of TGF- Smad4 is functionally unique among the Smads, with an amino acid
sequence more closely related to the Drosophila gene product Medea than to Mad (6). In contrast to the R-Smads, Smad4 is not
regulated by phosphorylation, but acts as a common mediator of TGF- Smad4 is an essential component of transcriptional complexes mediating
the activation of Smad-dependent target genes. The transcriptional activity of Smad4 has been ascribed to its capacity to
associate with other Smad-transcription factor complexes on cis-acting
elements of responsive promoters (10-13), and by participating in
R-Smad interactions with the paralogous bridging co-activators CBP and
p300 (14-18). Recent data also suggest that Smad4 plays an active role
in recruiting other components of the transcriptional complex involved
in target gene activation, including the transcriptional co-activator
MSG1 (19). Although several studies have suggested that the C-terminal
MH2 domain is essential for mediating Smad4 transcriptional activation
(11, 20), recent studies show that a Smad4 mutant lacking the whole MH2
domain retains the capacity to activate transcription (21).
Furthermore, we previously showed that the Smad4 MH2 domain is
interchangeable with the Smad1 MH2 domain, and that a 48-amino acid
segment within the middle linker called the Smad4 activation domain, or
SAD, is required for the activation of Smad4-dependent
signaling responses (7). These data provide evidence that elements
within the middle linker region of Smad4 are required for the
activation of Smad-dependent transcriptional responses, but
it is unknown how these regulate the function of Smad4.
In this study, we show that the SAD is in fact a transcriptional
activation domain which is both necessary and sufficient for the
activation of transcription by Smad4. Mutants lacking the SAD are still
able to form complexes with other Smad family members and associated
transcription factors, but cannot activate transcription by these
complexes. We show that the SAD has intrinsic, p300-dependent, transcriptional activity, and determine
that this activity is associated with a physical interaction between
the SAD and the NH2 terminus of p300. These findings
identify a novel function for the middle linker region of Smad4, and
define the role of the SAD as an important locus determining the
transcriptional activation of the Smad complex.
Cell Lines and Expression Constructs--
MDA-MB468, NMuMg, and
COS-1 cells were maintained in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium
with 10% fetal bovine serum and antibiotics. Cells were transfected
with the indicated constructs using Superfect (Qiagen) or LipofectAMINE
(Life Technologies), according to the manufacturer's protocols. 3'
FLAG-tagged Smad4 mutant and deletion constructs, and 5' double
Myc-tagged Smad2 were generated by polymerase chain reaction using a
proofreading polymerase and subcloned into pcDNA3 (Invitrogen) or
the pSG424 (22) expression vectors. All polymerase chain
reaction-generated products were sequenced using the dideoxynucleotide method.
Transcriptional Response Assays--
The 3TP-Lux reporter was
used to measure TGF- Immunoprecipitation and Western Blots--
COS-1 and NMuMg cells
were transfected with the indicated constructs, with or without, the
activated TGF-
For GST affinity assays, glutathione S-transferase (GST)
fusion proteins for the N (amino acids 1-596), M (744-1571), or C (1572-2370) regions of p300 were expressed in bacteria and quantitated by SDS-PAGE and Coomassie staining following affinity purification on
glutathione beads. Equal amounts of fusion protein were incubated in
lysis buffer (50 mM HEPES pH 7.5, 150 mM NaCl,
2.5 mM EGTA, 1 mM EDTA, 1 mM
dithiothreitol, 10% glycerol, 1% Triton X-100 with protease and
phosphatase inhibitors) with lysates from COS cells transiently
transfected with the Gal4-SAD expression construct. Lysates were
immunoprecipitated with anti-GST antibody (Santa Cruz Biotechnology)
and analyzed by SDS-PAGE and immunblotting with anti-Gal4 antibody.
Indirect Immunofluorescence--
NMuMg cells were transiently
transfected in chamber slides with the FLAG-tagged Smad4 constructs and
Myc-Smad2, with or without the activated T Gel Mobility Shift and Supershift Assays--
MDA-MB468 and
NMuMg cells were transfected, serum starved overnight, and treated with
TGF- Smad4 SAD Deletion Results in Loss of Function--
Smad4 restores
TGF-
To determine if the differences in ability to activate transcription
were dependent on Smad4 directly, we performed the same experiments
using Gal4-Smad4 fusion constructs. Transfection of Gal4 fusion
proteins containing full-length Smad4, or a truncated Smad4
encompassing amino acids 266-552, showed a ligand dependent activation
of the Gal4 reporter, with a larger absolute activation by the 266-552
construct, consistent with relief of autoinhibition by the MH1 domain
(5, 20). Compatible with the above findings, deleting the SAD from
these constructs caused a complete loss of signal, despite comparable
expression levels (Fig. 1B).
Smad4 SAD Deletion Does Not Affect the Known Cytoplasmic Functions
of Smad4--
Interactions between Smad4 and R-Smad proteins are
particularly sensitive to deletion and mutation within the
COOH-terminal domain of Smad4 (25-27). As the Smad4( Transcriptional Activation by Smad4 Requires the SAD and Is
Distinct from Its Stabilizing Effects on Protein-DNA Complexes--
To
determine how deletion of the SAD disrupts the nuclear functions of
Smad4, we reconstituted a defined transcriptional response from
Xenopus in mammalian cells. Activin and TGF-
The ability of wild type Smad4 to participate in these transcriptional
complexes correlates with its ability to enhance
ligand-dependent transcriptional activation of the
ARE-luciferase reporter both in Smad4 null cells (Fig. 3C),
and in TGF- The SAD Is a Proline-rich Transcriptional Activation Domain That
Binds p300--
Although we have shown that Smad4 mutants lacking the
SAD only weakly activate transcription of Smad-dependent
transcriptional complexes, we were unable to identify any defects in
the other known biochemical functions of Smad4. Analysis of the SAD
amino acid sequence (Fig. 4A)
shows that it is rich in proline residues, much like the
transcriptional activation domains of other well characterized
transcriptional activators including AP-2 and CTF/NF-1 (30, 31). To
test our hypothesis that the SAD acts as an intrinsic transcriptional
activation domain, we performed heterologous activation assays using a
Gal4-SAD fusion protein. These experiments demonstrate that the SAD is
a strong, ligand-independent transcriptional activator, with levels of
activation comparable to or higher than the most active Gal4-Smad4
fusion construct (Fig. 4B).
Recent studies suggest that the transcriptional activity of Smad
proteins is dependent on their interaction with the paralogous bridging
co-activators CBP and p300, linking the Smad-DNA binding complex to the
basal transcriptional machinery (14-18, 32). In order to determine if
SAD transcriptional activity was dependent on interaction with these
co-activators, we co-transfected adenoviral E1A, an inhibitor of
CBP/p300 activity (33), along with Gal4-SAD, in the heterologous
activation assay. E1A overexpression markedly reduced the level of
Gal4-SAD transcriptional activity, while a mutant form of E1A lacking
the CBP/p300-binding site (
These studies suggest that there is a functional co-operativity between
CBP/p300 and the SAD, but do not define the nature of this interaction.
To determine if the p300-dependent activation of Gal4-SAD
is mediated by a direct interaction with p300, we performed
co-immunoprecipitation assays. Initially we looked for interactions
between endogenous p300 and epitope-tagged Smad4 constructs. We used
Smad4 266-552 as the backbone for these studies as this was expressed
at high levels following transfection, has previously been shown to
interact with p300 and Smad2 (5, 18), and is transcriptionally active
(Fig. 1B). In these studies, the SAD deletion mutant was
still able to bind to endogenous p300 in a ligand-dependent
manner (Fig. 5A, Lanes 7 and
9). Furthermore, binding of both the wild type and the SAD
deletion mutant was enhanced by overexpression of Smad2 (Lanes
5 and 9), indicating that the principal interaction of
Smad4 with p300 may be indirect, mediated by stronger interactions
between the R-Smad, Smad2, and p300, and the R-Smad with Smad4.
As our functional data provided evidence supporting the role of the SAD
as a CBP/p300-dependent transcriptional activation domain,
we went on to determine whether the SAD itself could independently interact with p300. For this, GST-p300 fragments purified by affinity chromatography (Fig. 5B), were incubated with lysates from
COS cells transiently transfected with Gal4-SAD or the Gal4 vector alone, and immunoprecipitated using anti-GST antibodies (Fig. 5C). Immunoblotting of the immunoprecipitates revealed an
association of Gal4-SAD with the CH1-containing
NH2-terminal region of p300 (Fig. 5C, middle panel,
Lane GST-N). Gal4-SAD showed a weak interaction with the middle
(GST-M) region and did not interact with the COOH-terminal (GST-C)
region of p300, and there was no interaction between the Gal4 protein
alone and the NH2-terminal GST-p300 fusion protein. This
SAD-interaction domain is distinct from the COOH-terminal p300-binding
site for the MH2 domains of the R-Smads (14, 15, 17, 18, 32), and is
consistent with a weak interaction observed between Smad4 and the
NH2 terminus of CBP in a mammalian two-hybrid assay
(14).
In order to define the functional significance of this Smad4 SAD-p300
interaction, we sought to determine whether overexpression of the
SAD-binding region of p300 could interfere with transcriptional activation by the SAD. Initially, we used the Gal4-Smad4 266-552 construct in these studies as this has particularly strong
ligand-dependent transcriptional activation when compared
with the wild type Smad4 fusion protein (Fig. 1B).
Overexpression of an NH2-terminal p300 construct (1-1736),
which contains the SAD-binding site but lacks the glutamine-rich
transactivation domain of p300, strongly repressed both basal and
ligand-dependent activation of Gal4 Smad4 266-552. In
contrast, the COOH-terminal p300 construct (1737-2414), which lacks
the SAD-binding site but has the capacity to bind to R-Smads, only
partially inhibited this transcriptional response (Fig.
6A). This is in keeping with
the observation that p300 (1737-2414) only partially blocks
TGF- Many components of the transcriptional complexes mediating
Smad-dependent activation of target genes have recently
been identified. These include Smad4, R-Smads, shared components of the
basal transcriptional machinery, and the CBP/p300 histone
acetyltransferase bridging co-activators (14-17, 32). Studies in Smad4
null cells indicate that the presence of Smad4 is essential for many of
these transcriptional responses (7-9). In certain contexts, Smad4 may
be required for stabilization of the Smad-DNA transcriptional complex
(11, 13), while in others this function may result from a co-operative
interaction between Smad4 and R-Smads (12, 14). However, while the
NH2-terminal MH1 domain of Smad4 is required to stabilize
these transcriptional complexes, for example, the TGF- We first identified the Smad4 activation domain, or SAD, from a
deletional analysis of the Smad4 middle linker (7). Deletion of the SAD
strongly reduces the ability of Smad4 to activate transcription of a
variety of target genes both in homologous and heterologous reporter
gene assays. SAD deletion mutants do not affect R-Smad-Smad4 hetero-oligomerization, nor the ability of Smad4 to participate in
ligand-dependent DNA binding of Smad-containing
transcriptional complexes. This contrasts with mutations and deletions
within the COOH-terminal MH2 domain of Smad4, which interfere with
transcriptional responses by disrupting hetero-oligomerization of Smad4
with R-Smads (26, 35, 36). Thus, while Smad4 requires its COOH terminus to interact with R-Smads and form ligand-dependent
transcriptional complexes, this activity is distinct from the
transactivating activity of Smad4 which requires the SAD.
The only other inactivating deletion in the middle linker region which
has been studied ( We now demonstrate that the SAD is an intrinsic transcriptional
activation domain, rich in proline residues, and that it is not only
necessary, but also sufficient to activate maximal
Smad-dependent transcriptional responses. Similar
proline-rich domains have been described in a number of other
transcriptional activators such as AP-2 and CTF/NF1 (30), suggesting a
common mechanism of action. A feature of these activation domains is
that they interact with diverse components within the general
transcriptional machinery, recruiting multicomponent complexes of
proteins into juxtaposition with the transcription factor-DNA complex.
In this context, the crystal structure of a transcriptionally active
Smad4 fragment (273-552) has recently been solved (38), providing key
insights into the structural basis for the transcriptional responses
mediated by the SAD. This structure contrasts with the previously
published structure of an inactive Smad4 fragment (319-543) (25) as
the additional residues stabilize a previously disordered structure within the MH2 domain of Smad4, forming a glutamine-rich extension from
the trimeric core. Interestingly, this glutamine-rich extension is
reinforced by the SAD, which is stabilized by flanking sequences that
interact with the structural core of Smad4. The proline-rich, hydrophobic surface of the SAD is located on the same surface as the
solvent accessible glutamine-rich extension of the MH2 domain at the
periphery of the trimeric disc, suggesting that this energetically
unfavorable hydrophobic surface could be stabilized by interaction with
a transcriptional co-factor. This model provides a structural basis for
the unique functional role we have ascribed to the SAD.
Residual ligand-dependent reporter gene activation of the
SAD deletion constructs suggests that other domains of Smad4 may also
contribute to the maximal activation of Smad transcriptional complexes.
Artificial nuclear localization of Smad4 using an estrogen receptor
fusion protein indicates that loss of the COOH-terminal 37 amino acids
prevents Smad4-dependent transcriptional activation (27).
This result resembles our findings with the SAD deletion mutant, and
suggests that there may be an additional transcriptional activation
domain in the COOH terminus of Smad4. This would explain our
observation that there is residual, ligand-dependent
activation by Smad4 SAD deletion construct, as stimulation by the COOH
terminus may still be competent despite a marked reduction in the
overall transcriptional activity caused by the SAD deletion mutant.
This is also consistent with the structural model of the
transcriptionally active Smad4 fragment, which proposes that functional
activity of the SAD occurs in the context of its physical relationship with an additional transcriptional activation domain in the COOH terminus of Smad4 (38).
In order to define the mechanism of transcriptional activation by the
SAD, we sought to determine whether there were physical and/or
functional interactions between the SAD and the parologous transcriptional adaptor proteins CBP and p300, which are essential for
the recruitment of transcriptional complexes to the basal general
transcriptional machinery (39). A wide range of transcriptional activators interact with CBP and p300, and recent studies have shown
that the transcriptional activity of Smad proteins also depends on the
binding of R-Smads to CBP and p300 (14-18, 32). The identification of
the COOH terminus of CBP/p300 as the R-Smad interaction site (14-18,
32) contrasts with our demonstration of a physical interaction between
the SAD and the NH2-terminal region of p300. However, we
have also shown that both wild type and the SAD deletion mutant of
Smad4 co-immunoprecipitate with endogenous p300 in a
ligand-dependent fashion, and that this interaction is
enhanced by addition of exogenous Smad2. This fits with previously published data indicating that the principal interaction between Smad4
and p300 requires the participation of an R-Smad in the transcriptional
complex (14, 16), and indicates that while the principal Smad4-CBP/p300
interaction occurs through an indirect physical association mediated by
the R-Smad, direct interaction of the SAD with CBP/p300 occurs as a
secondary event in the assembly of an active transcriptional complex.
The functional significance of this interaction between the SAD and
p300 is underscored by our demonstration that transcriptional activity
of the SAD is inhibited by EIA in a p300-dependent fashion. Furthermore, the transcriptional activity both of Smad4, and of the SAD
alone, are strongly repressed by overexpression of a p300 construct
which lacks the R-Smad-binding site but has the capacity to bind to the
SAD. Taken together, our findings define a novel function of the middle
linker region of Smad4 in the regulation of transcriptional responses,
and suggest a model in which interaction between the Smad4 SAD and
CBP/p300 is essential for efficient transcriptional activation by the
Smad complex. In this model, R-Smads initially recruit CBP/p300 into
the transcriptional complex, bringing the Smad complex into apposition
with the basal transcriptional machinery. At the same time, the
heteromeric R-Smad/Smad4 interaction enables interaction of the SAD
with the NH2 terminus of CBP/p300. This interaction is
essential for maximal activation by the Smad complex, resulting in
activation of the basal transcriptional machinery, recruitment of other
members of the complex, and/or alterations in histone acetyltransferase activity.
We thank Kai Lin for sharing unpublished data
on the crystal structure of Smad4, D. M Livingston and S. R. Grossman for p300 constructs, J. Massagué for the p3TP-Lux
reporter, M. Montminy and C. R. Goding for E1A
constructs, M. Ptashne for pSG424J, M. Whitman for the
Xenopus Myc-tagged FAST1 and ARE-Luc constructs, and J. Wrana and L. Attisano for the p147-Gal4 reporter, pG5E1B, and activated
TGF- *
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.
¶
HHMI-National Institutes of Health Research Scholar.
**
To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.: 301-496-5391;
Fax: 301-496-8395; E-mail: Robertsa@dce41.nci.nih.gov.
2
R. Lechleider, unpublished data.
3
M. P. de Caestecker, unpublished data.
The abbreviations used are:
TGF-
The Smad4 Activation Domain (SAD) Is a Proline-rich,
p300-dependent Transcriptional Activation Domain*
,
,
Developmental Signaling Laboratory, Imperial Cancer Research
Fund, P. O. Box 123, Lincoln's Inn Fields,
London WC2A 3PX, United Kingdom
![]()
ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
(TGF-
) family
members signal through a unique set of intracellular proteins called
Smads. Smad4, previously identified as the tumor suppressor
DPC4, is functionally distinct among the Smad family, and
is required for the assembly and transcriptional activation of diverse,
Smad-DNA complexes. We previously identified a 48-amino acid
proline-rich regulatory element within the middle linker domain of this
molecule, the Smad4 activation domain (SAD), which is essential for
mediating these signaling activities. We now characterize the
functional activity of the SAD. Mutants lacking the SAD are still able
to form complexes with other Smad family members and associated
transcription factors, but cannot activate transcription in these
complexes. Furthermore, the SAD itself is able to activate
transcription in heterologous reporter assays, identifying it as a
proline-rich transcriptional activation domain, and indicating that the
SAD is both necessary and sufficient to activate
Smad-dependent transcriptional responses. We show that
transcriptional activation by the SAD is p300-dependent,
and demonstrate that this activity is associated with a physical
interaction of the SAD with the amino terminus of p300. These data
identify a novel function of the middle linker region of Smad4, and
define the role of the SAD as an important locus determining the
transcriptional activation of the Smad complex.
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
1 is the
prototypic member of a large family of structurally related cytokines
including the TGF-
s, activins, and bone morphogenetic proteins which
regulate cell fate and extracellular matrix deposition through the
transcriptional regulation of diverse gene targets. These ligands
initiate cellular signals by associating with two classes of
interacting transmembrane receptor serine-threonine kinases. Ligand
binding to the type II receptor results in recruitment and
transphosphorylation of type I receptors, which then signal downstream
responses (1). Clues as to the mechanisms regulating downstream
signaling responses have been provided by the discovery of Smad
proteins as direct substrates of the TGF-
family of receptor kinases, and mediators of signals from the receptors to the nucleus.
and activin signaling pathways,
while Smad1, Smad5, and Smad8 are involved in bone morphogenetic
protein responses (1). Following receptor activation, these Smad
proteins translocate to the nucleus where they function as
transcriptional regulators (2). Smads have a domain structure
consisting of highly conserved amino (NH2)- and
(COOH)-terminal regions, referred to as Mad homology 1 (MH1) and MH2
domains, respectively, and an intervening middle linker, which is of
variable length and sequence. The MH2 domain contains the principal
receptor serine-threonine kinase phosphoacceptor sites (1, 3), and
determinants of specific Smad-receptor and Smad-Smad interactions (4),
and is essential for transcriptional activation (2). Effector functions
of the MH2 domain are inhibited by the MH1 domain (5), while the MH1
and linker regions of Drosophila MAD and mammalian Smad3 are
responsible for their DNA binding (2).
,
activin, and bone morphogenetic protein signaling responses (7-9).
Following phosphorylation, R-Smads form hetero-oligomeric complexes
with Smad4 which are then translocated to the nucleus (1, 3). Like the
R-Smads, the MH2 domain of Smad4 is responsible for interaction with
other Smad proteins, while autoinhibition of MH2 activity and DNA
binding are mediated through its MH1 domain (5).
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-induced gene expression, while pG5E1B-Luc,
containing the Gal4 upstream activating sequence linked to a luciferase
reporter, was co-transfected with the indicated Gal4-Smad fusion
protein constructs in heterologous DNA binding assays. For the
ARE-reporter assays, ARE-Luc containing three tandem repeats of the ARE
linked to the luciferase reporter in pGL3 was co-transfected with
Myc-FAST1, Myc-Smad2, and various Smad4-FLAG constructs. Transfection,
TGF-
treatment and luciferase assays were performed as described
previously, co-transfecting pSV-
-galactosidase to allow for
normalization of transfection efficiency (7). The total amount of
transfected DNA was standardized by addition of pcDNA3 control
vector as required, and all assays were performed in triplicate, and
represented as mean (±S.E.) of three independent transfections.
type I receptor (T204D) point mutant (23). After
24 h cells were switched to 0.2% serum overnight, and lysed in
0.5 ml of Nonidet P-40 lysis buffer (1% Nonidet P-40, 150 mM NaCl, and 50 mM Tris, pH 8.0) in the
presence of phosphatase and protease inhibitors. Lysates were either
directly separated by sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis and transferred onto Immobilon-P membranes (Millipore),
and/or first immunoprecipitated for 1 h using epitope-specific 9E10 anti-Myc (Zymed Laboratories Inc.) monoclonal
antibodies. For the p300 interaction assays, cells were lysed in
Nonidet P-40 lysis buffer containing 100 mM NaCl, and
endogenous p300 immunoprecipitated with rabbit anti-p300 (N15, Santa
Cruz). Western blots were performed using mouse monoclonal anti-Myc,
anti-FLAG M2 (Kodak), anti-HA (Roche Molecular Biochemicals), rabbit
anti-Gal4 DNA-binding domain (Santa Cruz), or rabbit anti-p300 (C-20,
Santa Cruz), as indicated, detected using the appropriate horseradish
peroxidase-conjugated secondary antibody, and visualized by
chemiluminescence (Pierce).
RI (T204D), and serum
starved overnight 24 h later. Cells were then fixed and
permeabilized, as described previously (24), and FLAG epitopes detected
by incubating with the anti-FLAG M2 monoclonal antibody overnight at
4 °C. This was followed by incubation with a goat anti-mouse
fluorescein isothiocyanate secondary antibody, and mounting in medium
containing 4,6-diamino-2-phenylindole (Vectorshield, Vector Labs). The
percentage of nuclear localization represents 100 cells counted by a
trained observer (W. T. P.), blinded as to the constructs transfected.
for 1 h. Cell lysates were prepared in hypertonic buffer
containing 400 mM KCl, 0.4% Triton X-100, 10% glycerol,
20 mM HEPES pH 7.5, 10 mM EGTA, 5 mM EDTA, and 1 mM dithiothreitol with protease
and phosphatase inhibitors. Following clarification, lysates were snap
frozen and stored at
80 °C. DNA binding assays were performed
using a radiolabeled ARE probe generated by polymerase chain reaction
with [32P]dCTP and [32P]dATP, using
two overlapping ARE oligonucleotides
(5'-CCGACTAGTATCTGCTGCCCTAAAATGTGTATTCCATGGAAATG-3' and
5'-CCGGCTAGCTAGGGAGAGAAGGGCAGACATTTCCATGGAATAC-3'), to generate a
71-base pair probe. The radiolabeled probe was added to the cell
lysates for 30 min after equilibrating the freshly thawed lysates to
200 mM KCl with 20 mM HEPES pH 7.5, 10%
glycerol, 10 mM EGTA, and 5 mM EDTA, and adding
an equal volume of probe mixture containing 20 mM KCl, 11 mM MgCl2, 20% glycerol, and 200 µg/ml poly(dI-dC). For antibody supershift experiments, 200 mM
KCl equilibrated cell lysates were incubated for 10 min with anti-Myc
9E10, or anti-FLAG M2 monoclonal antibodies in the probe mixture, prior to addition of the radiolabeled ARE probe. Protein-DNA complexes were
resolved on a 5% nondenaturing polyacrylamide gel.
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
responsive p3TP-Lux reporter gene activation when
co-transfected into Smad4 null MDA-MB468 cells (7). Using the same
functional assay, we have previously shown that deletion of the
COOH-terminal portion of the middle linker region of Smad4 (amino acids
275-322), the Smad4 activation domain (SAD), results in loss of
function, and that the NH2 terminus of Smad4 enhances
ligand-dependent reporter gene activation in Smad1/Smad4 chimeras (7). The mechanism whereby Smad4(
275-322) interferes with
Smad-mediated signaling is unknown. To explore this further, we used a
heterologous transcriptional activation assay to determine the ability
of this Smad4 mutant to restore transcriptional activity of a
Gal4-Smad2 fusion protein, which has previously been shown to be
dependent on Smad4 expression (11). Co-transfection of Smad4 with
Gal4-Smad2 restored ligand-dependent transcriptional activation of the Gal4 reporter gene in Smad4-null MDA-MB 468 cells,
while Smad4(
275-322) only weakly restored transcriptional activity
of the fusion protein, despite comparable levels of Gal4-Smad2 fusion
protein expression (Fig.
1A).

View larger version (28K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
The Smad4 SAD is essential for maximal
transcriptional activation of Smad2 and Smad4. A, the
Smad4 SAD domain is essential for maximal transcriptional activation of
Smad2. B, the SAD domain is essential for transcriptional
activation of Smad4. In these heterologous DNA binding assays,
MDA-MB468 cells (A) or NMuMg cells (B) were
transfected with equal amounts of the indicated Gal4-Smad fusion
proteins with or without FLAG-tagged Smad4 constructs, and the
pSV-
-galactosidase and pG5E1B luciferase reporters. Following
transfection, cells were serum starved overnight and treated for
20 h with 10 ng/ml TGF-
1. Cell lysate luciferase activity was
detected, and activities corrected on the basis of
-galactosidase
activity. Results are expressed as mean (± S.E.) of triplicate assays.
Protein expression was determined in parallel experiments following
transient transfection of the indicated constructs in COS-1
cells.
275-322)
deletion is in close apposition to the MH2 domain (amino acids
323-552), we felt that a possible explanation for its lack of function
was through disruption of the MH2 tertiary structure. We therefore
tested the known cytoplasmic functions of the MH2 domain of Smad4,
including hetero-oligomerization with R-Smads and nuclear translocation of Smad-containing complexes. Smad4(
275-322) formed heteromeric complexes with Smad2 (Lane 4, Fig.
2A), and, as described for the
wild type molecule (11, 28), underwent ligand-dependent nuclear translocation in the presence of overexpressed Smad2 (Fig. 2B). This differentiates it from COOH-terminal point mutants
of Smad4, G508S and D351H, which disrupt the normal COOH-terminal structure of Smad4 and fail to form heteromeric complexes with activated Smad2 (25). Furthermore, Smad4G508S and Smad4D351H did not
undergo nuclear translocation following receptor activation (Fig.
2B). This suggests that the COOH-terminal structure of Smad4 is preserved in Smad4(
275-322), and indicates that the principal effect of the SAD deletion is to interfere with the nuclear activities of Smad4.

View larger version (27K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Smad4(
275-322)
associates with Smad2 and is translocated to the nucleus.
A, Smad4(
275-322) associates with Smad2. COS-1 cells
were transfected with the indicated constructs and lysates analyzed by
immunoprecipitation and Western blotting, as indicated. T
RI* indicates transfection with the activating point mutant
of the TGF-
type 1 receptor (T204D). B,
Smad4(
275-322) and wild-type Smad4 translocate to the nucleus in
the presence of Smad2. NMuMg cells were transiently transfected with
the indicated FLAG-tagged expression constructs, Myc-tagged Smad2, with
or without T
RI*, and processed for anti-FLAG immunofluorescence.
The percentage of cells with nuclear staining is indicated.
Quantification is depicted as mean (± S.E.) from five separate
experiments, counted by an independent, blinded observer.
signaling
induce the formation of an activin response factor (ARF) that contains Smad2, Smad4, and FAST1, and binds to the activin response element (ARE) on the Xenopus Mix.2 promotor (10, 11, 29). Smad4 is a
critical component of this complex, enabling transcriptional activation
of the ARE-containing reporter construct (10, 11). Previous studies
have shown that wild type Smad4 forms ternary complexes with FAST1 in
the presence of Smad2 (10, 11). We reproduced these findings with wild
type Smad4, and also showed that the Smad4(
275-322) mutant
co-immunoprecipitates with FAST1 in the presence of
Smad2.2 We sought to
determine if loss of the SAD would alter the DNA binding ability of the
Smad-FAST1 complex. We performed gel shift experiments using lysates
from Smad4-null MDA-MB468 cells transfected with various components of
the ARF and a 32P-labeled ARE probe. No TGF-
-inducible
ARE binding complexes were detected in cells transfected with vector
alone, FAST1, or Smad2 and FAST1. However, co-transfection with either
wild type Smad4 or the Smad4(
275-322) SAD deletion mutant yielded
TGF-
-inducible gel-shifted complexes (Lanes 9 and
11, Fig. 3A). To
confirm that wild type Smad4, Smad4(
275-322), Smad2 and FAST1 all
participated in these ARE-binding complexes, we used antibodies
directed against the epitopes expressed on these constructs to
supershift the complexes. TGF-
-responsive NMuMg cells were used as
these gave a reproducibly high level of protein expression following
transient transfection (Fig. 3E). In these cells,
ligand-dependent gel-shifted complexes are seen in the
absence of exogenous Smad4 (Lane 3, Fig. 3B), presumably as a result of binding to complexes containing endogenous Smad4. Incubation with Myc antibody reduced the mobility of the ARE-binding complex (Lanes 4, 8, and 12),
confirming the presence of Myc-Smad2 and/or Myc-FAST1 in all of the
complexes, while the FLAG antibody shifted a component of the complex
either with transfected wild type Smad4, or the Smad4(
275-322)
deletion mutant (Lanes 9 and 13). The FLAG
antibody did not lead to any supershift in lysates from cells
transfected with FAST1 and Smad2 alone (Lane 5), confirming
the specificity of these findings. These data show that the
Smad4(
275-322) deletion mutant participates in
ligand-dependent DNA binding complexes.

View larger version (46K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Smad4(
275-322)
participates in Smad transcriptional complexes, but only weakly
activates transcription. A, Smad4(
275-322)
forms a gel-shifted complex in Smad4 null cells. MDA-MB468 cells were
transfected with the indicated constructs, serum starved overnight,
treated with or without 10 g/ml TGF-
for 1 h, and the extracts
incubated with the 71-base pair ARE probe. Lane 1 contains
the ARE probe only (P). B, Smad4(
275-322) is
a component of the ARF in NMuMg cells. NMuMg cells were transiently
transfected with Myc-tagged Smad2 and FAST1, and FLAG-tagged Smad4
constructs. After treatment with or without 10 g/ml TGF-
for 1 h, cell extracts were then incubated with the ARE probe, and gel
shifted complexes super-shifted with either anti-Myc (M) or
anti-FLAG (F) antibodies, as indicated. C, Smad4,
and not Smad4(
275-322), can fully activate the ARE in Smad4 null
cells. Smad4 null MDA-MB468 cells were transfected with the ARE-Luc
reporter and the indicated constructs, and luciferase activity measured
after TGF-
treatment for 20 h. D, wild type but not
mutant Smad4 augments the ARE response in NMuMg cells. NMuMg cells were
transfected with the indicated constructs, and luciferase activity
measured after TGF-
treatment. All results are expressed as mean (± S.E.) of triplicate assays, corrected for
-galactosidase activity.
E, expression of the various constructs. NMuMg cell lysates
were transfected and probed as indicated.
-responsive NMuMg cells (Fig. 3D). The
Smad4(
275-322) mutant only weakly enhanced ARE-luciferase activity
in Smad4 null cells when compared with the Smad4-independent activation
response (Fig. 3C). Furthermore, in NMuMg cells, both basal
and ligand-dependent activation of the ARE luciferase
reporter were reduced in the presence of Smad4(
275-322) (Fig.
3D), indicating that Smad4(
275-322) has dominant
negative effects on TGF-
signaling. In these experiments, various
defined components of this transcriptional complex were expressed at
comparable levels (Fig. 3E). Taken together, these data
indicate that maximal activation of Smad-dependent transcriptional responses by Smad4 requires the SAD, and that this
activity is distinct from its ability to participate in these transcriptional complexes.

View larger version (25K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
The SAD is a proline-rich,
p300-dependent transcriptional activation domain.
A, amino acid sequence of the SAD. The Smad4 amino acid
sequence from 275-322 is represented using standard single letter
abbreviations. Prolines are bolded and
underlined. B, Gal4-SAD fusion proteins can
activate transcription. Full-length Gal4-Smad4 (WT),
Gal4-Smad4 (266-552), or Gal4-SAD fusion constructs were
transfected into NMuMg cells, along with the reporter plasmid and
luciferase activity determined before and after TGF-
treatment for
20 h. C, Gal4-SAD transcriptional activity is dependent
on p300/CBP. Gal4-SAD was co-transfected with E1A wild type or p300/CBP
binding mutant (
2-36) constructs, and Gal4-dependent
luciferase was activity determined. The effect of EIA transfection on
Gal4-SAD expression was determined in parallel experiments in which
COS-1 cells were transfected with Gal4-SAD along with the indicated EIA
constructs, and the cell lysates immunoblotted with anti-Gal4
antibodies. D, p300 partially restores
E1A-dependent transcriptional repression. Gal4-SAD was
co-transfected with the indicated expression constructs and
Gal4-dependent luciferase activity determined. All results
are expressed as the mean (±S.E.) of triplicate assays corrected for
-galactosidase activity.
2-36) (34) had no effect on this
response (Fig. 4C). The levels of Gal4-SAD protein
expression were unaffected by E1A transfection. To confirm that this
effect was dependent on p300 activity, we co-transfected increasing
amounts of p300 along with E1A in the Gal4-SAD reporter assay. p300
partially relieved E1A inhibition of Gal4-SAD (Fig. 4D).
This indicates that transcriptional activation by the SAD is
functionally dependent on p300.

View larger version (27K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Physical interactions between Smad4 and
p300. A, Smad2-dependent binding of Smad 4 to endogenous p300. COS-1 cells were transfected with the indicated
constructs and the lysates analyzed by immunoprecipitation and Western
blotting, as indicated. T
R-I* indicates
transfection with the activating point mutant of the TGF-
type 1 receptor (T204D). B and C, the SAD interacts with
the NH2-terminal region of p300. Equal amounts of
bacterially produced GST fusion fragments of p300 containing the CH1
(GST-N), CH2 (GST-M), or CH3 (GST-C)
regions (B), were incubated with cell lysates from COS cells
transiently transfected with Gal4-SAD, and precipitated by an anti-GST
antibody (C). Co-precipitated Gal4-SAD was detected
following SDS-PAGE by Western blotting using an anti-GAL4 antibody
(top panel). Coomassie Blue staining of p300 fusion proteins
demonstrates equal expression (bottom panel).
-dependent activation of the p3TP-Lux reporter, and
probably reflects inhibition of R-Smad binding to endogenous p300 (32).
As Smad4 266-552 contains the SAD(275-322), we sought to determine
whether p300 (1-1736) might be interfering with the transcriptional
activation of Gal4-Smad4 266-552 by inhibiting p300-dependent transcriptional activation of the SAD.
Transfection of increasing amounts of p300 (1-1736) inhibits the
transcriptional activity of Gal4-SAD, while the COOH-terminal, R-Smad
binding p300 construct (1737-2414), had no effect on this response
(Fig. 6B). This suggests that p300 (1-1736) is competing
with endogenous p300 for binding to the SAD, and therefore interfering
with transcriptional activation by the Gal4-SAD fusion protein. Taken
together, these data indicate that the interaction between the Smad4
SAD and the NH2 terminus of p300 is functionally
significant, and points to a novel role of the middle linker in
regulating the transcriptional activity of Smad4.

View larger version (24K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
Functional interactions between Smad4 and
p300. A, the NH2 terminus of p300 inhibits
ligand-dependent transcriptional activation of Smad4. NMuMg
cells were transfected with Gal4-Smad4 266-552 or Gal4-Smad4 266-552
(
275-322) fusion constructs, 1.5 µg of the indicated p300
constructs (1-1736) and (1737-2414), the appropriate reporter
plasmids, and luciferase activity determined before and after TGF-
treatment for 20 h. Results are expressed as mean (± S.E.) of
triplicate assays, corrected for
-galactosidase activity.
B, the NH2 terminus of p300 inhibits
transcriptional activity of the SAD. NMuMg cells were transfected with
Gal4-SAD, reporter constructs, and increasing amounts (0.75 and 1.5 µg) of the indicated p300 constructs. Luciferase activity was
determined 40 h following transfection.
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
inducible
FAST1/Smad2 ARF, Smad4 mutants lacking the NH2 terminus can
still transactivate Gal4-Smad2 in heterologous DNA binding assays in
Smad4 null cells (11). This suggests that Smad4 has an additional
function as a transcriptional activator.
223-301) is a splice variant of Smad4 found in
MDA-MB231, a breast cancer cell line (37). Unlike the SAD deletion,
which can inhibit TGF-
-dependent responsive reporter
gene activity,3 this mutant
lacks dominant negative activity, suggesting that the deletion of
additional sequences upstream of the SAD may interfere with other
functions of Smad4, for example, its association with other R-Smads in
the cytoplasm. Partial mapping of Smad4 transactivator domains using
heterologous DNA binding assays confirms that Gal4-Smad4(266-552) strongly activates transcription of the luciferase reporter in a
ligand-dependent manner, while deletion of the SAD in this
construct completely abolishes this activity. Our experiments in Smad4
null cells also show that the transactivating activity of Gal4-Smad2 is
absolutely dependent on the presence of exogenous Smad4, and that this
response is markedly reduced following deletion of the SAD. These data
confirm that Smad4 is involved in mediating Smad-dependent transcriptional responses, and support our conclusion that this activity is dependent on the SAD.
![]()
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
type I receptor T204D. C. Eng and J. Ryan provided expert
technical assistance.
![]()
FOOTNOTES
Recipient of a Wellcome Trust Advanced Training Fellowship from
the United Kingdom.

Present address: Dept. of Pharmacology, Uniformed Services
University of the Health Sciences, 4301 Jones Bridge Rd., Bethesda, MD
20814-4799.
![]()
ABBREVIATIONS
, transforming growth factor-
;
R-Smad, receptor-activated Smad;
MH1, Mad homology domain 1;
GST, glutathione S-transferase;
PAGE, polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis;
SAD, Smad activation domain;
ARF, activin response factor;
ARE, activin response element;
CBP, cAMP-binding protein.
![]()
REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
1.
Massague, J.
(1998)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
67,
753-791[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
2.
Derynck, R.,
Zhang, Y.,
and Feng, X. H.
(1998)
Cell
95,
737-740[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
3.
Heldin, C. H.,
Miyazono, K.,
and ten Dijke, P.
(1997)
Nature
390,
465-471[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
4.
Chen, Y. G.,
Hata, A.,
Lo, R. S.,
Wotton, D.,
Shi, Y.,
Pavletich, N.,
and Massague, J.
(1998)
Genes Dev.
12,
2144-2152 5.
Hata, A.,
Lo, R. S.,
Wotton, D.,
Lagna, G.,
and Massague, J.
(1997)
Nature
388,
82-87[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
6.
Hudson, J. B.,
Podos, S. D.,
Keith, K.,
Simpson, S. L.,
and Ferguson, E. L.
(1998)
Development
125,
1407-1420[Abstract]
7.
de Caestecker, M. P.,
Hemmati, P.,
Larisch-Bloch, S.,
Ajmera, R.,
Roberts, A. B.,
and Lechleider, R. J.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
13690-13696 8.
Lagna, G.,
Hata, A.,
Hemmati-Brivanlou, A.,
and Massague, J.
(1996)
Nature
383,
832-836[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
9.
Candia, A. F.,
Watabe, T.,
Hawley, S. H.,
Onichtchouk, D.,
Zhang, Y.,
Derynck, R.,
Niehrs, C.,
and Cho, K. W.
(1997)
Development
124,
4467-4480[Abstract]
10.
Chen, X.,
Weisberg, E.,
Fridmacher, V.,
Watanabe, M.,
Naco, G.,
and Whitman, M.
(1997)
Nature
389,
85-89[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
11.
Liu, F.,
Pouponnot, C.,
and Massague, J.
(1997)
Genes Dev.
11,
3157-3167 12.
Zhang, Y.,
Feng, X. H.,
and Derynck, R.
(1998)
Nature
394,
909-913[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
13.
Labbe, E.,
Silvestri, C.,
Hoodless, P. A.,
Wrana, J. L.,
and Attisano, L.
(1998)
Mol. Cell
2,
109-120[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
14.
Feng, X. H.,
Zhang, Y.,
Wu, R. Y.,
and Derynck, R.
(1998)
Genes Dev.
12,
2153-2163 15.
Janknecht, R.,
Wells, N. J.,
and Hunter, T.
(1998)
Genes Dev.
12,
2114-2119 16.
Pouponnot, C.,
Jayaraman, L.,
and Massague, J.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
22865-22868 17.
Topper, J. N.,
DiChiara, M. R.,
Brown, J. D.,
Williams, A. J.,
Falb, D.,
Collins, T.,
and Gimbrone, M. A. J.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
9506-9511 18.
Shen, X.,
Hu, P. P.,
Liberati, N. T.,
Datto, M. B.,
Frederick, J. P.,
and Wang, X. F.
(1998)
Mol. Biol. Cell
9,
3309-3319 19.
Shioda, T.,
Lechleider, R. J.,
Dunwoodie, S. L.,
Li, H.,
Yahata, T.,
de Caestecker, M. P.,
Fenner, M. H.,
Roberts, A. B.,
and Isselbacher, K. J.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
9785-9790 20.
Liu, F.,
Hata, A.,
Baker, J. C.,
Doody, J.,
Carcamo, J.,
Harland, R. M.,
and Massague, J.
(1996)
Nature
381,
620-623[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
21.
Stroschein, S. L.,
Wang, W.,
and Luo, K.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
9431-9441 22.
Sadowski, I.,
and Ptashne, M.
(1989)
Nucleic Acids Res.
17,
7539 23.
Wieser, R.,
Wrana, J. L.,
and Massague, J.
(1995)
EMBO J.
14,
2199-2208[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
24.
de Caestecker, M. P.,
Parks, W. T.,
Frank, C. J.,
Castagnino, P.,
Bottaro, D. P.,
Roberts, A. B.,
and Lechleider, R. J.
(1998)
Genes Dev.
12,
1587-1592 25.
Shi, Y.,
Hata, A.,
Lo, R. S.,
Massague, J.,
and Pavletich, N. P.
(1997)
Nature
388,
87-93[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
26.
Wu, R. Y.,
Zhang, Y.,
Feng, X. H.,
and Derynck, R.
(1997)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17,
2521-2528[Abstract]
27.
Le Dai, J.,
Turnacioglu, K. K.,
Schutte, M.,
Sugar, A. Y.,
and Kern, S. E.
(1998)
Cancer Res.
58,
4592-4597 28.
Souchelnytskyi, S.,
Tamaki, K.,
Engstrom, U.,
Wernstedt, C.,
ten Dijke, P.,
and Heldin, C. H.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
28107-28115 29.
Chen, X.,
Rubock, M. J.,
and Whitman, M.
(1996)
Nature
383,
691-696[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
30.
Kunzler, M.,
Braus, G. H.,
Georgiev, O.,
Seipel, K.,
and Schaffner, W.
(1994)
EMBO J.
13,
641-645[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
31.
Latchman, D. S.
(1997)
Int. J. Biochem. Cell Biol.
29,
1305-1312[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
32.
Nishihara, A.,
Hanai, J. I.,
Okamoto, N.,
Yanagisawa, J.,
Kato, S.,
Miyazono, K.,
and Kawabata, M.
(1998)
Genes Cells
3,
613-623[Abstract]
33.
Arany, Z.,
Newsome, D.,
Oldread, E.,
Livingston, D. M.,
and Eckner, R.
(1995)
Nature
374,
81-84[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
34.
Kraus, V. B.,
Moran, E.,
and Nevins, J. R.
(1992)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
12,
4391-4399 35.
Shi, Y.,
Wang, Y. F.,
Jayaraman, L.,
Yang, H.,
Massague, J.,
and Pavletich, N. P.
(1998)
Cell
94,
585-594[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
36.
Kawabata, M.,
Inoue, H.,
Hanyu, A.,
Imamura, T.,
and Miyazono, K.
(1998)
EMBO J.
17,
4056-4065[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
37.
de Winter, J. P.,
Roelen, B. A.,
ten Dijke, P.,
van der Burg, B.,
and van den Eijnden-van Raaij, A. J.
(1997)
Oncogene
14,
1891-1899[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
38.
Qin, B.,
Lam, S. S. W.,
and Lin, K.
(1999)
Structure
7,
1493-1503[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
39.
Eckner, R.
(1996)
Biol. Chem.
377,
685-688
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:
![]() |
H. Nishida, S. Miyagawa, M. Vieux-Rochas, M. Morini, Y. Ogino, K. Suzuki, N. Nakagata, H.-S. Choi, G. Levi, and G. Yamada Positive Regulation of Steroidogenic Acute Regulatory Protein Gene Expression through the Interaction between Dlx and GATA-4 for Testicular Steroidogenesis Endocrinology, May 1, 2008; 149(5): 2090 - 2097. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Wang, J. Long, F. Dai, M. Liang, X.-H. Feng, and X. Lin BCL6 Represses Smad Signaling in Transforming Growth Factor-{beta} Resistance Cancer Res., February 1, 2008; 68(3): 783 - 789. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. Cocolakis, M. Dai, L. Drevet, J. Ho, E. Haines, S. Ali, and J.-J. Lebrun Smad Signaling Antagonizes STAT5-mediated Gene Transcription and Mammary Epithelial Cell Differentiation J. Biol. Chem., January 18, 2008; 283(3): 1293 - 1307. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. Shi, S. C. Boyle, D. B. Sparrow, S. L. Dunwoodie, T. Shioda, and M. P. de Caestecker The Transcriptional Activity of CITED1 Is Regulated by Phosphorylation in a Cell Cycle-dependent Manner J. Biol. Chem., September 15, 2006; 281(37): 27426 - 27435. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Okano, H. W. Schnaper, K. Bomsztyk, and T. Hayashida RACK1 Binds to Smad3 to Modulate Transforming Growth Factor-beta1-stimulated {alpha}2(I) Collagen Transcription in Renal Tubular Epithelial Cells J. Biol. Chem., September 8, 2006; 281(36): 26196 - 26204. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Lamba, M. M Santos, D. P Philips, and D. J Bernard Acute regulation of murine follicle-stimulating hormone {beta} subunit transcription by activin A J. Mol. Endocrinol., February 1, 2006; 36(1): 201 - 220. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |