|
Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M003579200 on May 8, 2000
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 275, Issue 30, 23346-23354, July 28, 2000
Characterization of Drosophila Insulin Receptor
Substrate*
Rachel M. Kulansky
Poltilove §,
Aviva R.
Jacobs §,
Carol
Renfrew
Haft§,
Pin
Xu§, and
Simeon I.
Taylor§¶
From the § Diabetes Branch, NIDDKD, National Institutes
of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892 and the Graduate
Genetics Program, The George Washington University,
District of Columbia 20052
Received for publication, April 27, 2000
 |
ABSTRACT |
Insulin receptor substrate (IRS) proteins are
phosphorylated by multiple tyrosine kinases, including the insulin
receptor. Phosphorylated IRS proteins bind to SH2 domain-containing
proteins, thereby triggering downstream signaling pathways. The
Drosophila insulin receptor (dIR) C-terminal extension
contains potential binding sites for signaling molecules, suggesting
that dIR might not require an IRS protein to accomplish its signaling
functions. However, we obtained a cDNA encoding
Drosophila IRS (dIRS), and we demonstrated expression of
dIRS in a Drosophila cell line. Like mammalian IRS
proteins, the N-terminal portion of dIRS contains a pleckstrin homology
domain and a phosphotyrosine binding domain that binds to
phosphotyrosine residues in both human and Drosophila insulin receptors. When coexpressed with dIRS in COS-7 cells, a
chimeric receptor (the extracellular domain of human IR fused to the
cytoplasmic domain of dIR) mediated insulin-stimulated tyrosine
phosphorylation of dIRS. Mutating the juxtamembrane NPXY motif markedly reduced the ability of the receptor to phosphorylate dIRS. In contrast, the NPXY motifs in the C-terminal
extension of dIR were required for stable association with dIRS.
Coimmunoprecipitation experiments demonstrated
insulin-dependent binding of dIRS to phosphatidylinositol
3-kinase and SHP2. However, we did not detect interactions with Grb2,
SHC, or phospholipase C- . Taken together with published genetic
studies, these biochemical data support the hypothesis that dIRS
functions directly downstream from the insulin receptor in
Drosophila.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Insulin receptor substrates
(IRS)1 are important in many
cellular signaling pathways (1). Although originally discovered as
substrates that are phosphorylated by insulin receptors in mammalian
systems (2-6), IRS molecules are also phosphorylated in response to
other hormones and cytokines (e.g. interleukin-4 and growth
hormone) (1). Furthermore, phosphotyrosine residues in IRS molecules
interact with various SH2 domain-containing proteins, such as Grb2 and
PI 3-kinase, thereby activating several signaling pathways (1, 2).
An insulin receptor homolog was identified in Drosophila by
Fernandez-Almonacid and Rosen (7). Two isoforms of the insulin receptor
have been identified in Drosophila (8, 9). One isoform
closely resembles mammalian receptors, and the other contains a
368-amino acid C-terminal extension. Because this extension contains
many potential sites for tyrosine phosphorylation, including consensus
binding sites for the p85 subunit of PI 3-kinase, it was suggested that
the Drosophila insulin receptor might mediate signaling
activities normally performed by IRS molecules. However, Yenush
et al. (10) found that the Drosophila insulin
receptor does not mediate insulin-stimulated mitogenesis in 32D cells
without the addition of mammalian IRS-1. This raised the question as to whether Drosophila might have an endogenous IRS molecule.
In this study, we have obtained a cDNA encoding
Drosophila IRS.2
The dIRS molecule is similar to mammalian IRS molecules, as it contains
a pleckstrin homology (PH) domain, a phosphotyrosine binding (PTB)
domain, and a phosphorylation domain with multiple potential sites of
tyrosine phosphorylation. While this work was in progress, Böhni
et al. (11) reported that dIRS is encoded by the
chico locus, a mutant phenotype associated with
abnormalities in cell size, cell number, and metabolism. To better
understand the Drosophila insulin signaling pathway, we have
investigated the interactions of dIRS with both human and
Drosophila insulin receptors as well as downstream signaling molecules.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Identification and Sequencing of the EST Clone
By using the complete amino acid sequence of mouse (m) IRS-1, we
searched the GenBankTM EST data base and identified a
fragment of Drosophila IRS (clone LD16868, accession number
AA536319), which we obtained from Genome Systems, Inc. (St. Louis, MO).
The nucleotide sequences of both strands of the clone were determined
using the ABI PRISM Dye Terminator Cycle Sequencing Ready Reaction Kit
(Perkin-Elmer) or the ABI PRISM dRhodamine Terminator Cycle Sequencing
Ready Reaction Kit (Perkin-Elmer). Reactions were analyzed using the ABI373A DNA sequencer. Sequence data were analyzed and assembled using
the computer program GeneWorks (version 2.5.1, Oxford Molecular Group,
Inc., Campbell, CA).
Yeast Plasmid Construction
dIRS Constructs--
We constructed expression vectors for
fusion proteins of dIRS with a yeast activation domain by ligating part
or all of dIRS cDNA into the plasmid pB42AD
(CLONTECH, San Francisco, CA). Fragments of dIRS
cDNA were amplified using oligonucleotide primers that introduced
in-frame EcoRI and SalI restriction sites into
the 5' ends of the upstream and downstream primers, respectively. Pfu DNA polymerase (Stratagene, La Jolla, CA) was used to
amplify the fragments for the N-terminal construct (amino acids 1-410) as well as the phosphorylation domain construct (amino acids 235-968); however, we used Expand Long Template Polymerase (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) to amplify the cDNA for the dIRS full-length
construct (amino acids 1-968). The N-terminal construct contained all
residues up to, but not including, the first YXXM motif.
Note that the N-terminal construct contained 175 amino acid residues
after the region of homology to PTB domains of mammalian IRS molecules. The phosphorylation domain construct contained all residues following the end of homology to other known PTB domains.
dIR Constructs--
We constructed expression vectors for fusion
proteins of dIR with the prokaryotic LexA DNA-binding protein by
ligating cDNA encoding portions of dIR into the plasmid pLexA
(CLONTECH, San Francisco, CA). dIR cDNAs were
amplified from EST AA246263 using oligonucleotide primers that
introduced in-frame EcoRI and SalI restriction
sites into the 5' ends of the upstream and downstream primers,
respectively. A combination of Pfu DNA polymerase and Taq DNA polymerase (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) was used
to amplify the fragments. The dIRc construct contained amino acid residues 1332-2148 (from the transmembrane domain to the C terminus of
the molecule). The transmembrane + juxtamembrane domains construct contained residues 1332-1661. The 4 NPXY construct
contained residues 1332-1965, beginning in the transmembrane domain
and ending before the four C-terminal NPXY motifs.
hIR Constructs--
We constructed the yeast expression vector
for the fusion protein of the hIRc with the prokaryotic LexA
DNA-binding protein by ligating cDNA encoding portions of hIR into
the plasmid pLexA (CLONTECH, San Francisco, CA).
hIRc cDNA was amplified from a cDNA construct of the insulin
receptor (12) using oligonucleotide primers that introduced in-frame
EcoRI and BamHI restriction sites into the 5'
ends of the upstream and downstream primers, respectively. The
construct contained residues 941-1343. The IR juxtamembrane NPXY motif mutant (JMm, residues 941-1343; N957A, Y960A)
and the IR kinase dead mutant (K1018A, residues 941-1343) were
generated by site-directed mutagenesis.
Yeast Two-hybrid System Assays
Assays were performed according to the MATCHMAKER LexA
Two-hybrid System protocol (CLONTECH, San
Francisco, CA). Briefly, EGY48 cells (mat his3,
trp1, ura3-52, leu2::3Lexop-LEU2, LYS2), which were
pretransformed with p8op-lacZ, were cotransformed with plasmid
constructs by the polyethylene glycol/lithium acetate protocol
(CLONTECH, San Francisco, CA). Transformants were
grown on appropriate SD (CLONTECH, San Francisco,
CA) glucose agar plates for 3 days at 30 °C. Several independent
colonies were transferred to SD galactose/raffinose agar plates and
grown overnight at 30 °C to induce expression of B42 fusion
proteins. The interactions were then assessed using colony lift
-galactosidase assays and liquid culture -galactosidase assays
with O-nitrophenyl -D-galactopyranoside (Sigma) as the substrate, according to the CLONTECH
protocol. For the liquid culture -galactosidase assays, the data
were normalized to the interaction of hIRc with mIRS-3 (defined to be
100%). Experiments were repeated twice in triplicate.
Expression in Mammalian Cells
dIRS--
Full-length dIRS cDNA was amplified by PCR from
the EST clone using Pfu DNA polymerase. The primers included
a site for EcoRI restriction endonuclease and a Kozak
consensus sequence (13) at the 5' end of the coding sequence. The
primers also introduced a site for SalI restriction
endonuclease at the 3' end of the cDNA. The PCR product was first
cloned using the Original TA Cloning Kit (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA).
The insert was excised using appropriate restriction endonucleases and
was ligated into pcDNA3.1 Myc-His version A (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA).
Chimeric hIR-dIR--
EST clone AA246263 served as a PCR
template to amplify residues 1344-2148 of the Drosophila
insulin receptor. We used Pfu DNA polymerase and
oligonucleotide primers to introduce in-frame ApaI and
SpeI restriction sites into the 5' ends of the upstream and
downstream primers, respectively. The product was cloned into pCR2.1-TOPO using the TOPO TA Cloning Kit (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA).
We then used a cDNA clone of the human IR (12) in pGEM4z that had a
synonymous substitution in codon 948 to create an ApaI restriction site. This hIR cDNA clone was digested with
ApaI and SpeI to remove hIR amino acids
949-1343. The dIR TA-cloned construct was then digested with
ApaI and SpeI; the fragment containing dIR
residues 1344-2148 was ligated to the pGEM4z-hIR fragment containing
hIR residues 1-948. The entire chimeric hIR-dIR was then excised by
restriction digestion with SalI and SpeI and
ligated into pcDNA 3 (Invitrogen, Carlsbad, CA) that had been
digested with XhoI and XbaI.
Chimeric hIR-dIR NPXY Mutants--
We used PCR-based techniques
to introduce mutations at the five NPXY motifs in the
cytoplasmic domain of the chimeric hIR-dIR molecule. Phenylalanine was
substituted for dIR Tyr1358 in the juxtamembrane of the
Y1358F chimeric receptor. In the CT mutant receptor, we substituted
Phe for Tyr1969 and deleted dIR amino acid residues
1970-2148 (containing the remaining three NPXY motifs). In
the Y1358F/ CT mutant, all five NPXY motifs were either
mutated or deleted. Constructs were confirmed by sequencing.
Bovine PI 3-Kinase p85 --
An expression vector for bovine
PI 3-kinase p85 was generously provided by Dr. Masato Kasuga
(14).
dIRS Expression and Phosphorylation by the Wild Type
hIR-dIR--
Plasmid DNA was transfected into COS-7 cells using
LipofectAMINE Plus (Life Technologies, Inc.) according to the
instructions provided by the manufacturer. Transfected cells were
serum-starved for 4 h (in DMEM containing 1% insulin-free BSA,
100 units/ml penicillin, 100 µg/ml streptomycin, and 2 mM
L-glutamine), stimulated with insulin (0-100
nM) for 10 min, and immediately lysed using a buffer
containing 1% Triton X-100, 150 mM NaCl, 10 mM
Tris (pH 7.4), 1 mM EDTA, 0.5% Nonidet P-40, 50 mM NaF, 1 mM Na3VO4,
0.2 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, and 1 µg/ml each of
aprotinin, leupeptin, and pepstatin. Proteins from cell lysates were
separated by SDS-PAGE and were transferred to a polyvinylidene
difluoride (PVDF) membrane. Immunoblotting was performed using anti-Myc
9E10 (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Santa Cruz, CA) and
anti-phosphotyrosine 4G10 (Upstate Biotechnology, Inc., Lake Placid,
NY) antibodies. Secondary antibodies were labeled with horseradish
peroxidase. Proteins were visualized using Enhanced Chemiluminescence
(ECL) (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech).
dIRS Association with hIR-dIR NPXY Mutants--
Transfected
cells were serum-starved for 16 h (in DMEM containing 1%
insulin-free BSA, 100 units/ml penicillin, 100 µg/ml streptomycin,
and 2 mM L-glutamine), stimulated with 100 nM insulin for 5 min, and lysed using a buffer containing
0.5% (v/v) Triton X-100, 50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 0.3 M sodium chloride, 10 mM sodium pyrophosphate,
100 mM sodium fluoride, 2 mM sodium vanadate,
Complete® protease inhibitor tablet (Roche Molecular Biochemicals),
and 10 mM N-ethylmaleimide (NEM). Four-fifths of
the lysate for each sample was used for immunoprecipitation. The lysate
was incubated with an excess of Ultralink-immobilized protein G
(Pierce) and autoantibodies to the IR that were obtained from patient
B-19 with clinical type B insulin-resistance syndrome (15). In contrast to other experiments described here, proteins were separated under non-reducing conditions by omitting dithiothreitol and adding 10 mM NEM (16) to the lysate in addition to the Laemmli sample buffer. Samples were boiled 3 min before resolving using SDS-PAGE. Proteins were transferred to PVDF membranes. Immunoblotting was performed using monoclonal anti-Myc antibodies (Santa Cruz
Biotechnology), polyclonal antibodies directed against the -subunit
of the human insulin receptor (Santa Cruz Biotechnology), and
monoclonal anti-phosphotyrosine antibodies (Upstate Biotechnology,
Inc.). Secondary antibodies were labeled with horseradish peroxidase,
and proteins were visualized using ECL (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech).
Coimmunoprecipitation Experiments with SH2 Domain-containing
Proteins--
Transfected cells were starved for 5 h (in DMEM
containing 1% insulin-free BSA, 100 units/ml penicillin, 100 µg/ml
streptomycin, and 2 mM L-glutamine), stimulated
with 100 nM insulin for 5 min, and immediately lysed using
a buffer containing 0.5% (v/v) Triton X-100, 50 mM
Tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 0.3 M sodium chloride, 10 mM
sodium pyrophosphate, 100 mM sodium fluoride, 2 mM sodium vanadate, and Complete® protease inhibitor
tablet (Roche Molecular Biochemicals). Two-thirds of the lysate for
each sample was used for immunoprecipitation. The lysate was incubated
with an excess of Ultralink-immobilized protein G (Pierce) and
monoclonal Myc antibody (Santa Cruz Biotechnology). Immunoprecipitates
and cell extracts (non-immunoprecipitated lysate) were separated by
SDS-PAGE and transferred to PVDF membranes. Immunoblotting was
performed using polyclonal antibodies to Grb2 (Santa Cruz
Biotechnology), Myc (Santa Cruz Biotechnology), PI 3-kinase p85
(Santa Cruz Biotechnology), phospholipase C- (Santa Cruz
Biotechnology), SHC (Upstate Biotechnology, Inc.), and SHP2 (Santa Cruz
Biotechnology); monoclonal anti-phosphotyrosine antibodies (Upstate
Biotechnology, Inc.) were also used. Secondary antibodies were labeled
with horseradish peroxidase. Proteins were visualized using ECL.
Experiments Using Schneider-2 (S2) Cells
Drosophila S2 cells were cultured in Schneider's
Drosophila medium with L-glutamine (Life
Technologies, Inc.) supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum, 2 mM L-glutamine, 100 units/ml penicillin, and
100 µg/ml streptomycin.
Genomic DNA Isolation--
DNAzol (Life Technologies, Inc.) was
used to lyse cells from a confluent 25-ml culture and isolate genomic
DNA according to the instructions provided by the product manufacturer.
Endogenous dIRS Expression--
S2 cells were lysed in a buffer
containing 0.5% (v/v) Triton X-100, 50 mM Tris-HCl (pH
7.5), 0.3 M sodium chloride, 10 mM sodium
pyrophosphate, 100 mM sodium fluoride, 2 mM
sodium vanadate, and Complete® protease inhibitor tablet (Roche
Molecular Biochemicals). Protein from cell lysates was separated by
SDS-PAGE and transferred to a PVDF membrane. Immunoblotting was
performed using a polyclonal peptide antibody made against residues
919-935 of dIRS (Zymed Laboratories Inc., South San
Francisco, CA). Antibody specificity was confirmed using lysates from
COS-7 cells transfected with empty vector or with Myc-tagged dIRS; both
preimmune and postimmune serum were tested (data not shown). Secondary
antibodies were labeled with horseradish peroxidase. Proteins were
visualized using ECL.
 |
RESULTS |
Sequence Analysis--
We identified a sequence in the EST data
base (AA536319) corresponding to a cDNA encoding
Drosophila IRS (dIRS). We determined the full-length coding
sequence of dIRS cDNA (2907 bp). The clone also contained a 110-bp
5'-untranslated sequence, a Kozak consensus sequence (13) at the
translation start site, a polyadenylation site, and a poly(A) tail.
dIRS is predicted to contain 968 amino acid residues with a calculated
molecular mass of 108,000 kDa. The deduced amino acid sequence of our
cDNA clone (GenBankTM accession number
AF092046)3 is identical to
that published by Böhni et al. (11). Like mammalian
IRS molecules, dIRS contains a pleckstrin homology (PH) domain, a
phosphotyrosine binding (PTB) domain, and a C-terminal phosphorylation
domain. The PH and PTB domains of dIRS are 45 and 41% identical,
respectively, to those of rIRS-1; similar results are obtained when
dIRS is compared with other mammalian IRS molecules (Fig.
1). The phosphorylation domain does not
display significant homology to other molecules. We identified at least
six potential sites of tyrosine phosphorylation that are present in the
context of known consensus binding sequences for SH2 domain-containing proteins (Table I). Four of these sites,
including two potential binding sites for the p85 subunit of PI
3-kinase (Tyr411 and Tyr641), are located in
the phosphorylation domain.

View larger version (70K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Alignment of the PH and PTB domains of
mammalian IRS molecules with respect to those domains of dIRS.
Percent identity is expressed relative to dIRS. Alignment was performed
using the program GeneWorks. Amino acid residues that are conserved in
at least two-thirds of the above molecules are indicated by
lowercase letters in the consensus sequence (bottom
line). Amino acid residues that are conserved in all of the above
sequences are indicated by uppercase letters.
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table I
Potential binding sites for SH2 domain-containing proteins
dIRS possesses at least six potential phosphotyrosine residues that are
predicted to bind several SH2 domain-containing proteins, as suggested
by published consensus binding sequences (35, 42, 51). Parentheses are
used to indicate consensus sequences for proteins that have not been
tested in coimmunoprecipitation experiments.
|
|
Presence of Endogenous dIRS--
The EST clone described above was
derived from Drosophila embryo, although other ESTs of dIRS
have since been obtained from the ovary and head. In order to determine
whether the predicted dIRS protein was expressed, we obtained an
antibody to dIRS by immunizing rabbits with a peptide specific to the
C-terminal region of the protein (amino acid residues 919-935).
Through immunoblotting, we confirmed that dIRS is expressed in
Drosophila S2 cells (embryonic epithelial cells), with an
Mr 144,000. Interestingly, when expressed in
COS-7 cells, Myc-tagged dIRS had an Mr
132,000 (Fig. 2).

View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
dIRS is endogenous to Drosophila
Schneider 2 (S2) cells. Lysates from S2 cells (lanes
1-3), COS-7 cells (lane 4), and COS-7 cells
overexpressing Myc-tagged dIRS (lane 5) were used for
immunoblotting with a peptide antibody specific for the C-terminal of
dIRS. Endogenous dIRS has an Mr 144,000,
whereas transfected dIRS in COS-7 cells has an
Mr 132,000. Lanes 1-3 represent
different volumes of S2 lysate (50, 25, and 10 µl) loaded on the
polyacrylamide gel.
|
|
Chromosomal Localization--
When the nucleotide sequence of the
entire dIRS EST insert was used to search the GenBankTM
nucleotide data base, we noted that the first 110 bases of our EST
insert are identical to the last 110 bases of a dJNK genomic sequence
(17). Since these bases occur after the dJNK polyadenylation site, we
hypothesized that dIRS is located immediately downstream of dJNK, which
has been mapped to chromosome 2, region 31 B-C (17) (Fig.
3). To test this hypothesis, genomic DNA
was isolated from S2 cells. We used the genomic DNA as a template to
perform PCR. In the first PCR, the amplicon extended from the last exon of dJNK through the middle of the 110-bp sequence. In the second PCR,
the amplicon extended from the 110-bp sequence to the dIRS sequence.
These reactions confirmed that the 110-bp sequence was located in close
proximity to the coding sequences of the genes for both dJNK and our
dIRS EST clone. Finally, we performed another PCR with one primer
derived from a sequence in the dJNK genomic clone (downstream from the
polyadenylation site) and a second primer in the 5' end of dIRS. After
being ligated into the TA-cloning vector, the sequence of the amplified
DNA was determined, thereby confirming that it contained both the dJNK
genomic clone sequence as well as the dIRS sequence. This suggests that
dJNK is immediately upstream of dIRS.

View larger version (39K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
dIRS is located on chromosome 2 region 31B-C,
immediately downstream of dJNK. The diagram depicts the 3' end of
the dJNK gene and its region of overlap with the dIRS cDNA obtained
from the EST data base. The locations of the oligonucleotides used as
primers for PCR are indicated by arrows (middle
of figure).
|
|
Yeast Two-hybrid--
To investigate the functional interactions
of dIRS with the human insulin receptor, we used the yeast two-hybrid
system (Fig. 4A). We fused
dIRS to the prokaryotic LexA DNA-binding protein in the pLexA
expression vector; the human insulin receptor cytoplasmic domain (hIRc)
was fused to a yeast transcription activation domain in pB42AD. As
judged by the yeast two-hybrid assay, the interaction between dIRS and
hIRc was nearly three times the strength of that of mIRS-3 and hIRc.
The interaction of dIRS with hIRc was specific in that there was a
negligible interaction of dIRS with human lamin C. Furthermore, there
was no detectable signal when hIRc was expressed in the absence of dIRS
(data not shown). The PTB domains of mammalian IRS molecules bind to a
phosphotyrosine residue in the juxtamembrane NPXY motif of
the insulin receptor. Therefore, we inquired whether the PTB domain in
dIRS had similar binding specificity. To address this question, we
constructed two mutants. In one mutant, the Asn957 and
Tyr960 in the NPXY motif were mutated to alanine
residues (JMm); in the other mutant (K1018A), Lys1018 in
the ATP-binding site of hIRc was mutated to Ala in order to inactivate
the receptor tyrosine kinase. Use of either of the mutant insulin
receptors decreased the strength of the interaction by 85%.
Interestingly, unlike the situation with mammalian IRS molecules, dIRS
retained a significant ( 15%) ability to bind to the hIRc.

View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
dIRS interacts with both the human and the
Drosophila insulin receptors. Both full-length
and truncated IRS molecules were fused to the B42 activation domain in
the yeast expression vector pB42AD, whereas the cytoplasmic domains of
both the human (A) and Drosophila (B)
insulin receptors were fused to the LexA DNA binding domain in the
yeast expression vector pLexA. Diagrams of the constructs indicate
which fragments of dIRS (A and B) or dIR
(B) are included in each of the fusion proteins. In the case
of hIR (A), we designate either wild type or mutant
receptors by the following: WT, K1018A, or JMm. -Galactosidase
activity in yeast extracts is expressed as a percentage of the
-galactosidase activity in yeast coexpressing LexA-hIRc and
B42AD-mIRS-3 (defined as 100%). In the lower left
corner of each panel, we diagram the boundaries for
important domains of dIRS (A and B) and dIR
(B).
|
|
To investigate this interaction, we created two overlapping partial
constructs of dIRS (Fig. 4A). One construct (amino acid residues 1-410) contained the PH and PTB domains plus 175 amino acids
residues downstream from the PTB domain. The other construct (amino
acid residues 235-968) contained the C-terminal portion of the
molecule distal to the PTB domain. These two constructs will be
referred to as the "N-terminal" and "phosphorylation domain" constructs, respectively. The N-terminal construct interacted nearly as
strongly as the full-length dIRS with the WT hIRc. However, like
mammalian IRS molecules, the N-terminal construct did not interact with
either the JMm or the K1018A hIRc constructs. Interestingly, the
phosphorylation domain of dIRS was able to interact with WT hIRc. The
strength of this interaction was 25% of the strength of the
interaction between full-length dIRS and WT hIRc, but did not require
intact kinase activity or an intact NPXY motif.
To investigate binding between two molecules derived from the same
species, we used the yeast two-hybrid system to study the interaction
between dIRS and the Drosophila insulin receptor cytoplasmic domain (dIRc) (Fig. 4B). The strength of the interaction
between dIRS and dIRc, although significant, was only 20% of the
strength of the interaction between dIRS and hIRc. A strong interaction was detected between the N-terminal construct and dIRc; however, we did
not detect an interaction between the phosphorylation domain of dIRS
and dIRc.
The dIR has a 368-amino acid C-terminal extension that contains
multiple potential tyrosine phosphorylation sites, including four
NPXY motifs. In addition, dIR has an NPXY motif
in its juxtamembrane domain (in the homologous position to the
NPXY motif present in mammalian insulin receptors). We
created two additional constructs in order to map the site in dIRc
where dIRS binds. In these two constructs, variable length sequences
(183- and 487-amino acid residues) were deleted from the C terminus of
dIRc; both mutants lack the four NPXY motifs in the
C-terminal extension. For both the full-length and N-terminal dIRS
constructs, deletion of the additional four NPXY motifs in
the C-terminal extension reduces the interaction by 70%; deletion
of the entire C-terminal extension abolishes the interaction (Fig.
4B).
Expression in Mammalian Cells--
We next inquired whether the
insulin receptor could phosphorylate dIRS in a more physiological
system. To address this question, we transiently cotransfected COS-7
cells with dIRS and a chimeric hIR-dIR. Serum-starved cells were
incubated in the absence or presence of insulin (10 or 100 nM). Cell lysates were used for immunoblots that were
probed with anti-phosphotyrosine antibodies and anti-Myc antibodies. In
cells coexpressing dIRS and chimeric hIR-dIR, incubation in the
presence of insulin led to increased tyrosine phosphorylation of both
recombinant dIRS and the chimeric insulin receptor (Fig.
5, lanes 10 and
11). When dIRS was expressed in the absence of recombinant
insulin receptor, a weak band was seen corresponding to phosphorylated
dIRS in extracts of cells exposed to insulin (Fig. 5, lanes
4 and 5).

View larger version (31K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
dIRS is phosphorylated in response to insulin
stimulation. Myc-tagged dIRS and a chimeric insulin receptor
(hIR-dIR, composed of the hIR ectodomain and the dIR cytoplasmic
domain) were overexpressed in COS-7 cells. Serum-starved cells were
stimulated with 0, 10, or 100 nM insulin for 10 min. Cell
lysates were used for immunoblotting with anti-phosphotyrosine
antibodies (top panels) or anti-Myc antibodies (bottom
panels). Lysates in lanes 1 and 2 originated
from cells transfected with pcDNA3.1 Myc-His. The bands
corresponding to dIR- and dIRS are indicated by
arrowheads on the figure. In cells expressing dIRS, but not
hIR-dIR (lanes 4 and 5, upper panel), the dIRS
band is a faint band migrating just above a strong nonspecific
band.
|
|
Coimmunoprecipitation Experiments with Mutant IRs--
Studies in
the yeast two-hybrid system suggested that the four NPXY
motifs in the C terminus of dIR were more important than the
juxtamembrane motif in the ability to bind dIRS (Fig.
4B). To further investigate this observation, COS-7 cells
were transiently transfected with hIR-dIR and/or Myc-dIRS cDNA and
were stimulated with 100 nM insulin for 5 min. Since the
Mr of dIRS is nearly identical to the
Mr of the truncated -subunit of the insulin receptor, we performed SDS-gel electrophoresis of the extracts under
non-reducing conditions to facilitate separation of the two molecules.
Immunoblotting of cell extracts with an anti-insulin receptor antibody
showed that all four forms of the insulin receptor were expressed at
comparable levels (Fig. 6B, lanes
1-4). Furthermore, when the phosphotyrosine content of the
various receptors was examined using an anti-phosphotyrosine antibody,
we found that the full-length hIR-dIR (FL), a receptor with a mutated
juxtamembrane NPXY motif (Y1358F), and a receptor lacking
NPXY motifs in its C-terminal extension ( CT) exhibited
similar levels of tyrosine phosphorylation (Fig. 6A, lanes
2-4). In contrast, receptors with all of their NPXY
motifs removed or mutated (Y1358F/ CT) displayed a reduced
phosphotyrosine content (Fig. 6A, lane 1).
Immunoprecipitation using anti-insulin receptor antibodies followed by
immunoblotting with either anti-phosphotyrosine antibodies (Fig.
6C, lanes 1-4) or anti-receptor antibodies (Fig. 6D,
lanes 1-4) showed similar results.

View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Requirement of the IR juxtamembrane
NPXY motif for efficient phosphorylation of dIRS and
the IR C-terminal extension NPXY motifs for stable
association with dIRS. COS-7 cells were cotransfected with
expression vectors for dIRS and full-length (FL) hIR-dIR
(lanes 3 and 8), Y1358F-IR (lanes 4 and 9), CT-IR (lanes 2 and 7), and
Y1358F/ CT-IR (lanes 1 and 6). To better
equalize the expression levels of the IR constructs, a ratio of 4:1 for
full-length versus truncated hIR-dIR constructs was used.
Empty expression vectors were included as required to maintain equal
DNA concentrations in all transfections. Serum-starved cells were
incubated in the presence of insulin (100 nM) for 5 min.
Cells were lysed in a buffer containing Triton X-100 (0.5%) and NEM
(10 mM). A and B, the samples were
applied directly to the gels. C and D, the
samples were immunoprecipitated (IP) using anti-IR
antibodies prior to analysis by SDS-PAGE (4%) under non-reducing
conditions in the absence of dithiothreitol. Proteins were detected by
immunoblotting (IB) with anti-insulin receptor antibody
(B and D, lanes 1-5), anti-Myc
antibody (B and D, lanes 6-10), and
anti-phosphotyrosine antibody (A and C, lanes
1-10). The upper band present in lanes
6-10 of C and D represents immunoglobulin
G.
|
|
As with the hIR-dIR molecules, expression of Myc-tagged dIRS in the
various extracts was similar (Fig. 6B, lanes 6-9). However, mutation of the hIR-dIR juxtamembrane NPXY motif resulted in
a significant reduction in the tyrosine phosphorylation of dIRS (Fig.
6A, lanes 6 and 9), whereas mutation of the
C-terminal NPXY motifs of the receptor did not affect its
ability to phosphorylate dIRS (Fig. 6A, lane 7).
In contrast, immunoprecipitation of extracts with an anti-insulin
receptor antibody followed by immunoblotting with anti-Myc antibody
showed that Myc-dIRS associated strongly with both the (FL) hIR-dIR
(Fig. 6D, lane 8) and the Y1358F mutant IR in which the Tyr
in the juxtamembrane NPXY motif was mutated to Phe (Fig.
6D, lane 9). However, this interaction was
significantly reduced when the NPXY motifs in the C-terminal
extension were removed ( CT) (Fig. 6D, lane 7) or when the
NPXY motifs in the juxtamembrane domain as well as the
C-terminal extension were removed (Y1358F/ CT) (Fig. 6D, lane
6). Furthermore, the dIRS that was associated with the receptors
was tyrosine-phosphorylated (Fig. 6C, lanes 6-9). Thus, the
juxtamembrane NPXY motif of dIR was required for optimal
phosphorylation of dIRS, but the C-terminal NPXY motifs were
necessary for formation of a stable complex that allowed for
coimmunoprecipitation of dIRS together with dIR.
Coimmunoprecipitation Experiments with SH2 Domain-containing
Proteins--
Next we investigated the interactions of dIRS with
downstream signaling molecules. COS-7 cells were transiently
transfected with Myc-tagged dIRS and/or the chimeric hIR-dIR. In
extracts of cells expressing both Myc-dIRS and hIR-dIR, anti-Myc
antibodies immunoprecipitated two phosphotyrosine-containing proteins
corresponding to dIRS and hIR-dIR. Insulin increased the
phosphotyrosine content of both molecules (Fig.
7, A and B,
lanes 3 and 4). Furthermore, when extracts from
cells overexpressing hIR-dIR and Myc-dIRS were immunoprecipitated with
anti-Myc antibodies and used for immunoblotting, we observed that
insulin increased association of p85 and SHP2 with Myc-dIRS (Fig.
7A, lanes 3 and 4). We did not detect
coimmunoprecipitation of Myc-dIRS with phospholipase C- , SHC, or
Grb2 (Fig. 7A, lanes 3 and 4). As a control, we
confirmed that our antibodies detected these SH2 domain-containing
proteins in extracts of the transfected COS-7 cells (data not shown).
Because there was only a weak signal corresponding to endogenous p85 in
the COS-7 cells (data not shown), we confirmed the association of p85
with Myc-dIRS in experiments using COS-7 cells coexpressing p85, dIRS,
and the chimeric hIR-dIR (Fig. 7B, lanes 3 and
4).

View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
dIRS associates with p85 and SHP2 in an
insulin-dependent manner in COS-7 cells. A,
Myc-tagged dIRS (lanes 1-4) and a chimeric insulin receptor
(the hIR extracellular domain and the dIR cytoplasmic domain;
lanes 3, 4, 7, and 8) were overexpressed in COS-7
cells. Empty expression vectors were included as required to maintain
equal DNA concentrations in all transfections. Serum-starved cells were
incubated in the presence or absence of insulin (100 nM)
for 5 min. Cell lysates were immunoprecipitated with anti-Myc
antibodies followed by immunoblotting with antibodies as indicated.
B, COS-7 cells were cotransfected with Myc-tagged dIRS
(lanes 1-4), a chimeric insulin receptor (the hIR
extracellular domain and the dIR cytoplasmic domain; lanes 3, 4, 7, and 8), and bovine p85 (lanes 1-8).
Empty expression vectors were included as required to maintain equal
DNA concentrations in all transfections. Serum-starved cells were
incubated in the presence or absence of insulin (100 nM)
for 5 min. Cell lysates were immunoprecipitated with anti-Myc
antibodies followed by immunoblotting with antibodies as
indicated.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Parallels between Insulin Signaling Pathways in Mammals and
Drosophila--
Many molecules in the mammalian insulin signaling
pathway have been identified in Drosophila. The dIR has been
cloned and has been demonstrated to be essential for early development
in Drosophila. Mutants lacking functional insulin receptors
die during the embryonic or early larval stage (18). Although a ligand for dIR has not been directly identified by cloning, several reports suggest the existence of "insulin-like activity" in extracts of Drosophila (19-21). Furthermore, several molecules that
function downstream in the insulin signaling pathway have homologs in
Drosophila, including Grb2 (Drk) (22, 23), dSHC (24), Sos
(25), PI 3-kinase (26-28), SHP2 (corkscrew) (29), PKB/Akt (30), PTEN (31, 32), and S6 kinase (33). Indeed, some of these molecules (e.g. Sos) were identified in Drosophila before
they were known to exist in mammals.
However, structural differences between dIR and mammalian insulin
receptors raised the possibility that there might be a major difference
in the pathways of insulin signaling. Unlike its mammalian homologs,
dIR contains a C-terminal extension with several potential sites of
tyrosine phosphorylation. These C-terminal phosphotyrosine residues may
serve as docking sites for signaling proteins containing SH2 domains.
If dIR could directly form stable complexes with downstream signaling
molecules, this might eliminate the need for a Drosophila
IRS. Nevertheless, several lines of evidence suggested the presence of
a Drosophila IRS (10, 34). For example, when the dIR
cytoplasmic domain was expressed in 32D cells, coexpression of IRS-1
was required to mediate insulin-stimulated mitogenesis (10). In the
present work, we have directly demonstrated the existence of
Drosophila IRS by identifying a cDNA encoding the protein.
The existence of an IRS molecule in Drosophila emphasizes
the many parallels between the insulin signaling pathways in species as
diverse as Drosophila and human. dIRS closely resembles
mammalian IRS molecules with respect to both structure and function.
Like its mammalian homologs, dIRS contains a PH domain, a PTB domain, and a phosphorylation domain. The N-terminal portion of dIRS
(i.e. the PTB domain) binds to phosphotyrosine residues
located in NPXY motifs of the insulin receptor. In addition,
coimmunoprecipitation experiments confirm that the dIRS phosphorylation
domain provides binding sites for signaling molecules that interact
with mammalian IRS molecules (e.g. PI 3-kinase and SHP2). By
using genetic techniques, Böhni et al. (11) also
conclude that dIRS interacts with dIR and PI 3-kinase. Böhni
et al. (11) also use sequence analysis to suggest that dIRS
binds Drk (the Drosophila ortholog of mammalian Grb2) (11).
However, the motif cited beginning at Tyr243 has an Arg at
amino acid residue 246 that does not correspond to the consensus
binding site for Grb2 (i.e. Tyr(P) followed by two
hydrophilic and then one hydrophobic amino acid residue) (35). Additionally, we did not detect immunoprecipitation of Grb2 with dIRS
in COS-7 cells, despite abundant expression of Grb2 in the cells.
Differences between dIRS and Mammalian IRS Molecules--
There
are several structural features that define the family of IRS molecules
including: an N-terminal PH domain, a PTB domain that interacts with
phosphotyrosine residues in NPXY motifs (e.g. Tyr960 of the human insulin receptor), and a C-terminal
domain containing multiple sites of tyrosine phosphorylation (1). In
addition, IRS-2 contains a second domain that binds elsewhere in the
insulin receptor; this interaction also requires intact tyrosine kinase activity (36, 37). dIRS resembles IRS-2 in that it also contains a
second domain that can bind to the hIR. However, unlike IRS-2, this
second binding interaction between dIRS and hIR does not require
tyrosine phosphorylation. Paradoxically, although we detected this
second binding interaction when the two molecules were derived from
different species (dIRS and hIR), we did not detect it when both
molecules were derived from the same species (dIRS and dIR). The
inability to detect this second interaction with dIR raises questions
about its physiological significance; however, we cannot rule out the
possibility of a low affinity interaction. Even a low affinity
interaction at a second binding site might contribute to stabilizing an
interaction that was driven primarily by binding of the PTB domain of
dIRS to an NPXpY motif in dIR.
IRS molecules bind through their PTB domains to a highly conserved
NPXY motif located in the juxtamembrane domain of mammalian insulin receptors (1). The dIR contains an NPXY motif in its juxtamembrane domain; however, the dIR also contains four additional NPXY motifs in its C-terminal extension. This raises the
question, to which NPXY motif(s) does dIRS bind? When we
deleted the NPXY motifs in the C terminus of dIR in the
yeast two-hybrid system as well as in COS-7 cells, this significantly
inhibited the association between dIRS and dIR. Thus, dIRS stably
interacts with the four NPXY motifs present in the
extension. Similarly, Marin-Hincapie and Garofalo (38) concluded that
human IRS-1 binds primarily to the C-terminal extension of
Drosophila IR. However, in contrast to the findings of
Marin-Hincapie and Garofalo (38), we found that the phosphorylation of
dIRS by dIR depends on the juxtamembrane NPXY motif, not the
C-terminal extension. It is possible that the differences in the
results are explained by differences in experimental methods. Whereas
we have used full-length insulin receptors and dIRS, Marin-Hincapie and
Garofalo (38) used a truncated insulin receptor lacking the -subunit
to phosphorylate mammalian IRS-1. By adding insulin to intact cells, we
have activated insulin receptors in the plasma membrane. It is not
clear whether recombinant -subunits of dIR (38) are transported
normally to the plasma membrane or whether they might be retained in
intracellular membranes.
In mammals, IRS molecules require the IR juxtamembrane NPXY
motif for phosphorylation. Although an association between mammalian IR
and mammalian IRS has been shown, the binding appears to be weak or
transient as non-stoichiometric amounts of these proteins are brought
down in immunoprecipitation experiments (39). Indeed, Auclair et
al. (40) presented evidence suggesting that stable (as opposed to
transient) binding of IRS-1 and IRS-2 to the IR can lead to insulin
resistance and inhibit insulin signaling.
Our findings suggest that the dIR juxtamembrane NPXY motif
functions in a manner similar to that of mammalian insulin receptors. However, the stable interaction of the C-terminal extension with dIRS
serves a unique function, as it does not allow for efficient phosphorylation of dIRS. There are many potential implications of this
finding. As mentioned above, stable binding of IRS to dIR may alter
receptor function by preventing binding of other proteins. For example,
binding of dIRS might inhibit binding of phosphatases, thereby
inhibiting dephosphorylation of the receptor as has been suggested in
the case of mammalian insulin receptors (41). Similarly, as discussed
below, it is possible that binding of dIRS might inhibit binding of
other signaling molecules to the insulin receptor. For example, the
C-terminal extension of dIR contains four consensus sites
(YXXM) for binding of the SH2 domain of the p85 regulatory
subunit of PI 3-kinase (42). It had been suggested that, upon tyrosine
phosphorylation, the dIR C-terminal extension might bind p85, thereby
activating PI 3-kinase directly without a requirement for an IRS
molecule. Indeed, experimental evidence has been obtained in support of
this hypothesis. Fernandez et al. (8) demonstrated binding
of a GST-p85 SH2 domain fusion protein to the phosphorylated long form
of dIR. Furthermore, Yenush et al. (10) demonstrated
activation of p85 by insulin-stimulated dIR in 32D cells (which do not
contain endogenous IRS molecules). However, it is noteworthy that the
YXXM motifs in the C terminus of dIR are contained within
NPXYXXM sequences. Thus, the partial overlap of
these two motifs (NPXY and YXXM) creates the
possibility that stable binding of IRS molecules to the NPXY
might inhibit the ability of p85 to bind to the YXXM motif.
At least two laboratories have published data consistent with this
interpretation. Marin-Hincapie and Garofalo (38) did not detect binding
of p85 to dIR -subunit when IRS-1 was bound to the C-terminal
extension. Similarly, Yamaguchi et al. (34) did not detect
increased binding to p85 or activation of PI 3-kinase by the long form
of the receptor in Chinese hamster ovary cells that contain endogenous
IRS molecules.
Previous studies suggest that dIR is expressed as two isoforms, a
full-length isoform as well as a truncated isoform (likely resulting
from proteolytic cleavage) that lacks the C-terminal extension (8).
Both isoforms are present in many cells types, although the ratio of
long form to short form varies greatly (7, 43). In our experiments, the
two truncated forms of the receptor (Y1358F/ CT and CT) were
present as a single band on the immunoblot (Fig. 6, B and
D, lanes 1 and 2). In contrast, the two
full-length constructs (FL and Y1358) migrated as a doublet. It is
likely that the low Mr band corresponds to the
proteolytically cleaved isoform lacking the C-terminal extension,
whereas the high Mr band corresponds to the
full-length isoform. However, under our conditions, the high
Mr band predominates, suggesting that the majority of the receptors are present as the full-length isoform (Fig.
6, B and D, lanes 3 and 4). It is not
known how the relative levels of the two forms are regulated.
Nonetheless, it is possible that the ability of dIRS to bind tightly to
C-terminal NPXY motifs in the long isoform may modify the
signaling specificity of dIR.
Physiological Significance of dIRS--
The ability to apply
genetics to analyze gene function is the principal advantage of
Drosophila as an experimental model. While our studies were
in progress, Böhni et al. (11) published work in which
they had identified the dIRS gene as the locus of a mutation causing
the chico phenotype. In addition, they used genetic methods
to map chico to region 31 B-C of chromosome 2, near basket
(the gene encoding dJNK), the same region where we mapped the gene
using a molecular approach. After the publication of the chromosomal
localization and phenotype of chico, Flybase (44) identified
chico as flipper, a gene whose phenotype was first reported by Bridges and Mohr in 1919 (45).
The chico flies, lacking functional dIRS, were smaller and
grew more slowly than wild type flies. Interestingly, small size and
growth retardation were the most obvious abnormalities in "knock-out" mice lacking IRS-1 (46, 47). Furthermore, because the
chico phenotype in Drosophila is milder than the
phenotype observed in flies lacking insulin receptors (18), this
suggests that dIRS may not be the only molecule that functions
downstream from the insulin receptor. It is not clear whether the dIR
has other physiological substrates that are phosphorylated directly by
the receptor, or whether the receptor itself may bind downstream signaling molecules (e.g. SH2 domain-containing proteins
that might bind to phosphotyrosine residues in the receptor itself). Furthermore, inactivating mutations in dAkt (48), dPTEN (31, 49), and
dS6 kinase (50) (three other proteins in the insulin signaling pathway)
lead to phenotypes that closely resemble chico flies.
In our biochemical studies, we have analyzed the direct binding
interaction of dIRS with upstream and downstream molecules. These
results elucidate the biochemical mechanisms for the role of dIRS in
Drosophila, complementing the genetic studies of Böhni et al. (11).
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We are grateful to George Poy for the
preparation of the oligonucleotides used in these experiments as well
as the operation of the fluorescent DNA sequencer. We also thank Dr.
Derek LeRoith for the critical reading of the manuscript.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
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.
The nucleotide sequence(s) reported in this paper has been submitted to the GenBankTM/EMBL Data Bank with accession number(s) AF092046.
¶
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Diabetes Branch,
Bldg. 10, Rm. 9S213, NIDDKD, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892-1829. Tel.: 301-496-4658; Fax: 301-402-0573; E-mail: sitaylormd@aol.com.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, May 8, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M003579200
2
This work was originally presented at the 80th
Annual Meeting of the Endocrine Society, June 24-27, 1998, New
Orleans, LA.
3
The nucleotide and amino acid sequences for
Drosophila insulin receptor substrate have been deposited in
the GenBankTM data base under accession number AF092046.
After our sequence was submitted, Böhni et al. (11)
also submitted the sequence under accession number AF154826. Although
no other similar Drosophila proteins have been identified in
the non-redundant data base, several entries in the EST data base
(dbEST) appear to also encode dIRS.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
IRS, insulin
receptor substrate;
bp, base pairs;
BSA, bovine serum albumin;
CT, chimeric insulin receptor C-terminal mutant;
DMEM, Dulbecco's modified
Eagle's medium;
EST, expressed sequence tag;
FL, full-length chimeric
hIR-dIR;
IR, insulin receptor;
JM, juxtamembrane;
JMm, juxtamembrane
domain mutant;
NEM, N-ethylmaleimide;
PH, pleckstrin
homology;
PI, phosphatidylinositol;
PTB, phosphotyrosine binding;
PVDF, polyvinylidene difluoride;
S2, Schneider 2;
PAGE, polyacrylamide
gel electrophoresis;
SH2, src homology 2;
WT, wild type;
Y1358F, chimeric insulin receptor juxtamembrane domain mutant;
Y1358F/ CT, chimeric insulin receptor juxtamembrane domain and C-terminal extension
mutant;
dIR, Drosophila insulin receptor;
hIR, human insulin
receptor;
dIRS, Drosophila insulin receptor substrate;
hIRS, human insulin receptor substrate;
PCR, polymerase chain reaction;
mIRS, mouse IRS;
dJNK, Drosophila c-Jun N-terminal kinase.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
White, M. F.,
and Yenush, L.
(1998)
Curr. Top. Microbiol. Immunol.
228,
179-208
|
| 2.
|
Sun, X. J.,
Rothenberg, P.,
Kahn, C. R.,
Backer, J. M.,
Araki, E.,
Wilden, P. A.,
Cahill, D. A.,
Goldstein, B. J.,
and White, M. F.
(1991)
Nature
352,
73-77
|
| 3.
|
Sun, X. J.,
Wang, L. M.,
Zhang, Y.,
Yenush, L.,
Myers, M. G., Jr.,
Glasheen, E.,
Lane, W. S.,
Pierce, J. H.,
and White, M. F.
(1995)
Nature
377,
173-177
|
| 4.
|
Lavan, B. E.,
Fantin, V. R.,
Chang, E. T.,
Lane, W. S.,
Keller, S. R.,
and Lienhard, G. E.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
21403-21407
|
| 5.
|
Sciacchitano, S.,
and Taylor, S. I.
(1997)
Endocrinology
138,
4931-4940
|
| 6.
|
Fantin, V. R.,
Sparling, J. D.,
Slot, J. W.,
Keller, S. R.,
Lienhard, G. E.,
and Lavan, B. E.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
10726-10732
|
| 7.
|
Fernandez-Almonacid, R.,
and Rosen, O. M.
(1987)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
7,
2718-2727
|
| 8.
|
Fernandez, R.,
Tabarini, D.,
Azpiazu, N.,
Frasch, M.,
and Schlessinger, J.
(1995)
EMBO J.
14,
3373-3384
|
| 9.
|
Ruan, Y.,
Chen, C.,
Cao, Y.,
and Garofalo, R. S.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
4236-4243
|
| 10.
|
Yenush, L.,
Fernandez, R.,
Myers, M. G., Jr.,
Grammer, T. C.,
Sun, X. J.,
Blenis, J.,
Pierce, J. H.,
Schlessinger, J.,
and White, M. F.
(1996)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
16,
2509-2517
|
| 11.
|
Böhni, R.,
Riesgo-Escovar, J.,
Oldham, S.,
Brogiolo, W.,
Stocker, H.,
Andruss, B.,
Beckingham, K.,
and Hafen, E.
(1999)
Cell
97,
865-875
|
| 12.
|
Ullrich, A.,
Bell, J. R.,
Chen, E. Y.,
Herrera, R.,
Petruzzelli, L. M.,
Dull, T. J.,
Gray, A.,
Coussens, L.,
Liao, Y. C.,
Tsubokawa, M.,
Mason, M.,
Seeburg, P. H.,
Grunfeld, C.,
Rosen, O. M.,
and Ramachandran, J.
(1985)
Nature
313,
756-761
|
| 13.
|
Kozak, M.
(1986)
Cell
44,
283-292
|
| 14.
|
Hara, K.,
Yonezawa, K.,
Sakaue, H.,
Ando, A.,
Kotani, K.,
Kitamura, T.,
Kitamura, Y.,
Ueda, H.,
Stephens, L.,
Jackson, T. R.,
Dhand, R.,
Clark, A. E.,
Holman, G. D.,
Waterfield, M. D.,
and Kasuga, M.
(1994)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
91,
7415-7419
|
| 15.
|
Taylor, S. I.,
Underhill, L. H.,
and Marcus-Samuels, B.
(1985)
Methods Enzymol.
109,
656-667
|
| 16.
|
Kramer, H.,
Deger, A.,
Koch, R.,
Rapp, R.,
Hinz, M.,
and Weber, U.
(1987)
Biol. Chem. Hoppe-Seyler
368,
471-479
|
| 17.
|
Sluss, H. K.,
Han, Z.,
Barrett, T.,
Davis, R. J.,
and Ip, Y. T.
(1996)
Genes Dev.
10,
2745-2758
|
| 18.
|
Chen, C.,
Jack, J.,
and Garofalo, R. S.
(1996)
Endocrinology
137,
846-856
|
| 19.
|
Seecof, R. L.,
and Dewhurst, S.
(1974)
Cell Differ.
3,
63-70
|
| 20.
|
Meneses, P.,
and De Los Angeles Ortiz, M.
(1975)
Comp. Biochem. Physiol. A. Comp. Physiol.
51A,
483-485
|
| 21.
|
LeRoith, D.,
Lesniak, M. A.,
and Roth, J.
(1981)
Diabetes
30,
70-76
|
| 22.
|
Olivier, J. P.,
Raabe, T.,
Henkemeyer, M.,
Dickson, B.,
Mbamalu, G.,
Margolis, B.,
Schlessinger, J.,
Hafen, E.,
and Pawson, T.
(1993)
Cell
73,
179-191
|
| 23.
|
Simon, M. A.,
Dodson, G. S.,
and Rubin, G. M.
(1993)
Cell
73,
169-177
|
| 24.
|
Lai, K. M.,
Olivier, J. P.,
Gish, G. D.,
Henkemeyer, M.,
McGlade, J.,
and Pawson, T.
(1995)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15,
4810-4818
|
| 25.
|
Bonfini, L.,
Karlovich, C. A.,
Dasgupta, C.,
and Banerjee, U.
(1992)
Science
255,
603-606
|
| 26.
|
MacDougall, L. K.,
Domin, J.,
and Waterfield, M. D.
(1995)
Curr. Biol.
5,
1404-1415
|
| 27.
|
Leevers, S. J.,
Weinkove, D.,
MacDougall, L. K.,
Hafen, E.,
and Waterfield, M. D.
(1996)
EMBO J.
15,
6584-6594
|
| 28.
|
Albert, S.,
Twardzik, T.,
Heisenberg, M.,
and Schneuwly, S.
(1997)
Gene (Amst.)
198,
181-189
|
| 29.
|
Perkins, L. A.,
Larsen, I.,
and Perrimon, N.
(1992)
Cell
70,
225-236
|
| 30.
|
Franke, T. F.,
Tartof, K. D.,
and Tsichlis, P. N.
(1994)
Oncogene
9,
141-148
|
| 31.
|
Huang, H.,
Potter, C. J.,
Tao, W.,
Li, D. M.,
Brogiolo, W.,
Hafen, E.,
Sun, H.,
and Xu, T.
(1999)
Development
126,
5365-5372
|
| 32.
|
Smith, A.,
Alrubaie, S.,
Coehlo, C.,
Leevers, S. J.,
and Ashworth, A.
(1999)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1447,
313-317
|
| 33.
|
Watson, K. L.,
Chou, M. M.,
Blenis, J.,
Gelbart, W. M.,
and Erikson, R. L.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
13694-13698
|
| 34.
|
Yamaguchi, T.,
Fernandez, R.,
and Roth, R. A.
(1995)
Biochemistry
34,
4962-4968
|
| 35.
|
Songyang, Z.,
Shoelson, S. E.,
McGlade, J.,
Olivier, P.,
Pawson, T.,
Bustelo, X. R.,
Barbacid, M.,
Sabe, H.,
Hanafusa, H.,
Yi, T.,
Ren, R.,
Baltimore, D.,
Ratnofsky, S.,
Feldman, R. A.,
and Cantley, L. C.
(1994)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14,
2777-2785
|
| 36.
|
He, W.,
Craparo, A.,
Zhu, Y.,
O'Neill, T. J.,
Wang, L. M.,
Pierce, J. H.,
and Gustafson, T. A.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
11641-11645
|
| 37.
|
Sawka-Verhelle, D.,
Baron, V.,
Mothe, I.,
Filloux, C.,
White, M. F.,
and Van Obberghen, E.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
16414-16420
|
| 38.
|
Marin-Hincapie, M.,
and Garofalo, R. S.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
24987-24994
|
| 39.
|
Levy-Toledano, R.,
Caro, L. H.,
Accili, D.,
and Taylor, S. I.
(1994)
EMBO J.
13,
835-842
|
| 40.
|
Auclair, M.,
Vigouroux, C.,
Desbois-Mouthon, C.,
Deibener, J.,
Kaminski, P.,
Lascols, O.,
Cherqui, G.,
Capeau, J.,
and Caron, M.
(1999)
J. Clin. Endocrinol. & Metab.
84,
3197-206
|
| 41.
|
Solow, B. T.,
Harada, S.,
Goldstein, B. J.,
Smith, J. A.,
White, M. F.,
and Jarett, L.
(1999)
Mol. Endocrinol.
13,
1784-1798
|
| 42.
|
Songyang, Z.,
Shoelson, S. E.,
Chaudhuri, M.,
Gish, G.,
Pawson, T.,
Haser, W. G.,
King, F.,
Roberts, T.,
Ratnofsky, S.,
Lechleider, R. J.,
Neel, B. G.,
Birge, R. B.,
Fajardo, J. E.,
Chou, M. M.,
Hanafusa, H.,
Schaffhausen, B.,
and Cantley, L. C.
(1993)
Cell
72,
767-778
|
| 43.
|
Marin-Hincapie, M.,
and Garofalo, R. S.
(1995)
Endocrinology
136,
2357-2366
|
| 44.
|
The FlyBase Consortium.
(1999)
Nucleic Acids Res.
27,
85-88
|
| 45.
|
Bridges, C. B.,
and Mohr, O. L.
(1919)
Genetics
4,
283-306
|
| 46.
|
Tamemoto, H.,
Kadowaki, T.,
Tobe, K.,
Yagi, T.,
Sakura, H.,
Hayakawa, T.,
Terauchi, Y.,
Ueki, K.,
Kaburagi, Y.,
Satoh, S.,
Sekihara, H.,
Yoshioka, S.,
Horikoshi, H.,
Furuta, Y.,
Ikawa, Y.,
Kasuga, M.,
Yazaki, Y.,
and Aizawa, S.
(1994)
Nature
372,
182-186
|
| 47.
|
Araki, E.,
Lipes, M. A.,
Patti, M. E.,
Bruning, J. C.,
Haag, B., III,
Johnson, R. S.,
and Kahn, C. R.
(1994)
Nature
372,
186-190
|
| 48.
|
Verdu, J.,
Buratovich, M. A.,
Wilder, E. L.,
and Birnbaum, M. J.
(1999)
Nat. Cell Biol.
1,
500-506
|
| 49.
|
Goberdhan, D. C.,
Paricio, N.,
Goodman, E. C.,
Mlodzik, M.,
and Wilson, C.
(1999)
Genes Dev.
13,
3244-3258
|
| 50.
|
Montagne, J.,
Stewart, M. J.,
Stocker, H.,
Hafen, E.,
Kozma, S. C.,
and Thomas, G.
(1999)
Science
285,
2126-2129
|
| 51.
|
Case, R. D.,
Piccione, E.,
Wolf, G.,
Benett, A. M.,
Lechleider, R. J.,
Neel, B. G.,
and Shoelson, S. E.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
10467-10474
|
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:

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. Pflieger, M. A. Junger, M. Muller, O. Rinner, H. Lee, P. M. Gehrig, M. Gstaiger, and R. Aebersold
Quantitative Proteomic Analysis of Protein Complexes: Concurrent Identification of Interactors and Their State of Phosphorylation
Mol. Cell. Proteomics,
February 1, 2008;
7(2):
326 - 346.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 2000 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
|