|
Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M004663200 on July 21, 2000
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 275, Issue 43, 33861-33868, October 27, 2000
Grp78 Is Involved in Retention of Mutant Low Density Lipoprotein
Receptor Protein in the Endoplasmic Reticulum*
Malene M.
Jørgensen §,
Ole N.
Jensen¶,
Henrik U.
Holst ,
Jens-Jacob
Hansen ,
Thomas J.
Corydon ,
Peter
Bross ,
Lars
Bolund , and
Niels
Gregersen
From the Research Unit for Molecular Medicine, Aarhus
University Hospital, Skejby Sygehus, DK-8200 Aarhus N, the
¶ Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of
Odense, DK-5230 Odense, and the Institute of Human Genetics,
University of Aarhus, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark
Received for publication, May 30, 2000, and in revised form, July 17, 2000
 |
ABSTRACT |
The low density lipoprotein (LDL) receptor is
responsible for removing the majority of the LDL cholesterol from the
plasma. Mutations in the LDL receptor gene cause the disease familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). Approximately 50% of the mutations in the
LDL receptor gene in patients with FH lead to receptor proteins that
are retained in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER). Misfolding of mutant
LDL receptors is a probable cause of this ER retention, resulting in no
functional LDL receptors at the cell surface. However, the specific
factors and mechanisms responsible for retention of mutant LDL
receptors are unknown. In the present study we show that the molecular
chaperone Grp78/BiP co-immunoprecipitates with both the wild type and
two different mutant (W556S and C646Y) LDL receptors in lysates
obtained from human liver cells overexpressing wild type or mutant LDL
receptors. A pulse-chase study shows that the interaction between the
wild type LDL receptor and Grp78 is no longer detectable after
21/2 h, whereas it persists for more than 4 h with the
mutant receptors. Furthermore, about five times more Grp78 is
co-immunoprecipitated with the mutant receptors than with the wild type
receptor suggesting that Grp78 is involved in retention of mutant LDL
receptors in the ER. Overexpression of Grp78 causes no major
alterations on the steady state level of active LDL receptors at the
cell surface. However, overexpression of Grp78 decreases the processing
rate of newly synthesized wild type LDL receptors. This indicates that
the Grp78 interaction is a rate-limiting step in the maturation of the
wild type LDL receptor and that Grp78 may be an important factor in the
quality control of newly synthesized LDL receptors.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The low density lipoprotein
(LDL)1 receptor is a
transmembrane glycoprotein that binds and internalizes circulating
particles of LDL by receptor-mediated endocytosis (1). Mutations in the LDL receptor gene cause familial hypercholesterolemia (FH), which is an
autosomal dominant inherited disorder of lipoprotein metabolism. Heterozygous FH is a common disorder with an estimated frequency of
about 1 in 500. Today, more than 500 different mutations have been
identified in the LDL receptor gene. About 50% of the
characterized mutations result in LDL receptor proteins that are
retained in the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) (2). Since the existence of an ER quality control system ensures that only correctly folded, newly
synthesized proteins are transported to the plasma membrane or
secreted, it is likely that protein misfolding contributes to the
pathogenesis of FH.
Protein misfolding is implicated in the pathogenesis of many genetic
diseases (reviewed in Refs. 3 and 4). Missense mutations and small in
frame deletions or insertions rarely affect the function of a given
protein directly. Mostly these disease-causing mutations affect the
ability of the proteins to fold into a correct conformation, and they
often give rise to premature degradation or aggregation of the mutant
proteins. Diseases caused by this kind of molecular pathological
mechanism are termed "conformational diseases" (5, 6). Yet, few
diseases have been experimentally proven to be conformational diseases.
Prominent examples related to ER are Alzheimer's disease,
Creutzfeld-Jakob disease, 1-antitrypsin deficiency, and
cystic fibrosis (reviewed in Refs. 3, 7, and 8). The ER retention of a
variety of LDL receptor mutants suggests that FH may belong to the
group of conformational diseases.
The folding and maturation pathway of the newly synthesized LDL
receptor in the ER has not yet been characterized. In order to reach a
better understanding of the molecular pathogenesis of FH, we embarked
on identification of ER quality control components involved in
prolonged interaction with mutant, ER-retained, and LDL receptors.
The ER quality control system includes a number of chaperones and
folding enzymes localized in the lumen or in the membrane of the ER
(reviewed in Ref. 9). It is likely that most, if not all, proteins
synthesized in the ER interact with chaperones at some stage of the
folding and maturation pathway. The chaperones bind non-native proteins
and are thought to assist folding by preventing irreversible
aggregation and misfolding. Exactly how chaperones act in concert to
keep non-native proteins on the productive folding pathway, and
selectively retain certain proteins, is not fully understood. Although
some chaperones in the ER are well studied, including 78-kDa
glucose-regulated protein (Grp78 or BiP), calnexin, calreticulin, and
94-kDa glucose-regulated protein (Grp94 or endoplasmin), it is at
present impossible to predict which chaperones a specific protein will
interact with and to predict the consequences of the interaction.
Grp78 is the ER-located Hsp70 analogue. It binds transiently to a
variety of newly synthesized proteins and more persistently to some
misfolded proteins. Furthermore, Grp78 is known to assist folding and
assembly of newly synthesized proteins by recognition and binding of
hydrophobic stretches of unfolded proteins. Binding of Grp78 prevents
protein aggregation and maintains the proteins in a folding and
oligomerization-competent state (reviewed in Ref. 10). Calnexin and
calreticulin are lectin-like ER chaperones, which specifically
recognize monoglycosylated N-linked core glycans. A major
function of the two chaperones is to monitor glycoprotein folding and
to prevent misfolded protein from leaving the ER (11). Grp94 is the ER
homologue to cytosolic Hsp90. It is abundant in the ER and possesses
Mg2+-dependent ATPase activity (12). Grp94
interacts with several nascent polypeptides and presumably mediates
folding of apolipoprotein B (13).
The purpose of this study was first to identify ER chaperones
interacting with the wild type and mutant LDL receptors. Second, it was
to characterize possible differences in the chaperone-LDL receptor
interaction for the mutant receptors compared with the wild type
receptor. Third, it was to manipulate the amount of identified
chaperones, by overexpression, in an attempt to influence the folding
and maturation of the LDL receptor.
To identify chaperones/folding enzymes interacting with wild type and
mutant LDL receptors, we performed expression studies in human liver
epithelial cells (Chang cells). Two mutants, ER-retained, LDL
receptors, and the wild type LDL receptor were analyzed. Both mutant
receptors contain amino acid substitutions caused by missense mutations. The first causes a tryptophan to serine substitution at
amino acid position 556 (W556S) in the receptor protein. About 12% of
FH in Denmark is caused by this W556S mutation (14). The second was a
missense mutation causing a cysteine to tyrosine substitution at amino
acid position 646 (C646Y) (15).
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Generation of Constructs--
Constructs expressing mutant LDL
receptors were generated by site-directed mutagenesis and cloned
in the pMP6 expression vector as described previously (14). The Grp78
cDNA was generated using "The 1st-StrandTM " cDNA kit
(CLONTECH Laboratories) as recommended by the
supplier. Grp78 cDNA was amplified using two primers flanking the
5' and the 3' ends of the coding region of the
Grp78 gene (sense primer,
5'-CCTGCTGCTGGTCGACTGGCTGGC-3'; antisense primer, 5'-GAGTCCAGTGTCGACAATATTACAGCAC-3'). The polymerase chain
reaction product was purified, cut with the endonuclease
SalI, and cloned into the XhoI site of the
pcDNA3.1(+) vector (Invitrogen). Correct orientation and sequence
of the Grp78 construct was confirmed by DNA sequencing.
Cell Culture and Transfection--
Chang cells (ATCC, CCL-13)
were cultivated in RPMI 1640 (In Vitro, Denmark) containing
10% heat-inactivated fetal calf serum (FCS) (Life Technologies, Inc.),
100 units/ml penicillin (Leo, Denmark), 0.1 mg/ml streptomycin (Leo,
Denmark), and 0.01 mg/ml phenol red, in 5% CO2, 95% air
atmosphere at 37 °C. Cells were seeded in T-75 flasks
(TPP®, Switzerland) 24 h before transfection. On the
day of transfection, cells were inspected microscopically in order to
check that they had reached 50% confluency. Transfection was performed
using FuGENETM6 transfection reagent (Roche Dianostics Corporation)
according to suppliers' recommendations. 16 h after transfection
the cells were seeded in 12.5-cm2 culture dishes, and the
medium was replaced with complete RPMI containing 2 µg/ml
25-hydroxycholesterol (Sigma) in order to down-regulate endogenous LDL
receptor expression.
Metabolic Labeling and Immunoprecipitation--
Transfected
Chang cells were incubated in methionine- and cysteine-free RPMI 1640 (In Vitro, Denmark), containing 5% dialyzed FCS and 2 µg/ml 25-hydroxycholesterol, for 30 min to deplete intracellular pools of methionine and cysteine. The depletion medium was replaced with methionine- and cysteine-free RPMI 1640, containing 0.1 mCi/ml Promix ([35S]methionine and [35S]cysteine)
(Amersham Pharmacia Biotech), 5% dialyzed FCS, and 2 µg/ml
25-hydroxycholesterol. For pulse-chase experiments the cells were
labeled for 30 min and chased for 0-4 h, in complete RPMI containing 5 mM methionine, 5 mM cysteine. In other
experiments cells were labeled for 2 h, with no chase period, as
indicated. The cells were lysed with lysis buffer (50 mM
HEPES, pH 7.4, 100 mM NaCl, 2% CHAPS, 2 mM
CaCl2, 2.5 mM MgCl2, 2.2%
Me2SO, 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl
fluoride, 0.5 mM leupeptin, 1 µg/ml aprotinin, 10 mM N-ethylmaleimide), and harvested with a
plastic scraper. For co-immunoprecipitation experiments, the LDL
receptor was immunoprecipitated using a polyclonal anti-LDL receptor
antibody (14) and protein A-Sepharose (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech).
Alternatively, for purification of the LDL receptor,
immunoprecipitation was performed under denaturing conditions. The cell
extracts were supplemented with SDS to a final concentration of 1% and
incubated at 95 °C for 5 min. The extracts were diluted with HBS
buffer (50 mM HEPES, pH 7.4, 100 mM NaCl, 1%
Triton X-100) to a final concentration of 0.1% SDS and 0.9% Triton
X-100. The LDL receptor was immunoprecipitated overnight, at 4 °C,
using the polyclonal anti-LDL receptor antibody (14), or a monoclonal
anti-LDL receptor antibody (C7) (16), and protein A-Sepharose. The
immunocomplexes were eluted from the beads by incubation in Laemmli
sample buffer, for 5 min, at 95 °C and analyzed by 4-15% gradient
SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Quantitation of gel bands was
performed using a PhosphorImager (STORM 840, Molecular Dynamics) and
the ImageQuant software (Molecular Dynamics).
Two-dimensional Gel Electrophoresis--
For
two-dimensional gel electrophoresis the immunocomplexes were
dissociated and solubilized by incubating in 50 µl of two-dimensional lysis buffer (8 M urea, 2% CHAPS, 0.5% IPG-buffer
3-10LTM (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech), 0.3% dithiothreitol, 1.25 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, 1 µg/ml aprotinin, 0.5 mM leupeptin). Chang cell pellets were solubilized in the
two-dimensional lysis buffer described above to a final protein
concentration of 1.5 mg/ml. 25 µl of the solubilized immunocomplex
and 100 µl of the Chang cell extract were diluted with 95 µl of
rehydration solution (8 M urea, 2% CHAPS, 0.5% IPG-buffer
pH 3-10LTM, 0.3% dithiothreitol, few grains of bromphenol blue) to
ensure a sufficient amount of protein for the mass spectrometry
analysis. Two-dimensional gel electrophoresis was carried out using a
Multiphor apparatus (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). The first dimension
isoelectric focusing was performed on an immobilized pH gradient
(immobiline dry strips, Amersham Pharmacia biotech) with a total length
of 11 cm. An Immobiline DryStrip Reswelling Tray (Amersham Pharmacia
Biotech) was used for rehydration and loading of the sample. After the
first dimension, the strips were equilibrated twice for 10 min in
equilibration solution (50 mM Tris-Cl, pH 8.8, 6 M urea, 30% glycerol, 1% SDS) supplemented with 16 mM dithiothreitol in the first incubation and 0.25 mM iodoacetamide in the second incubation. The second dimension was carried out in horizontal SDS-PAGE using 8-18% Excel Gel. The gels were run according to suppliers' recommendation, dried,
and analyzed using the PhosphorImager and the ImageQuant software
(Molecular Dynamics, CA) as described above.
Protein Digestion--
Tryptic digestion of protein in excised
two-dimensional gel plugs was performed as described previously (17,
18). In brief, the excised gel plugs were washed in 100 mM
NH4HCO3/acetonitrile (1:1). The protein was
reduced and S-alkylated with iodoacetamide, and the gel
plugs were dried by vacuum centrifugation. Modified porcine trypsin (12 ng/µl) (Promega, sequencing grade) in digestion buffer (50 mM NH4HCO3, 5 mM
CaCl2) was added to the dry gel pieces, and they were
incubated on ice for 1 h in order to reswell them. After removing
the supernatant, 10-20 µl of digestion buffer was added, and the
digestion was continued overnight at 37 °C. The peptides were
extracted with 5% formic acid, 50% acetonitrile, dried by vacuum
centrifugation, and redissolved in 20 µl of 5% formic acid prior to
mass analysis.
Peptide Mass Mapping by Matrix-assisted Laser-Desorption
Ionization Time-of-Flight (MALDI-TOF) Mass Spectrometry--
A Bruker
REFLEX delayed extraction MALDI-TOF mass spectrometer (Bruker-Franzen
Analytik GmbH, Bremen, Germany) equipped with the SCOUT source and
variable detector bias gating was employed for mass analysis of peptide
mixtures in positive ion reflector mode. Ion acceleration voltage was
22 kV. Thin matrix films of -cyano-4-hydroxycinnamic acid and
nitrocellulose were prepared by the fast evaporation method (17, 18).
An aliquot of peptide solution (0.3 µl) was injected into a 0.6-µl
droplet of 5% formic acid previously deposited onto the thin matrix
layer, and the solvent was then allowed to dry. The analyte/matrix
surface was washed with 10 µl of 5% formic acid and then with 10 µl of pure water prior to analysis by MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry.
Mass spectra were calibrated by using matrix ion signals and trypsin
autolysis peptide signals as internal mass calibrants (19).
Protein Identification by Peptide Mass Mapping and Data Base
Searching--
High mass accuracy MALDI-TOF peptide mass maps were
used to query a comprehensive protein sequence data base (NRDB,
European Bioinformatics Institute, Hinxton, UK) utilizing the
PeptideSearch software (20). Unambiguous protein identification was
achieved by requiring a tryptic peptide mass error below 50 ppm.
Immunoblot Analysis--
Equal proportions of immunoprecipitated
proteins and aliquots of total cell protein extracts corresponding to
1/50 of the extracts subjected to immunoprecipitation were subjected to
4-15% gradient SDS gel electrophoresis, transferred to polyvinylidene difluoride membrane, blocked, and immunoblotted with anti-Grp78 antibody (SPA-827, StressGen, Canada). The antibody stock was diluted
1:10,000 in PBS-Tween (0.15 M NaCl, 0.05 M
phosphate buffer, pH 7.2, 0.05% Tween20) containing 5% skim milk
powder. The membranes were incubated 15 h at room temperature.
Subsequently, the membranes were incubated in horseradish
peroxidase-conjugated anti-mouse antibody (DAKO, Denmark) diluted
1:25,000 in PBS/Tween containing 5% skim milk powder for 2 h at
room temperature. Chemiluminescence detection was performed with ECL
Plus (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) and direct image analysis using the
Molecular Dynamics Storm blot imaging system.
Flow Cytometry--
Transfected cells for LDL receptor activity
measurements were cultivated for 5 h in RPMI containing 5%
lipid-deficient human serum and 2 µg/ml
1,1'-dioctadecyl-3,3,3',3'-tetramethylindocarbocyanine perchlorate
(DiI)-conjugated LDL (21) (Molecular Probes). Cells were harvested in
PBS containing 0.6 mM EDTA followed by a short incubation
in PBS containing 0.6 mM EDTA and 0.01% trypsin, washed 3 times in PBS, and analyzed by flow cytometry as described below. For
surface staining cells were harvested 48 h after transfection by
incubation in PBS containing 0.6 mM EDTA followed by a
short incubation in PBS containing 0.6 mM EDTA and 0.01%
trypsin. The cells were labeled with 2.5 µg/ml monoclonal anti-LDL
receptor antibody (C7) for 30 min at 4 °C, washed in complete RPMI,
and stained with Alexa 488-conjugated goat anti-mouse antibody
(Molecular Probes), and diluted 1:400 in RPMI for 20 min at 4 °C.
The cells were analyzed on a FACSCalibur flow cytometer (Becton
Dickinson) equipped with an argon laser operating at 488 nm. Forward
angle light scatter gates were established to exclude dead cells and cell debris from the analysis. 5 × 104 cells were
analyzed in each sample.
 |
RESULTS |
A 78-kDa Protein Interacts Transiently with LDL Receptor Proteins
and Displays Prolonged Interaction with Mutant LDL Receptor
Proteins--
Chang cells expressing wild type LDL receptor, W556S-LDL
receptor, or C646Y-LDL receptor were pulse-labeled with
[35S]methionine and [35S]cysteine for 30 min and chased in the presence of cycloheximide to inhibit further
protein synthesis. Cell extracts were subjected to immunoprecipitation
with anti-LDL receptor antibodies under non-denaturing conditions. Fig.
1 shows that within 1 h most of the
immunoprecipitated wild type LDL receptors were processed from the
faster migrating 120-kDa precursor form to the more slowly migrating
160-kDa mature form. In contrast, none of the mutant W556S-LDL
receptors and C646Y-LDL receptors appeared to be processed after a 4-h
chase (Fig. 1A). The band appearing approximately at 160 kDa
at the early time points for the C646Y mutant is not present when the
immunoprecipitation is performed under denaturing conditions,
indicating that it does not represent mature LDL receptors (results not
shown). These results confirm previously obtained results showing that
the two mutant LDL receptors are retained in the endoplasmic reticulum
(ER) (14, 15). The pulse-chase experiment reveals one protein with an
apparent mass of 78 kDa that specifically co-immunoprecipitates with
the newly synthesized wild type LDL receptor (Fig. 1A). The
interaction between the wild type LDL receptor and the 78 kDa protein
is detectable only in the initial phase of the chase. After 21/2
h of chase, where most of the LDL receptor has been transported out of
the ER, interaction is no longer detectable. In contrast, the
association between the two mutant LDL receptors and the 78-kDa protein
persists during 4 h of chase (Fig. 1A). Furthermore,
the ratio between the intensity of the band representing the 78-kDa
protein and the band representing mutant LDL receptors is about 1/5 and
constant during the 4-h chase, whereas it decreases from 1/10 to
undetectable for the wild type receptor (Fig. 1B). Taken
together, these results indicate that the 78-kDa protein interacts
transiently with the wild type LDL receptor and is involved in
retention of mutant LDL receptors in the ER.

View larger version (46K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Grp78 interacts transiently with the
wild type LDL receptor and displays prolonged interaction with two
mutant LDL receptors. Chang cells were transfected with plasmids
expressing wild type (WT-LDLr) or mutant
(W556S-LDLr or C646Y-LDLr) LDL receptors. The
cells were pulse-labeled for 30 min and chased in complete medium
containing 5 mM methionine, 5 mM cysteine, and
1 mM cycloheximide. The cells were lysed, and the extracts
were subjected to immunoprecipitation with polyclonal anti-LDL receptor
antibodies under non-denaturing conditions. A,
immunoprecipitation of wild type and mutant LDL receptor proteins (120 kDa, non-mature LDL receptor protein, and 160 kDa, mature LDL receptor
protein) co-precipitated a 78- kDa protein. B, the intensity
of the bands representing the non-mature LDL receptor protein (120 kDa)
and the band representing Grp78 (78 kDa) were quantified using a
PhosphorImager. Intensity of the band representing Grp78, relative to
each band representing the non-mature receptor protein, is shown with
time ( , wild type LDLr; , W556S-LDLr; , C646Y-LDLr).
|
|
Identification of the 78-kDa Protein Interacting with the LDL
Receptor as Grp78--
To identify the 78-kDa protein
co-immunoprecipitating with the LDL receptor, we used two-dimensional
gel electrophoresis to purify and MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry to
identify the protein.
Cells expressing wild type LDL receptor, W556S-LDL receptor, or
C646Y-LDL receptor were continuously labeled for 2 h with [35S]methionine and [35S]cysteine and
subjected to immunoprecipitation with anti-LDL receptor antibody under
non-denaturing conditions. The immunocomplexes were dissociated by
incubation in denaturing lysis buffer and loaded on an immobilized pH
gradient. Following isoelectric focusing the samples were subjected to
SDS-PAGE, and the gels were analyzed using a PhosphorImager. The
two-dimensional analysis confirms that the 78-kDa co-immunoprecipitates
with the LDL receptor (Fig. 2). The spots
representing the 78-kDa protein were cut out of the gel, in-gel
reduced, alkylated, and proteolytically degraded by trypsin. The
trypsinized protein sample was analyzed by MALDI-TOF (Fig.
3A). Querying a comprehensive
sequence data base with the measured set of tryptic peptide masses
retrieved human Grp78 (Swiss-Prot P11021) as the highest ranking
candidate. A total of 24 tryptic peptide masses were assigned to the
Grp78 polypeptide corresponding to an amino acid sequence coverage of
41% (Fig. 3B). The high number of assigned peptides and the
high sequence coverage unambiguously identified this protein. To
confirm the results obtained with this novel identification technique,
a Western blot was performed with an antibody specifically recognizing
Grp78 and Grp94 (Fig. 4). Cells
transiently expressing wild type or one of the two mutant receptors
were lysed, subjected to immunoprecipitation, and immunoblotted using
an antibody recognizing both Grp78 and Grp94. The Western blot confirms
that Grp78 co-immunoprecipitates with the LDL receptor. A faint band
representing Grp78 could be detected when expressing wild type LDL
receptor (Fig. 4, lane 1). A significantly larger amount of
Grp78 co-immunoprecipitated with either of the two mutant receptors
compared with the wild type (Fig. 4, lanes 2 and
3). Quantification of the bands representing Grp78 showed
that in the steady-state situation five times more Grp78
co-immunoprecipitated with the mutant receptors compared with the wild
type. Furthermore, aliquots corresponding to 1/50 of the total Chang
cell extract were isolated and immunoblotted together with the
immunoprecipitated proteins. The antibody detects both Grp78 and Grp94
in the Chang cell lysates (Fig. 4, lanes 5-8). However,
using these specific co-immunoprecipitation conditions Grp94 was not
co-isolated with the LDL receptor (Fig. 4, lanes 1-3),
indicating no detectable association between the LDL receptor and
Grp94.

View larger version (100K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Purification of Grp78 by two-dimensional gel
electrophoresis for mass spectrometry analysis. Chang cells were
transfected with plasmids expressing wild type, W556S, or C646Y LDL
receptors, or were mock-transfected. The cells were pulse-labeled for
2 h, lysed, and subjected to immunoprecipitation with polyclonal
anti-LDL receptor antibodies under non-denaturing conditions. The
immunoprecipitated complexes were separated by two-dimensional
electrophoresis, and the spots representing Grp78 were excised from the
gel. , Grp78; , 120-kDa LDL receptor protein.
|
|

View larger version (72K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Identification of human Grp78 by MALDI
peptide mass mapping and data base searching. A,
peptide mass map obtained by MALDI mass spectrometry analysis after
in-gel tryptic digestion of the 78-kDa protein. Data base searches with
this set of peptide masses identified human Grp78 (Swiss-Prot code
P1102). A total of 24 peptide masses (circles) were assigned
to Grp78 amino acid sequence corresponding to sequence coverage of
41%. The peptide mass error was less than 50 ppm. B,
alignment of the experimentally derived peptide sequences assigned to
human Grp78 with the Swiss-Prot protein sequence. Underlined
sequences correspond to the masses obtained by MALDI peptide-mass
fingerprinting and are marked by circles in the peptide mass
map. The covered sequence regions are shown in bold.
Double underlining indicates identification of identical
peptides with or without one oxidized methionine, +16u. Sequence in
box represents the signal sequence for ER
translocation.
|
|

View larger version (48K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Grp78 co-immunoprecipitated with the LDL
receptor. Chang cells were transfected with plasmids expressing
wild type (WT-LDLr) or mutant (W556S-LDLr or
C646Y-LDLr) LDL receptors or were mock-transfected
(pMP6). The cells were lysed and subjected to
immunoprecipitation under non-denaturing conditions with polyclonal
anti-LDL receptor antibodies (lanes 1-4).
Immunoprecipitated complexes were analyzed by Western blotting with an
antibody recognizing Grp78 and Grp94. As control aliquots (1/50) of the
total extracts were isolated before immunoprecipitation and subjected
to immunoblotting (lanes 5-8).
|
|
Up-regulation of Grp78 by 6-Aminonicotinamide
Treatment--
6-Aminonicotinamide (6-AN) is an analogue of niacin
that can be metabolized to 6-amino-NAD(P), a competitive inhibitor of NAD(P)-requiring processes including glucolysis (22) and
poly(ADP-ribose) synthesis (23). 6-AN has previously been used for
specific up-regulation of Grp78 and for studying the effect from
overexpression of Grp78 in colon cancer cell lines (24). Furthermore,
previously obtained results show that cultivation of cells, in complete
medium, for 4 h after 6-AN treatment allows NAD(P) and
poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase activity to become normal, whereas Grp78
levels remain elevated (24). To verify that Grp78 can be induced also
in our system, Chang cells, transfected with a plasmid expressing wild
type LDL receptor, were treated for 36 h with 0.2 mM
6-AN, washed, and grown for 41/2 h to allow the NAD(P)
metabolism to return to normal. Western blotting shows that Grp78 was
elevated approximately 5 times (Fig. 5,
lane 1), compared with the untreated cells (Fig. 5,
lane 5), and stays elevated during a period of 4 h
(Fig. 5, lane 2). In parallel Grp78 was overexpressed
transiently by co-transfection with plasmids expressing Grp78 and the
LDL receptor (Fig. 5, lanes 3 and 4). However, in
Chang cells the co-transfection efficiency is only about 10% resulting
in a high level of Grp78 in some cells and normal levels of Grp78 in
most of the cells.

View larger version (46K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Grp78 expression can be increased by 6-AN
treatment of transfected Chang cells or by co-transfection of Chang
cells with a plasmid expressing Grp78. Transfected Chang cells
were subjected to 6-AN treatment to induce endogenous Grp78
(WT-LDLr + 6-AN) or co-transfected with plasmids expressing
recombinant Grp78 (WT-LDLr + Grp78). Equal amounts of
protein were loaded on an SDS-PAGE gel and analyzed by Western blotting
using an antibody specific to Grp78 and Grp94, as described under
"Experimental Procedures." Lanes 1 and 2, Chang cells transfected with plasmids expressing wild type LDL
receptor. 12 h after transfection the cells were treated with 0.2 mM 6-AN for 36 h, rinsed, reefed with regular growth
medium, and incubated for 41/2 h in order to allow NAD levels to
return to normal. Cells were harvested at this point (0h),
and to verify that Grp78 remained elevated cells were harvested 4 h later (4h). Lanes 3 and 4, Chang
cells co-transfected with plasmids expressing wild type LDL receptor
and Grp78. Lanes 5 and 6, Chang cells transfected
with wild type LDL receptor as control.
|
|
Effects of Overexpression of Grp78 with Grp78 Co-transfection and
6-AN Treatment--
Previous studies demonstrated that overexpression
of wild type Grp78 can inhibit secretion of a variety of proteins in
the ER (25-27). This indicates that one effect of overexpression of Grp78 is selective retention of proteins in the ER. In contrast, other
studies have shown that overexpression of Grp78 can stimulate folding
and improve secretion of other proteins (28, 29). Therefore, we studied
the effect of Grp78 overexpression on the processing of wild type LDL
receptor, both by Grp78 co-transfection and 6-AN treatment. In
immunoprecipitates from cells expressing wild type LDL receptor, the
intensity of the band representing the mature form has reached the same
intensity as the band representing the precursor LDL receptor after
about 30-45 min. Thus, at this point the amount of mature LDL receptor
is equal to the amount of precursor receptor protein. However, when
overexpressing Grp78 by co-transfection or by 6-AN treatment, more than
1 h is needed before half of the newly synthesized precursor
protein is present in the mature form (Fig.
6). These results indicate that
overexpression of Grp78 decreases the processing rate of the wild type
LDL receptor precursor. Overexpression of Grp78 did not cause any
detectable differences in the processing of the two mutant LDL
receptors (results not shown). The mutant receptors were not detectable in the mature form, either during co-expression of Grp78 or during 6-AN
treatment. The pulse-chase results were identical to the results in
Fig. 1.

View larger version (43K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Overexpression of Grp78 decreases the
processing rate of the wild type LDL receptor. Chang cells
expressing the wild type LDL receptor (WT-LDLr),
co-expressing wild type LDL receptor and recombinant Grp78
(WT-LDLr+Grp78), or expressing the wild type LDL receptor
and 6-AN-treated (WT-LDLr+6-AN) were pulse-labeled for 30 min and chased for the indicated periods. The cells were lysed and
subjected to immunoprecipitation under denaturing conditions, using a
polyclonal antibody against the LDL receptor. The immunoprecipitated
proteins were analyzed by 4-15% SDS-PAGE, and the intensity of the
bands representing the non-mature LDL receptor protein (120 kDa) and
the band representing the mature LDL receptor (160 kDa) were quantified
using a PhosphorImager. Intensity of the band representing mature LDL
receptor, relative to each band representing the precursor receptor
protein, is shown with time ( , wild type LDLr; , wild type LDLr + Grp78; , wild type LDLr + 6-AN). Reported results are mean values
(n = 3). A representative set of gels used for
calculation of the intensity of the individual 120- and 160-kDa bands
is displayed below the graphical presentation.
|
|
Since Grp78 overexpression decreases the processing rate of the wild
type LDL receptor, overexpression of Grp78 may also influence the
steady state level of the LDL receptors at the cell surface. To address
this question Chang cells were transfected with a plasmid expressing
the wild type LDL receptor alone, co-transfected with plasmids
expressing the wild type LDL receptor and Grp78, or transfected with a
plasmid expressing the wild type LDL receptor and treated with 6-AN to
increase the endogenous level of Grp78. The cell surface expression and
activity of LDL receptors were analyzed by flow cytometry. In order to
measure the relative amount of LDL receptors at the cell surface,
intact cells were stained with C7 antibody and Alexa-conjugated rabbit
anti-mouse antibody at 4 °C (Fig.
7A). In parallel, the activity
of the LDL receptors was determined as binding and uptake of
DiI-conjugated LDL at 37 °C. Fig. 7, B and C,
shows the median fluorescence above background for cells transfected
with plasmids expressing the wild type LDL receptor with or without
6-AN treatment or co-transfection with plasmids expressing Grp78.
Background was defined as the fluorescence value below which 99.75% of
cells transfected with the pMP6 vector without insert was found.
Accordingly, the population above the background represents cells
overexpressing the wild type LDL receptor. Overexpression of Grp78
causes no major alterations of the steady state level of the LDL
receptor quantity or function (Fig. 7, B and C).
Nevertheless, one-way analysis of variance shows a significant difference between the three groups for the C7 labeling
(p 0.00097) as well as for the DiI-LDL incubation
(p 0.00055). The DiI-LDL binding and uptake
measurements show no significant difference between the untreated and
the 6-AN-treated cells (p 0.09676) indicating that
it is the decrease in the Grp78 co-transfected cells that causes the
significant difference between the three groups.

View larger version (66K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
Characterization of expressed cell
surface-located LDL receptor protein in transfected Chang cells using
flow cytometric measurements. Chang cells were transfected with
plasmids expressing the wild type LDL receptor (1-3) or
were mock-transfected (4-6). A subset of these cells were
co-transfected with plasmids expressing Grp78 (2 and
5) or were treated with 0.2 mM 6-AN for 36 h (3 and 6). A, dot plots of
representative flow cytometric analyses of transfected Chang cells
incubated DiI-LDL at 37 °C for 5 h before harvesting. Side
angle light scatter is given on the x axis, and the
fluorescence of individual cells in arbitrary units is given on the
y axis. 99.75% of the mock-transfected cells has
fluorescence below the horizontal background line. B,
histogram showing median fluorescence above background, as defined
under A, representing relative LDL receptor amounts on the
surface of transiently transfected Chang cells, as measured by
immunofluorescence staining with C7 antibody at 4 °C. Reported
results are mean values (n = 3). C,
histogram showing median fluorescence above background defined as the
fluorescence value below which 99.75% of the mock-transfected cells
was found. The results represent the activity of the cell
surface-located LDL receptors, measured by take up of DiI-LDL at
37 °C. Reported results are mean values (n = 3).
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Approximately 50% of the characterized mutations in the LDL
receptor gene lead to mutant proteins that are partially or totally retained in the ER (2). However, the specific factors and mechanisms responsible for the retention of mutant LDL receptors are unknown. Our
results are the first to identify a specific chaperone involved in
retention of LDL receptors in the ER. The mass spectrometry (Fig. 3)
and Western blot analysis (Fig. 4) unambiguously identify the 78-kDa
protein co-immunoprecipitating with the LDL receptor as Grp78. In our
system no other proteins showed specific co-immunoprecipitation with
either the wild type or the mutant LDL receptors. This does not rule
out the possibility that other chaperones are involved in the quality
control of the LDL receptor. In fact previous studies demonstrate that
Grp78 can cooperate with other chaperones. For example in the
maturation of apolipoprotein B (apoB) Grp78 associates with apoB as a
part of a complex including the chaperones Grp94, calreticulin, and
Erp72 (13). It cannot be excluded that some of these chaperones also
interact with the LDL receptor, but our results indicate that such
interactions are weak if they are present. Calnexin and calreticulin
react specifically with monoglycosylated N-linked core
glycans, and since the LDL receptor is a glycoprotein it is a potential
substrate for calnexin and calreticulin. However, we detected no
association between the LDL receptor and calnexin or the LDL receptor
and calreticulin, indicating that these two chaperones are not major
contributors in the ER retention and quality control of the LDL
receptor. The LDL receptor contains one or two aspargine-linked glycans
(30), which are not localized within the first 50 residues of
NH2 terminus of the protein. This may explain why the LDL
receptor is mainly associated with Grp78 and not with calnexin and
calreticulin. This is in accordance with recent results where Molinari
and Helenius (31) showed that direct interaction of aspargine-linked
glycans with calnexin and calreticulin, without prior interaction with
Grp78, occurs only if glycans were present within about 50 residues of
the NH2 terminus of the protein.
During this study we have established a sensitive method for
identification of proteins interacting with the LDL receptor. It may be
expected that combining the already established protocol with
expression of other processing-deficient mutant LDL receptors, or
stabilization of the chaperone complexes by chemical cross-linking, may
identify other chaperones. However, our results showing that Grp78
displays transient interaction with the wild type LDL receptor and
prolonged interaction with two ER-retained, mutant, LDL receptors, indicate that Grp78 is a major factor in ER retention of mutant LDL
receptors. This is supported by the observation of a significant increase in the amount of Grp78 co-immunoprecipitated when expressing either of the two mutant receptors and compared with the wild type LDL
receptor. This shows that Grp78 has an increased affinity for the
mutant receptors and is consistent with previous results demonstrating
that one function of Grp78 is selective retention of proteins in the ER
(32). Grp78 is believed to function as a chaperone via cyclic on and
off associations with hydrophobic protein stretches, coupled to ATP
hydrolysis (33, 34). The increased affinity of Grp78 for the mutant LDL
receptors implicates that the two mutations cause misfolding resulting
in exposed hydrophobic areas in the LDL receptor protein. The W556S and
the C646Y mutations are both localized in the second domain of the LDL
receptor. This domain is characterized by being 33% identical to a
portion of the human epidermal growth factor precursor (35). The C646Y mutation disrupts the correct formation of a disulfide bond in one of
the three growth factor repeats. The W556S mutation results in an amino
acid substitution in one of the conserved YWTD repeats (35). Mutations
resulting in disruption of disulfide bonds or mutations in conserved
regions are likely to cause folding problems. However, since the two
mutations are not localized in the ligand binding domain of the LDL
receptor (14, 15), it is possible that the mutant receptors are in
position to bind LDL if they could escape the ER quality control
system. Taken together, our results support the hypothesis that protein
misfolding contributes to the pathogenesis of FH, and thereby FH can
also be regarded as a conformational disease.
The Grp78 overexpression experiments show that increased levels of
Grp78 decrease the processing rate of the wild type LDL receptor (Fig.
6). Since Grp78 binds through cyclic on and off associations, the
decreased processing rate may be due to a more frequent binding of the
LDL receptor by Grp78, owing to the increased concentration of Grp78 in
the overexpressing cells. Therefore, the average association free time
for the LDL receptor during overexpression of Grp78 is shortened. It is
well known that when unfolded proteins accumulate in the ER, Grp78
transcription is induced. This response is a part of the cellular
unfolded protein response. The signal for induction is believed to be a
decrease in the concentration of the free Grp78 owing to binding of
Grp78 in complexes with unfolded proteins (36, 37). This indicates that
an effective regulation of Grp78 transcription, resulting in increased
amounts of Grp78, is important for the ability of the cells to cope
with stress situations. The observed decrease in the processing rate of
the wild type LDL receptor (Fig. 6) is consistent with the notion that
an increased amount of Grp78 can influence the folding and maturation
of the LDL receptor.
Overexpression of Grp78 did not have any detectable influence on the
folding and maturation of the mutant LDL receptors. They stayed totally
retained in the ER, and no significant alterations in degradation could
be observed. We suggest that the available amount of Grp78 is already
sufficient to prevent transport of the mutant receptors to the plasma
membrane. Therefore, a further increase of Grp78 by overexpression will
not significantly alter the situation. However, many LDL receptor
mutations resulting only in delayed transport of the newly synthesized
receptor through the ER have been identified. It might be expected that
overexpression of Grp78 could influence the partial retention of these
"less severe" mutant receptors.
Overexpression of Grp78 is known to cause selective retention of a
variety of proteins (25-27). According to these results and our
observation that overexpression of Grp78 caused delayed processing of
the wild type receptor, we expected overexpression of Grp78 to decrease
the steady state level of active LDL receptors. Surprisingly, we
observed no major decrease in the steady state amount of cell surface
LDL receptors or in the binding and internalization of DiI-LDL (Fig.
7). This shows that decreasing the folding and maturation rate of the
LDL receptor had no major influence on the steady state level of the
wild type LDL receptor. However, it cannot be excluded that
overexpression of Grp78 influences the steady state level of the LDL
receptor but that the effects may be too small for detection in our
system. Actually, one-way analysis of variance showed a significant
difference in the number and the activity of cell surface-located LDL
receptors between Chang cells overexpressing the LDL receptor alone,
overexpressing the LDL receptor together with Grp78, or overexpressing
the LDL receptor after 6-AN treatment. We especially observed a
decrease in the activity of cell surface-located LDL receptors when
co-expressing Grp78. Overexpression of Grp78 decreases the processing
rate of the LDL receptor, indicating an increase in the average time
each LDL receptor molecule spends in the ER. This may lead to an
increased risk of degradation of the receptor and thereby decreased
steady state level at the cell surface. We did not observe the same
decrease in the 6-AN-treated cell. However, overexpression of
recombinant Grp78 by co-transfection and up-regulation of endogenous
Grp78 by 6-AN are two distinct mechanisms. A direct mechanistic link between 6-AN induction of Grp78 expression has not been established. However, an association has been identified between deficiency of the
NAD-poly(ADP-ribose) synthesis system and induction of Grp78,
suggesting that 6-AN induces Grp78 indirectly by inhibition of
poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (38). 6-AN also effects the cellular ATP
levels by secondary inhibition of glycolysis (22). Since protein
dissociation from Grp78 can be blocked by depletion of cellular ATP
levels (39), the 6-AN treatment may cause induction of Grp78 by
accumulation of a variety of Grp78-bound unfolded proteins in the ER.
Therefore, induction of Grp78 by 6-AN treatment might not increase the
level of available Grp78 in the ER. This might explain why we do not
observe a significant effect on the steady state level and activity of
cell surface-located LDL receptors in the 6-AN-treated cells. Taking
into account that only about 10% of the cells express the recombinant
Grp78, the individual co-transfected cells express approximately 10 times more Grp78 when compared with the 6-AN-treated cells (Fig. 5,
lanes 1-4). It cannot totally be excluded that the decrease
in the number and activity of cell surface-located LDL receptors is
linked to the simultaneous expression of two recombinant proteins from
strong promoters, leading to a possible overload of cellular protein synthesis capacity.
In summary, Grp78 interacts transiently with the wild type LDL receptor
and displays prolonged interaction with two mutant LDL receptors. This
indicates that misfolding of the two mutant LDL receptors causes
retention in the ER and that Grp78 is involved in the specific
retention of the mutant receptors in the ER. Accordingly, protein
misfolding contributes to the pathogenesis of familial hypercholesterolemia. Our results suggest that Grp78 is a potential key
factor in the ER quality control of the newly synthesized LDL receptor.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank Dr. Søren Neve and Dr. Karsten
Kristiansen for supplying us with the polyclonal antibody against the
LDL receptor and Professor Ineke Braakman and Dr. Annemieke Jansens for
excellent technical advise and fruitful discussions.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by the Danish Heart Foundation and
the Elvira and Rasmus Riisfort's benevolent fund for the public benefit.The costs of publication of this
article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article
must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement" in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
§
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Research Unit for
Molecular Medicine, University of Aarhus, Skejby Sygehus,
Brendstrupgaardsvej, DK-8200 Aarhus N, Denmark. Tel.: 45 89495142;
E-mail: mmj@mmf.au.dk.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, July 21, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M004663200
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
LDL, low density
lipoprotein;
ER, endoplasmic reticulum;
FH, familial
hypercholesterolemia;
FCS, fetal calf serum;
CHAPS, 3-[(3-cholamidopropyl)dimethylammonio]-1-propanesulfonic acid;
PAGE, polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis;
MALDI-TOF, matrix-assisted
laser-desorption ionization-time-of-flight;
DiI, 1,1'-dioctadecyl-3,3,3',3'-tetramethylindocarbocyanine perchlorate;
PBS, phosphate-buffered saline;
6-AN, 6-aminonicotinamide.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Brown, M. S.,
and Goldstein, J. L.
(1986)
Science
232,
34-47
|
| 2.
|
Hobbs, H. H.,
Russell, D. W.,
Brown, M. S.,
and Goldstein, J. L.
(1990)
Annu. Rev. Genet.
24,
133-170
|
| 3.
|
Bross, P.,
Corydon, T. J.,
Andresen, B. S.,
Jorgensen, M. M.,
Bolund, L.,
and Gregersen, N.
(1999)
Hum. Mutat.
14,
186-198
|
| 4.
|
Brooks, D. A.
(1997)
FEBS Lett.
409,
115-120
|
| 5.
|
Carrell, R. W.,
and Lomas, D. A.
(1997)
Lancet
350,
134-138
|
| 6.
|
Beissinger, M.,
and Buchner, J.
(1998)
Biol. Chem. Hoppe-Seyler
379,
245-259
|
| 7.
|
Soto, C.
(1999)
J. Mol. Med.
77,
412-418
|
| 8.
|
Carrell, R. W.,
Lomas, D. A.,
Sidhar, S.,
and Foreman, R.
(1996)
Chest
110,
243-247
|
| 9.
|
Ellgaard, L.,
Molinari, M.,
and Helenius, A.
(1999)
Science
286,
1882-1888
|
| 10.
|
Gething, M. J.
(1999)
Semin. Cell Dev. Biol.
10,
465-472
|
| 11.
|
Hammond, C.,
Braakman, I.,
and Helenius, A.
(1994)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
91,
913-917
|
| 12.
|
Li, Z.,
and Srivastava, P. K.
(1993)
EMBO J.
12,
3143-3151
|
| 13.
|
Linnik, K. M.,
and Herscovitz, H.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
21368-21373
|
| 14.
|
Jensen, H. K.,
Holst, H.,
Jensen, L. G.,
Jorgensen, M. M.,
Andreasen, P. H.,
Jensen, T. G.,
Andresen, B. S.,
Heath, F.,
Hansen, P. S.,
Neve, S.,
Kristiansen, K.,
Faergeman, O.,
Kolvraa, S.,
Bolund, L.,
and Gregersen, N.
(1997)
Atherosclerosis
131,
67-72
|
| 15.
|
Leitersdorf, E.,
Tobin, E. J.,
Davignon, J.,
and Hobbs, H. H.
(1990)
J. Clin. Invest.
85,
1014-1023
|
| 16.
|
Beisiegel, U.,
Schneider, W. J.,
Goldstein, J. L.,
Anderson, R. G.,
and Brown, M. S.
(1981)
J. Biol. Chem.
256,
11923-11931
|
| 17.
|
Shevchenko, A.,
Wilm, M.,
Vorm, O.,
and Mann, M.
(1996)
Anal. Chem.
68,
850-858
|
| 18.
|
Jensen, O. N.,
Shevchenko, A.,
and Mann, M.
(1997)
Protein Structure: A Practical Approach
, 2nd Ed
, IRL Press at Oxford University Press, Oxford
|
| 19.
|
Jensen, O. N.,
Podtelejnikov, A.,
and Mann, M.
(1996)
Rapid Commun. Mass Spectrom.
10,
1371-1378
|
| 20.
|
Mann, M.,
Hojrup, P.,
and Roepstorff, P.
(1993)
Biol. Mass Spectrom.
22,
338-345
|
| 21.
|
Barak, L. S.,
and Webb, W. W.
(1981)
J. Cell Biol.
90,
595-604
|
| 22.
|
Street, J. C.,
Mahmood, U.,
Ballon, D.,
Alfieri, A. A.,
and Koutcher, J. A.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
4113-4119
|
| 23.
|
Berger, N. A.,
Catino, D. M.,
and Vietti, T. J.
(1982)
Cancer Res.
42,
4382-4386
|
| 24.
|
Belfi, C. A.,
Chatterjee, S.,
Gosky, D. M.,
Berger, S. J.,
and Berger, N. A.
(1999)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
257,
361-368
|
| 25.
|
Morris, J. A.,
Dorner, A. J.,
Edwards, C. A.,
Hendershot, L. M.,
and Kaufman, R. J.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
4327-4334
|
| 26.
|
Muresan, Z.,
and Arvan, P.
(1998)
Mol. Endocrinol.
12,
458-467
|
| 27.
|
Yang, Y.,
Turner, R. S.,
and Gaut, J. R.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
25552-25555
|
| 28.
|
Tate, C. G.,
Whiteley, E.,
and Betenbaugh, M. J.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
17551-17558
|
| 29.
|
Ailor, E.,
and Betenbaugh, M. J.
(1998)
Biotechnol. Bioeng.
58,
196-203
|
| 30.
|
Cummings, R. D.,
Kornfeld, S.,
Schneider, W. J.,
Hobgood, K. K.,
Tolleshaug, H.,
Brown, M. S.,
and Goldstein, J. L.
(1983)
J. Biol. Chem.
258,
15261-15273
|
| 31.
|
Molinari, M.,
and Helenius, A.
(2000)
Science
288,
331-333
|
| 32.
|
Dorner, A. J.,
Wasley, L. C.,
and Kaufman, R. J.
(1992)
EMBO J.
11,
1563-1571
|
| 33.
|
Flynn, G. C.,
Chappell, T. G.,
and Rothman, J. E.
(1989)
Science
245,
385-390
|
| 34.
|
Blond-Elguindi, S.,
Fourie, A. M.,
Sambrook, J. F.,
and Gething, M. J.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
12730-12735
|
| 35.
|
Sudhof, T. C.,
Russell, D. W.,
Goldstein, J. L.,
Brown, M. S.,
Sanchez-Pescador, R.,
and Bell, G. I.
(1985)
Science
228,
893-895
|
| 36.
|
Kohno, K.,
Normington, K.,
Sambrook, J.,
Gething, M. J.,
and Mori, K.
(1993)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13,
877-890
|
| 37.
|
Leborgne-Castel, N.,
Jelitto-Van Dooren, E. P.,
Crofts, A. J.,
and Denecke, J.
(1999)
Plant Cell
11,
459-470
|
| 38.
|
Chatterjee, S.,
Cheng, M. F.,
Berger, S. J.,
and Berger, N. A.
(1994)
Cancer Res.
54,
4405-4411
|
| 39.
|
Dorner, A. J.,
Wasley, L. C.,
and Kaufman, R. J.
(1990)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
87,
7429-7432
|
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:

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. Sorensen, T. Ranheim, K. S. Bakken, T. P. Leren, and M. A. Kulseth
Retention of Mutant Low Density Lipoprotein Receptor in Endoplasmic Reticulum (ER) Leads to ER Stress
J. Biol. Chem.,
January 6, 2006;
281(1):
468 - 476.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. Castro-Fernandez, G. Maya-Nunez, and P. M. Conn
Beyond the Signal Sequence: Protein Routing in Health and Disease
Endocr. Rev.,
June 1, 2005;
26(4):
479 - 503.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
U. K. Misra, M. Gonzalez-Gronow, G. Gawdi, and S. V. Pizzo
The Role of MTJ-1 in Cell Surface Translocation of GRP78, a Receptor for {alpha}2-Macroglobulin-Dependent Signaling
J. Immunol.,
February 15, 2005;
174(4):
2092 - 2097.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
Y. Li, W. Lu, A. L. Schwartz, and G. Bu
Degradation of the LDL receptor class 2 mutants is mediated by a proteasome-dependent pathway
J. Lipid Res.,
June 1, 2004;
45(6):
1084 - 1091.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
![]() | |