![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 275, Issue 46, 36116-36123, November 17, 2000
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From the
Received for publication, May 3, 2000, and in revised form, July 3, 2000
Trio is a complex protein containing two guanine
nucleotide exchange factor domains each with associated pleckstrin
homology domains, a serine/threonine kinase domain, two SH3 domains, an immunoglobulin-like domain, and spectrin-like repeats. Trio was originally identified as a LAR tyrosine phosphatase-binding
protein and is involved in actin remodeling, cell migration, and cell growth. Herein we provide evidence that Trio not only activates RhoA but is also a RhoA target. The RhoA-binding site was mapped to the Trio immunoglobulin-like domain. RhoA isoprenylation is necessary for the RhoA-Trio interaction, because mutation of the RhoA
carboxyl-terminal cysteine residue blocked binding. The existence of an
intramolecular functional link between RhoA activation and RhoA binding
is suggested by the finding that Trio exchange activity enhanced RhoA
binding to Trio. Furthermore, immunofluorescence studies of HeLa cells
showed that although ectopically expressed Trio was evenly distributed
within the cell, co-expression of Trio with RhoA resulted in
relocalization of Trio into punctate structures. Relocalization was not
observed with Trio constructs lacking the immunoglobulin-like domain,
indicating that RhoA acts to regulate Trio localization via binding to
the immunoglobulin-like domain. We propose that Trio-mediated RhoA
activation and subsequent RhoA-mediated relocalization of Trio
functions to modulate and coordinate Trio signaling.
Trio is an unusual member of the Dbl homology
(DH)1 family of guanine
nucleotide exchange factors (GEFs) because it contains two DH GEF
domains in addition to a protein serine/threonine kinase, two SH3-like
domains, an Ig-like domain, and at least four spectrin-like repeats (schematically shown in Fig. 1; Ref. 1). DH GEF family members
function to activate Rho GTPases such as, RhoA, Rac1, and
Cdc42 by promoting the exchange of GDP for GTP (2, 3). Once
these molecular switches are activated, Rho GTPases function in diverse
cellular processes including actin cytoskeleton organization, mitogen-activated protein kinase cascade signaling, and gene
transcription (3-5). Targets for Rho GTPases include protein kinases,
lipid kinases, and nonenzymatic proteins (2, 4, 6-8). During cell
activation, Rho GTPases are released from a complex with GDP
dissociation inhibitor (GDI) and then translocate from the cytoplasm to
membranes (5, 9). Many DH GEF family members were isolated as
oncogenes, indicating their importance to cell growth control (2), and
genetic analysis has revealed that several DH GEF family members are
important in development, among them Vav (10), the faciogenital
dysplasia protein, FGD1 (11, 12), the Drosophila Still life
(13) and DRhoGEF2 (14, 15) gene products, the Caenorhabditis
elegans Trio-like unc-73 gene product (16), and
Drosophila Trio (17-20). DH GEFs all contain a ~260-amino
acid DH domain immediately followed by a ~100-amino acid pleckstrin
homology (PH) domain, and some DH GEFs such as Trio contain additional
catalytic domains and auxiliary domains (2, 3). The regulation of DH
GEFs is incompletely understood, but PH domain-mediated interactions
with phospholipids or proteins, phosphorylation of DH GEF proteins, or
interactions of DH GEFs with other GTPases may be involved (2, 21-26).
The solution structure of the amino-terminal Trio-GEF/PH region
revealed that the GEF and PH domains interact with one another, and
mutational analysis demonstrated that the PH domain enhances Trio GEF
activity for Rac1 in vitro (24).
Trio was originally isolated by virtue of its binding to the
intracellular region of the LAR transmembrane protein-tyrosine phosphatase, and the Trio segment that binds the LAR PTP-D2
domain was shown to include the Ig-like and protein serine/threonine kinase domains (1). The Trio amino-terminal GEF domain (GEF-D1) displays Rac1 activity, and the carboxyl-terminal GEF domain (GEF-D2) exhibits RhoA GEF activity in vitro (1). Trio GEF-D1 was
also recently shown to activate RhoG in vitro and in cells
(27). Expression of Trio GEF-D1 causes prominent membrane ruffling, whereas cells expressing Trio GEF-D2 have increased stress fibers and
lamellae that terminate in miniruffles (28, 29). Furthermore, cells
expressing Trio GEF-D1 display increased haptotactic migration and
anchorage-independent growth, suggesting that Trio regulates matrix-induced signal transduction (28). Transient expression of
full-length Trio alters actin cytoskeleton organization, as well as the
distribution of focal contact sites (28). These findings support a role
for Trio as a multifunctional protein involved in coordinating actin
remodeling necessary for cell migration and growth.
The unusual configuration of tandem DH GEF domains, as well as a kinase
domain, suggested the possibility that the activity of one or more of
the Trio domains could be regulated by the activity of another domain.
To test this possibility, we initially examined whether Trio itself
might be a target for Rho or Rac. Co-expression studies indicated that
RhoA, but not Rac1 or Cdc42, bound Trio, and mapping studies identified
the Trio Ig-like domain as the RhoA-binding site. Trio GEF-D2 activity
increased the amount of RhoA bound to Trio, providing evidence for a
direct link between Trio-mediated RhoA activation and RhoA binding to
Trio. Because RhoA binding to Trio required the most carboxyl-terminal
cysteine residue, which is the site of lipid modification, RhoA
isoprenylation is required for binding to the Trio Ig-like domain.
Furthermore, immunofluorescence studies of HeLa cells indicated that
RhoA binding to the Trio Ig-like domain functions to regulate Trio localization.
Plasmid Constructions--
Trio expression constructs were made
using standard techniques and confirmed by restriction mapping and, in
some cases, DNA sequencing. Trio cDNA constructs were cloned into
the pMT.HA tag (30) or pMT.Myc tag expression vectors, which encode
either a HA or Myc epitope tag sequence immediately upstream of the
cloning site. The extent of the Trio regions encoded by these plasmids are schematically shown in Fig. 1. Amino acid numbering of Trio is
according to a full-length Trio of 3038 amino acids
(GenBankTM accession number UF091395). The HA-Trio.mD2 and
HA-Trio.mGSIK constructs have residues 2050-2056 deleted within the
GEF-D2 domain and have no detectable exchange activity in
vitro (29). Rho GTPases were expressed as GST fusion proteins
using the pEBG vector (31) or as Myc-tagged GTPases using the pMT·Myc
tag vector. The pGEX-rhotekin construct contains the rhotekin
RhoA-binding domain (amino acids 7-89) (32).
Cell Transfections--
COS-7 cell transient transfections were
done by the DEAE-dextran/Me2SO method using ~2
µg of plasmid DNA/2 × 105 cells, and cells were
harvested ~20 h after transfection. Proteins were metabolically
labeled with [35S]methionine and
[35S]cysteine labeling during the final 4 h prior to
harvesting of cells. HeLa cells were transfected by calcium phosphate
precipitation and fixed and stained 3 days after transfection as
described previously (33).
Cell Labeling and Protein Analysis--
Cell proteins were
metabolically labeled with [35S]methionine and
[35S]cysteine essentially as described previously (30).
Following labeling, cells were washed in PBS, lysed in Nonidet P-40
lysis buffer (1% Nonidet P-40, 150 mM NaCl, 50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 5 mM MgCl2)
containing 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, 10 µg/ml
leupeptin, and 10 µg/ml aprotinin. Insoluble material was removed
from the lysates by centrifugation in a microcentrifuge. Cell lysates
were then precleared once with 25 µl of protein A-Sepharose (Amersham
Pharmacia Biotech) for 1-2 h. For immunoprecipitations 1 µl of
anti-HA mAb 12CA5 ascites fluid and 25 µl of protein A-Sepharose were
added per ml of precleared lysate for 1 h. Precipitates were then
washed with buffer containing 0.1% Nonidet P-40, 150 mM
NaCl, 25 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5), and 5 mM
MgCl2. Precipitated proteins were analyzed using SDS-PAGE
under reducing conditions followed by autoradiography. Proteins from
cell lysates or co-precipitated proteins from nonlabeled cells were
resolved by SDS-PAGE and then transferred to Immobilon-P (Millipore,
Bedford, MA), and immunoblots were probed with the anti-HA mAb HA 11 (BabCO, Richmond, CA) or the anti-GST mAb 112 (ImmunoGen, Cambridge,
MA). Cellular activation of RhoA was detected using the GST-rhotekin
binding assay (32). Briefly, cells were lysed as described above, and
GTP-RhoA was precipitated with 5 µg of bacterially expressed
GST-rhotekin (rhotekin amino acids 7-89). The precipitates were boiled
in SDS-PAGE sample buffer, electrophoresed, blotted, and probed with
anti-HA mAb HA 11. Immunoblots were developed with rabbit anti-mouse
horseradish peroxidase-conjugated IgG (Dako, Carpinteria, CA) and the
chemiluminescence reagent, luminol, essentially as described by the
supplier (PerkinElmer Life Sciences).
Immunofluorescence--
HeLa cells were rinsed in PBS, fixed in
2% paraformaldehyde/PBS for 15 min, and then permeabilized for 10 min
in 0.1% Triton X-100/PBS containing 2% horse serum. Nonspecific
Ab-binding sites were blocked by a 30-min incubation in blocking buffer
(10% normal goat serum in PBS). To detect HA-Trio and GST-RhoA,
permeabilized cells were exposed to the anti-HA mAb HA 11 and anti-GST
for 1 h and washed, and then the primary Abs were detected with a
30-min treatment of Texas red-linked goat anti-mouse IgG2a (Southern Biotech., Birmingham, AL) and fluorescein isothiocyanate-linked goat
anti-mouse IgG1 (Southern Biotech). Slides were mounted in a polyvinyl
alcohol medium and viewed on a Nikon E800 microscope equipped for
epifluorescence or on a Bio-Rad MRC-1024 laser scanning confocal
microscope equipped for epifluorescence, and images were obtained at
0.35-µm intervals. Co-localization coefficients were obtained using
the LaserSharp version 3.2 software package (Bio-Rad).
Trio Binds RhoA--
The two Trio GEF domains have distinct
substrate specificities: the amino-terminal GEF-D1 domain has Rac1
activity, whereas the carboxyl-terminal GEF-D2 domain has RhoA activity
in vitro (1). To assess whether Trio itself may be target
for RhoA, Rac1, or Cdc42, we performed a series of co-precipitation
experiments to determine the ability of GST-tagged Rho GTPases to bind
HA-tagged full-length Trio or various Trio deletion constructs (Fig.
1; the overall structure of Trio is
schematically shown at the top of figure, and
below are shown the extent of the various Trio deletion
constructs used in this study). To this end, COS-7 cells were
co-transfected with HA-tagged Trio (HA-Trio, amino acids 1-3038)
together with GST-tagged, constitutively activate (V14RhoA, V12Rac1,
and V12Cdc42) or dominant-negative (N19RhoA and N17Rac1) forms of RhoA,
Rac1, and Cdc42, and following transfection, proteins were
metabolically labeled with [35S]methionine and
[35S]cysteine, extracts were prepared, and then GST
fusion proteins were recovered using Glutathione-Sepharose. As seen in
Fig. 2, Trio bound GST-V14RhoA (Fig. 2,
upper panel, lane 2), suggesting that Trio could
indeed be a RhoA target. The binding appeared specific to RhoA because
neither GST, GST-V12Rac1, -N17Rac1, nor -V12Cdc42 appreciably bound
Trio, even though the expression levels of Trio and the various
GST-tagged GTPases were comparable in the various co-transfections
(Fig. 2 and data not shown). Equal expression levels of full-length
HA-Trio in the presence of GST-V14RhoA and GST-N19RhoA were only
possible at lower levels of GST-N19RhoA expression, perhaps because of
cell toxicity. However, Trio consistently bound more (2.5-6-fold)
GST-V14RhoA than GST-N19RhoA, as determined by densitometric scanning
of autoradiograms and correcting for the amount Trio present in the
various co-transfections, suggesting that Trio preferentially bound
activated RhoA (Fig. 2 and data not shown). Although GST-V12Rac1,
-N17Rac1, and -V12Cdc42 did not appreciably bind Trio, they did bind
endogenous COS-7 proteins, such as a protein that migrates somewhat
slower than Trio and a ~180-kDa protein (Fig. 2, upper
panel, lanes 4-6, 9, and 10). Taken together, these findings indicate that Trio is a target for RhoA,
but not for Rac1 or Cdc42, and that activated RhoA preferentially binds
Trio. Attempts to precipitate endogenous Trio with the various GST-tagged GTPases were unsuccessful, probably because of the low level
of endogenous Trio present in diverse cell lines (data not shown).
Trio Binds RhoA via Its Ig-like Domain--
To map which region of
Trio bound RhoA, a series of Trio amino-terminal truncation mutants
(Fig. 1) were co-expressed together with GST-V14RhoA in COS-7 cells,
and following metabolic labeling, cell extracts were prepared, and
glutathione-Sepharose precipitation was performed (Fig.
3A). GST-V14RhoA bound
HA-Trio.GSIK (lane 2), and HA-Trio.SIK (lane 3),
but did not efficiently bind HA-Trio·GS (lane 4). Control
anti-HA immunoprecipitations of cell extracts used for the
glutathione-Sepharose precipitations showed that the expression levels
of HA-Trio.GSIK, HA-Trio.SIK, and HA-Trio.GS were comparable (Fig.
3A, lanes 6-8). These results thus indicate that
the Trio RhoA-binding site resides in the Trio carboxyl-terminal region
(amino acids 2629-3038), which includes the Ig-like domain and the
kinase domain.
To assess where RhoA bound within the Trio carboxyl-terminal region,
HA-tagged Trio constructs encoding both the Ig-like and kinase domains
(Trio.IK) or kinase domain alone (Trio·K), were co-expressed with
GST-tagged Rho GTPases, and glutathione-Sepharose precipitations were
performed (Fig. 3B). GST-V14RhoA bound Trio.IK but did not
bind Trio.K, indicating that the Trio Ig-like domain was required for
efficient V14RhoA binding (Fig. 3B, lane 2). Furthermore, binding studies using a construct encoding only the Trio
Ig-like domain (Trio·I) confirmed that GST-V14RhoA bound the Ig-like
domain (Fig. 3C, lane 2). Little if any binding
of GST-N19RhoA, -V12Rac1, or -V12Cdc42 was observed with Trio.IK, Trio.I, and Trio.K (Fig. 3, B and C). The
HA-tagged Trio.IK, Trio.K, and Trio.I constructs were all efficiently
expressed as determined by anti-HA immunoblotting of total lysates
(Fig. 3, B and C), as were the GST-Rho GTPases as
determined by Coomassie staining (data not shown).
To establish whether the Ig-like domain was required for RhoA binding
in context of full-length Trio, we created a Trio mutant, Trio RhoA Cysteine 190 Is Required for Trio Binding--
Our mapping
studies demonstrated that the Trio Ig-like domain is required for
efficient binding of RhoA to Trio. However, E. coli-derived
V14RhoA did not bind Trio in vitro (data not shown), suggesting that a post-translation modification of RhoA, such as lipid
modification, might be required for Trio binding. Consistent with this
hypothesis, the binding of GST-V14RhoA to Trio was insensitive to the
presence of high NaCl concentrations (up to 1 M NaCl) in the precipitate wash buffer (Fig.
4A), supporting a possible
lipid-protein interaction. To test whether RhoA isoprenylation was
required for Trio binding, a RhoA cysteine 190 Trio GEF-D2 Activity Enhances RhoA Binding to Trio--
Because
the Trio Ig-like domain preferentially bound activated RhoA and the
Trio GEF-D2 domain activates RhoA (1), it was hypothesized that Trio
GEF-D2 activity could modulate RhoA binding to Trio. To test this
possibility, we compared the ability of wild-type GST-RhoA or
constitutively activated GST-V14RhoA to bind Trio using either
Trio.GSIK, which has the ability to activate RhoA, or a Trio
GEF mutant, Trio.mGSIK, which lacks detectable GEF activity in
vitro (data not shown). To initially confirm that Trio GEF-D2 did
indeed increase GTP-bound RhoA levels in cells, rhotekin pull-down
experiments were performed (32). To this end, HA-tagged wild-type RhoA
was co-expressed with either HA-Trio.GSIK or HA- Trio.mGSIK in COS-7
cells, and the amount of GTP-bound RhoA was estimated by precipitation
using GST-rhotekin, which binds GTP-bound RhoA but not GDP-bound RhoA.
Cells transfected with Trio.GSIK had readily detectable levels of
GTP-bound RhoA (Fig. 5A,
lane 2), whereas Trio.mGSIK transfected cells had little GTP-bound RhoA (lane 3), indicating that RhoA nucleotide
exchange occurs with Trio.GSIK but not with Trio.mGSIK. To then assess the ability of HA-Trio.GSIK and HA-Trio.mGSIK to bind GST-RhoA, glutathione-Sepharose precipitations were performed using extracts prepared from metabolically labeled cells (Fig. 5B). The
constitutively activated form of RhoA, GST-V14RhoA, bound about equally
well to HA-Trio.GSIK and HA-Trio.mGSIK (Fig. 5A, lanes
1 and 3, respectively). However, the amount of
wild-type GST-RhoA bound to HA-Trio.GSIK was consistently ~2.0-fold
higher than the amount of GST-RhoA bound to HA-Trio.mGSIK, as
determined by densitometric scanning of the autoradiograms. This
finding argued that the prior activation of RhoA by the Trio GEF-D2
domain increased the amount of RhoA bound to Trio.
RhoA Expression Alters Trio Localization--
To assess whether
RhoA binding to Trio could function to regulate Trio localization
within cells, Trio and RhoA were expressed either alone (Fig.
6, A-D) or together
(E-J) in HeLa cells, and then Trio
(green) and RhoA (red) localization were
determined by immunofluorescence staining. The expression patterns of
HA-Trio alone (Fig. 6B), HA-Trio
To characterize the association of Trio and RhoA in more detail, HeLa
cells coexpressing HA-Trio and GST-RhoA, or as control HA-Trio The DH GEF family member Trio is of particular interest because it
is a multifunctional protein that contains three enzymatic domains (two
GEF domains and a protein kinase serine/threonine protein kinase
domain) and is implicated in coordinating actin cytoskeletal
reorganization and cell growth regulation (1, 28, 29). Herein we
demonstrate that in addition to activating RhoA, Trio is itself a RhoA
target, and mapping studies identified the Trio Ig-like domain as the
RhoA-binding site. Furthermore, we show that RhoA binding to Trio
requires RhoA lipid modification. We also provide evidence for the
existence of an intramolecular cascade whereby the Trio GEF-D2 domain
activates RhoA and then activated RhoA binds the Trio Ig-like domain.
Finally, immunofluorescence studies using HeLa cells ectopically
expressing Trio and RhoA indicate that RhoA binding regulates Trio
cellular localization.
The preferential binding of GST-V14RhoA to both full-length Trio and
the isolated Trio Ig-like domain, suggests that Trio binds GTP-bound
RhoA. It is thus possible that conformational changes in RhoA that
accompany GTP binding expose a Trio-binding site on RhoA in addition to
the isoprenyl group. However, we have been unable to study the
nucleotide dependence of RhoA binding to Trio using purified proteins
in vitro, perhaps because of the strict requirement of the
RhoA isoprenyl group for binding, as well as possible deleterious
effects on this moiety of the detergents used to solubilize the
protein. We also cannot rule out the possibility that the interaction
between RhoA and Trio may not be direct but instead is mediated by an
adapter protein. However, co-precipitation analysis using
[35S]methionine and [35S]cysteine
metabolically labeled proteins did not reveal significant amounts of a
third protein in the RhoA and Trio complexes (see Figs. 3 and 4 and
data not shown), thus arguing that the interaction is direct.
Furthermore, RhoGDI was shown to bind the isoprenyl group of Cdc42
directly via two RhoA binding to Trio may have consequences on the in vivo
function of both proteins. RhoGDI regulates the activation status of
Rho GTPases by inhibiting intrinsic or GTPase-activating
protein-stimulated GTPase activity (3, 5). It is therefore possible
that after binding to Trio, RhoA-GTPase activity is altered.
Furthermore, the proximity of the Ig-like domain to the Trio GEF-D2
domain could ensure efficient delivery and binding of activated RhoA to
Trio. With respect to Trio function, the resulting relocalization of
Trio after binding RhoA may affect interactions between the GEF-D1,
GEF-D2 or the kinase domain with their respective substrates. Additionally, the relocalization of Trio-mediated by RhoA may also
reflect a conformational change that uncovers latent protein or
membrane-binding sites within the Trio protein. Finally, the dissociation of the RhoA and Trio complex may require interaction(s) with another isoprenyl-binding entity such as RhoGDI, the plasma membrane, or lipid second messengers. In the case of the Rac and RhoGDI
complex, it was shown that a number of lipids including arachidonic
acid, phosphatidic acid, and phosphatidylinositols could disrupt the
Rac and RhoGDI complex (45).
The binding of Rho GTPases to Ig-like domains as seen for RhoGDI and
Trio may indicate that this type of interaction occurs in other
proteins related to Trio such as UNC-73 (16), Kalirin-12 (46), and Duet
(47), as well as other cytoskeletal proteins that have Ig-like domains
such as Titin (48), Twitchin (49, 50), and myosin light chain kinase
(51, 52). Multiple isoforms of Kalirin are generated by alternative
splicing, and the largest isoform, Kalirin-12, which is most similar to
Trio and contains two Ig-like domains, localizes largely to cell
bodies, whereas shorter Kalirin isoforms, which lack the Ig-like
domains, localize to punctate structures distributed along neuronal
processes, as well as to cell bodies (46, 53). It is thus possible that the Kalirin Ig-like domains may play a similar role as the Trio Ig-like
domain to localize these GEFs to specific sites within the cell.
Furthermore, binding of isoprenylated GTPases to Ig-like domains may
also be involved in regulating the activity of these proteins. The
ability of Trio to bind post-translationally modified RhoA suggests a
potentially vital role for isoprenylation not only for localization of
RhoA to the plasma membrane but also in determining RhoA's ability to
bind proteins. Indeed, binding of Rho family GTPases via their
isoprenyl group to target proteins may result in specific and stable
complexes that are important in the regulation of downstream signaling pathways.
We thank Dr. H. Saito for critical review of
the manuscript, Drs. John Blenis and Margaret Chou for plasmids
encoding GST-tagged V12Rac1 and GST-tagged V14RhoA, Dr. Walter Blattler
for the anti-GST mAb, and Michelle Lowe for expert technical assistance.
*
This work was supported by Grants CA55547 and CA75091 from
the National Institutes of Health and a Medical Research Council of
Canada Fellowship (to Q. G. M.).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.
**
Leukemia and Lymphoma Society Scholar. To whom correspondence
should be addressed: Dept. of Cancer Immunology and AIDS, Dana-Farber Cancer Inst., 44 Binney St., Boston, MA 02115. Tel.: 617-632-3526; Fax:
617-632-4569; E-mail: Michel_Streuli@dfci.harvard.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, August 17, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M003775200
The abbreviations used are:
DH, Dbl homology;
GEF, guanine nucleotide exchange factor;
GDI, GDP dissociation
inhibitor;
GST, glutathione S-transferase;
HA, hemagglutinin;
mAb, monoclonal antibody;
PAGE, polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis;
PH, pleckstrin homology;
PBS, phosphate-buffered
saline.
The Trio Guanine Nucleotide Exchange Factor Is a RhoA Target
BINDING OF RhoA TO THE TRIO IMMUNOGLOBULIN-LIKE DOMAIN*
§,
¶
,
,
§,
,
, and
§**
Department of Cancer Immunology and AIDS,
Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts 02115 and the
Departments of § Pathology and ¶ Medicine, Harvard
Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115
![]()
ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (26K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Trio and Trio mutants. The structure of
the 3038 amino acid Trio protein is shown schematically at the
top, and below are shown Trio deletion constructs used in
this study. Numbers in parentheses are the Trio
residues encoded by the various constructs. All of the constructs
contain at their amino termini a HA tag sequence. GEF-D,
guanine nucleotide exchange factor domain; SH3-D, Src
homology 3 domain.

View larger version (81K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Trio binds RhoA. Shown is a SDS-PAGE
analysis of [35S]methionine- and
[35S]cysteine-labeled proteins isolated by
co-precipitation with GST-tagged Rho family GTPases. COS-7 cells were
transiently transfected with vectors encoding GST-tagged Rho family
GTPases (see top of the figure) with either an expression
vector encoding HA-tagged Trio (amino acids 1-3038) (lanes
1-6) or no vector (lanes 7-10). The GST-V14RhoA,
-V12Rac1, and -V12Cdc42 constructs harbor mutations that block the
GTPase activity, whereas the GST-N19RhoA and -N17Rac1 constructs bind
GDP preferentially. Two days after transfection, cells were
metabolically labeled, and then cell extracts were prepared, and
co-precipitation analysis was performed using glutathione-Sepharose
(lanes 1-10, upper panel). As control, 10% of
the lysates were used to immunoprecipitate Trio using the anti-HA 12CA5
antibody (lanes 1-6, lower panel). Precipitated
proteins were resolved by 6% SDS-PAGE and visualized by
autoradiography. The position of Trio is indicated by an
arrow, and the expected positions of HA-Trio are marked by
asterisks located between the lanes. The 200,000 molecular
mass standard in kDa is shown at the left of the
figure.

View larger version (85K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Mapping of the RhoA binding site to the Trio
Ig-like domain. A, Trio constructs containing the
Ig-like and kinase domains bind V14RhoA. Shown is a SDS-PAGE analysis
of [35S]methionine- and
[35S]cysteine-labeled proteins isolated by
co-precipitation with GST-V14RhoA. COS-7 cells were transiently
transfected with vectors encoding HA-Trio.GSIK, HA-Trio.SIK, or
HA-Trio.GS (see Fig. 1) together with a vector encoding GST-V14RhoA.
Two days after transfection, cells were labeled, cell extracts were
prepared, and co-precipitation analysis was performed using
glutathione-Sepharose (lanes 1-4) or anti-HA 12CA5 antibody
(lanes 5-8) as described in the Fig. 2 legend. The position
of the Trio mutants are indicated by arrows. The 200,000 molecular mass standard in kDa is shown at the left of the
figure. B, the Trio Ig-like domain binds RhoA. Shown are
immunoblot analysis of proteins binding to GST-tagged Rho GTPases. The
Trio constructs HA-Trio.IK or HA-Trio.K (see Fig. 1) were co-expressed
in COS-7 cells with GST or GST-tagged Rho GTPases (see top
of the figure). Two days after transfection, cell extracts were
prepared, and co-precipitation analysis was performed using
glutathione-Sepharose (lanes 1-6). As control, 5% of the
total lysate was directly applied to the gels (lanes 7-12).
Following electrophoresis and transfer of proteins to Immobilon-P, the
blot was probed with the anti-HA mAb HA 11. The position of the Trio
proteins are indicated by arrows. Molecular mass standards
in kDa are shown at the right of the figure. C,
isolated Trio Ig-like domain binds RhoA. Binding studies were done as
described in the legend to Fig. 3B except the Trio·I
construct was used, and GST-N17Rac1 was omitted. D, Trio
lacking the Ig-like domain inefficiently binds RhoA. Shown is a
SDS-PAGE analysis of [35S]methionine- and
[35S]cysteine-labeled proteins isolated by
co-precipitation with GST-V14RhoA or GST-N19RhoA. COS-7 cells were
transiently transfected with vectors encoding HA-Trio, HA-Trio
C, or
HA-Trio
Ig (see Fig. 1) together with a vectors encoding either
GST-V14RhoA or GST-N19RhoA. Two days after transfection, cells were
labeled, cell extracts were prepared, and co-precipitation analysis was
performed using glutathione-Sepharose (lanes 1-8) or
anti-HA 12CA5 antibody (lanes 9-16) as described
above.
Ig
(amino acids 1-2626 and 2717-3038), that lacks only the Ig-like
domain and Trio
C (amino acids 1-2241) that lacks the carboxyl-terminal SH3, Ig-like, and kinase domain (Fig. 1). HA-tagged Trio, Trio
C, or Trio
Ig were co-expressed together with
GST-V14RhoA or GST-N19RhoA in COS-7 cells, and following metabolic
labeling, cell extracts were prepared, and glutathione-Sepharose
precipitations were performed (Fig. 3D). GST-V14RhoA bound
very little HA-Trio
Ig compared with HA-Trio (Fig. 3D,
lanes 3 and 7), consistent with the Ig-like
domain-binding RhoA. Control anti-HA immunoprecipitations using cell
extracts showed that the expression levels of Trio, Trio
C, and
Trio
Ig were comparable (Fig. 3D, lanes 9-16).
GST-V14RhoA and -N19RhoA fusion proteins were also efficiently
expressed (data not shown). Taken together, the mapping studies
demonstrate that the Ig-like domain is the primary RhoA-binding site on
Trio and that the Ig-like domain alone is sufficient to bind activated RhoA.
serine mutant
(34-36), GST-V14RhoA-C/S, was constructed and tested for its ability
to bind Trio. To this end, GST-V14RhoA-C/S or GST-V14RhoA was
co-expressed with HA-tagged Trio.GSIK or with Trio.SIK in COS-7 cells,
and following metabolic labeling, cell extracts were prepared, and glutathione-Sepharose precipitations were performed (Fig.
4B). Whereas GST-V14RhoA efficiently bound HA-Trio.GSIK and
HA-Trio.SIK (Fig. 4B, lanes 1 and 3,
respectively), the GST-V14RhoA-C/S mutant did not bind HA-Trio.GSIK or
Trio.SIK (Fig. 4B, lanes 2 and 4, respectively). The expression levels of GST-V14RhoA-C/S and GST-V14RhoA were comparable (Fig. 4B, lanes 1-4), and
control anti-HA immunoprecipitations using total cell extracts showed
that the expression levels of HA-Trio.GSIK and HA-Trio.SIK were also
similar (Fig. 4B, lanes 5-8). Furthermore,
binding experiments using the isolated Ig-like domain construct
(Trio·I) with GST-V14RhoA-C/S and GST-V14RhoA also showed a
requirement for RhoA isoprenylation (Fig. 4C). The finding
that neither GST-V14RhoA-C/S nor E. coli-derived V14RhoA bound full-length Trio or the isolated Trio Ig-like domain strongly argues that RhoA isoprenylation is required for RhoA binding to Trio.

View larger version (57K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
The Trio and RhoA interaction requires RhoA
isoprenylation. A, Trio and RhoA binding is stable in
high NaCl concentrations. Shown is a SDS-PAGE analysis of
[35S]methionine- and [35S]cysteine-labeled
proteins isolated by co-precipitation with GST-V14RhoA and then
subjected to high salt washes. COS-7 cells were transiently transfected
with the HA-Trio and GST-V14RhoA vectors, and 2 days after
transfection, cells were labeled, cell extracts were prepared, and
co-precipitation analysis was performed using glutathione-Sepharose as
described in the Fig. 2 legend except that precipitated proteins were
washed with buffers containing either 0.15 M (standard
condition), 0.3, 0.5, or 1.0 M NaCl prior to
electrophoresis. The position of Trio is indicated by an
arrow. B, a RhoA mutant lacking the
isoprenylation site does not bind Trio. Shown is a SDS-PAGE analysis of
[35S]methionine- and [35S]cysteine-labeled
proteins isolated by co-precipitation with GST-V14RhoA, or with
GST-V14RhoA-C/S, which harbors an amino acid substitution (cysteine 190
serine) that inhibits RhoA isoprenylation. COS-7 cells were
transiently transfected with vectors encoding HA-Trio.GSIK or
HA-Trio.SIK (see Fig. 1) together with vectors encoding either
GST-V14RhoA or GST-V14RhoA-C/S. One day after transfection, cells were
labeled, cell extracts were prepared, and co-precipitation analysis was
performed using glutathione-Sepharose (lanes 1-4) or
anti-HA 12CA5 antibody (lanes 5-8) as described in the Fig.
2 legend. The position of the Trio mutants and GST-V14RhoA are
indicated by arrows. C, RhoA isoprenylation is
required for RhoA binding to the isolated Trio Ig domain. The
requirement for RhoA isoprenylation was demonstrated using the Trio
Ig-like domain construct (HA-Trio.I) and various GST-tagged GTPases in
co-precipitation studies in COS-7 cells as in Fig. 3. Two days after
transfection, cells extracts were prepared and protein precipitated
using glutathione-Sepharose (lanes 1-4) or 5% boiled in
SDS as controls for protein expression (lanes 5-8). Samples
were electrophoresed on a 14% SDS-polyacrylamide gel and blotted and
probed with anti-HA mA HA 11. The position of the HA-Trio·I is
indicated at the left of the figure and molecular mass
standards in kDa are shown at the right.

View larger version (41K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Trio GEF activity increases the amount of
RhoA bound to Trio. A, Trio GEF-D2 activates RhoA in
cells. Shown are GST-rhotekin pull-down assays to determine the
cellular levels of GTP-bound HA-RhoA. COS-7 cells were transfected with
plasmids encoding HA-Trio.GSIK (lane 2), HA-Trio.mGSIK
(lane 3), which contains a mutated GEF-D2 domain, or control
(lane 1) together with wild-type HA-RhoA, and following
preparation of cell extracts, GTP-bound RhoA was isolated using
GST-rhotekin. GTP-bound HA-RhoA level were assessed by immunoblotting
using the anti-HA mAb HA 11 mAb. Expression controls using 5% of the
total lysate used for GST-rhotekin assay are shown in lanes
4-6. The position of HA-RhoA is indicated by an arrow,
and molecular mass standards in kDa are shown at the right
of the figure. B, Trio RhoA GEF activity increases the
amount of RhoA bound to Trio. Shown is a SDS-PAGE analysis of
[35S]methionine- and [35S]cysteine-labeled
proteins isolated by co-precipitation with constitutively activated
GST-tagged V14RhoA or wild-type RhoA. This analysis is representative
of three separate experiments. COS-7 cells were transiently transfected
with vectors encoding HA-Trio.GSIK or HA-Trio.mGSIK, which harbors a
mutation in the GEF-D2 domain that blocks GEF activity (data not
shown), together with GST-V14RhoA or GST-RhoA. Two days after
transfection, cells were labeled, cell extracts were prepared, and
co-precipitation analysis was performed using glutathione-Sepharose
(lanes 1-4) or anti-HA 12CA5 antibody (lanes
5-8) as described in the Fig. 2 legend. The position of Trio.GSIK
(and Trio.mGSIK) is indicated by an arrow. Molecular mass
standards in kDa are shown at the left of the figure.
Ig alone (Fig.
6C), and HA-Trio.mD2 alone (Fig. 6D; a
full-length Trio construct containing the GEF-D2 inactivating mutation)
were similar and showed an even distribution throughout the cell with a
slight concentration at the edges. In contrast, the expression pattern
of GST-RhoA was largely patchy and punctate (Fig. 6A).
Ectopic expression of the Trio and Rho constructs also displayed
perinuclear staining. Analysis of cells co-expressing HA-Trio
(green) and GST-RhoA (red) showed the cells to be
more rounded and both proteins to have similar punctate and patchy distributions that partially co-localize (see arrows in Fig.
6, E and F). This finding indicated that HA-Trio
and GST-RhoA associated in cells and that RhoA expression altered Trio
localization from a fairly even distribution into punctate structures.
Consistent with a role for RhoA mediating Trio relocalization was the
observation that GST-RhoA co-expressed with HA-Trio
Ig, which lacks
RhoA binding activity, had little if any effect on Trio localization
(Fig. 6, G and H). Additionally, co-expression of
GST-RhoA and HA-Trio.mD2, which lacks RhoA activating activity, also
displayed reduced localization of Trio into punctate structures (Fig.
6, I and J). These results are thus consistent
with an intramolecular functional link between Trio-mediated RhoA
activation and RhoA-mediated relocalization of Trio via RhoA binding to
the Trio-Ig-like domain.

View larger version (48K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
RhoA alters Trio localization in HeLa
cells. The effect of RhoA expression on Trio localization in HeLa
cells was determined using immunofluorescence imaging. HeLa cells were
transfected with GST-RhoA alone (A), HA-Trio alone
(B), HA-Trio
Ig alone (C), HA-Trio.mD2 alone
(D), or co-expressed GST-RhoA (red)
(E), and HA-Trio (green; F),
co-expressed GST-RhoA (red; G) and HA-Trio
Ig
(green; H), and co-expressed GST-RhoA
(red; I) and HA-Trio·mD2 (green;
J). Examples of GST-RhoA and HA-Trio co-localization are
indicated by arrows in E and F. Cells
were transfected using calcium phosphate, and then they were fixed and
stained with anti-HA and anti-GST antibodies as described under
"Experimental Procedures." All images are of identical
magnification. Bar in G represents 25 µm.
Ig and
GST-RhoA, were analyzed by scanning confocal microscopy (Fig.
7). Two horizontal slices taken from
either the lower half of the cell (Fig. 7, A and
B) or the upper half of the cell (Fig. 7, C and
D) of cells co-expressing either HA-Trio and GST-RhoA or
HA-Trio
Ig indicated that there was a high degree of co-localization of GST-RhoA and HA-Trio in punctate bodies at the edge of the cell
(Fig. 7A, arrows) and over the nucleus at the top
of the cell (Fig. 7B). These examples, as well as the other
cell layers (data not shown), are consistent with the Trio and RhoA
association occurring mainly at the plasma membrane. The coefficient of
co-localization of HA-Trio with GST-RhoA was 0.93, indicating that
approximately 93% of the HA-Trio was complexed with GST-RhoA, whereas
the HA-Trio
Ig had a coefficient of only 0.30 and co-localization
appeared mainly in the endoplasmic reticulum (Fig. 7, B and
D). As seen in Fig. 6 (E and F) and
Fig. 7 (A and C), the HA-Trio and GST-RhoA
expressing HeLa cells appeared less well spread and thicker than the
HA-Trio
Ig and GST-RhoA cells, suggesting that the binding of RhoA to
Trio has striking effects on cell morphology possibly through
regulation of one or more of the enzymatic activities of Trio.

View larger version (77K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 7.
Co-localization of RhoA and Trio in HeLa
cells. The localization of GST-RhoA and HA-Trio in transiently
transfected HeLa cells was analyzed using laser scanning confocal
microscopy. Shown are merged images from two distinct 0.35-µm
horizontal intervals from cells co-expressing GST-RhoA (red)
and HA-Trio (green) (A and C), or two
images of cells co-expressing GST-RhoA (red) and
HA-Trio
Ig (green) (B and D), with
co-localization of red and green appearing
yellow-orange. Images shown in A and B
are from the lower half of the cells, and images from C and
D are from the upper half of the cells. Co-localization of
HA-Trio and GST-RhoA is apparent at the plasma membrane (see
arrows in A), and in punctate structures over the
nucleus (C). In contrast, little co-localization is observed
between HA-Trio
Ig and GST-RhoA (B and D). All
images are of identical magnification.
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-sheets that form an Ig-like fold (37-39). RhoA
isoprenylation was also shown necessary for binding to protein kinase C
(40, 41) and phospholipase D (42, 43), and binding of Ha-Ras to Raf-1
requires Ha-Ras post-translational modification (44). In these cases,
however, it is unclear whether the GTPase post-translational
modification is necessary to localize the GTPase to the membrane for
binding to ensue or whether the modification is directly involved in
binding the target protein as appears to be the case with Trio.
![]()
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
![]()
FOOTNOTES
Present address: Dept. d'Immunologia 5,5, Hospital Clinic i
Provincial de Barcelona, Villarroel 170, 08036 Barcelona, Spain.
![]()
ABBREVIATIONS
![]()
REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
1.
Debant, A.,
Serra-Pages, C.,
Seipel, K.,
O'Brien, S.,
Tang, M.,
Park, S. H.,
and Streuli, M.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
5466-5471
2.
Cerione, R. A.,
and Zheng, Y.
(1996)
Curr. Opin. Cell Biol.
8,
216-222
3.
Zohn, I. M.,
Campbell, S. L.,
Khosravi-Far, R.,
Rossman, K. L.,
and Der, C. J.
(1998)
Oncogene
17,
1415-1438
4.
Hall, A.
(1998)
Science
279,
509-514
5.
Van Aelst, L.,
and D'Souza-Schorey, C.
(1997)
Genes Dev.
11,
2295-2322
6.
Aspenstrom, P.
(1999)
Curr. Opin. Cell Biol.
11,
95-102
7.
Lim, L.,
Manser, E.,
Leung, T.,
and Hall, C.
(1996)
Eur. J. Biochem.
242,
171-185
8.
Lamarche, N.,
and Hall, A.
(1994)
Trends Genet.
10,
436-440
9.
Takai, Y.,
Sasaki, T.,
Tanaka, K.,
and Nakanishi, H.
(1995)
Trends Biochem. Sci.
20,
227-231
10.
Zmuidzinas, A.,
Fischer, K. D.,
Lira, S. A.,
Forrester, L.,
Bryant, S.,
Bernstein, A.,
and Barbacid, M.
(1995)
EMBO J.
14,
1-11
11.
Olson, M. F.,
Pasteris, N. G.,
Gorski, J. L.,
and Hall, A.
(1996)
Curr. Biol.
6,
1628-1633
12.
Pasteris, N. G.,
Cadle, A.,
Logie, L. J.,
Porteous, M. E.,
Schwartz, C. E.,
Stevenson, R. E.,
Glover, T. W.,
Wilroy, R. S.,
and Gorski, J. L.
(1994)
Cell
79,
669-678
13.
Sone, M.,
Hoshino, M.,
Suzuki, E.,
Kuroda, S.,
Kaibuchi, K.,
Nakagoshi, H.,
Saigo, K.,
Nabeshima, Y.,
and Hama, C.
(1997)
Science
275,
543-547
14.
Barrett, K.,
Leptin, M.,
and Settleman, J.
(1997)
Cell
91,
905-915
15.
Hacker, U.,
and Perrimon, N.
(1998)
Genes Dev.
12,
274-284
16.
Steven, R.,
Kubiseski, T. J.,
Zheng, H.,
Kulkarni, S.,
Mancillas, J.,
Ruiz Morales, A.,
Hogue, C. W.,
Pawson, T.,
and Culotti, J.
(1998)
Cell
92,
785-795
17.
Newsome, T. P.,
Schmidt, S.,
Dietzl, G.,
Keleman, K.,
Asling, B.,
Debant, A.,
and Dickson, B. J.
(2000)
Cell
101,
283-294
18.
Bateman, J.,
Shu, H.,
and Van Vactor, D.
(2000)
Neuron
26,
93-106
19.
Liebl, E. C.,
Forsthoefel, D. J.,
Franco, L. S.,
Sample, S. H.,
Hess, J. E.,
Cowger, J. A.,
Chandler, M. P.,
Shupert, A. M.,
and Seeger, M. A.
(2000)
Neuron
26,
107-118
20.
Awasaki, T.,
Saito, M.,
Sone, M.,
Suzuki, E.,
Ito, K.,
and Hama, C.
(2000)
Neuron
26,
119-131
21.
Gulbins, E.,
Coggeshall, K. M.,
Baier, G.,
Katzav, S.,
Burn, P.,
and Altman, A.
(1993)
Science
260,
822-825
22.
Han, J.,
Das, B.,
Wei, W.,
Van Aelst, L.,
Mosteller, R. D.,
Khosravi-Far, R.,
Westwick, J. K.,
Der, C. J.,
and Broek, D.
(1997)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17,
1346-1353
23.
Horii, Y.,
Beeler, J. F.,
Sakaguchi, K.,
Tachibana, M.,
and Miki, T.
(1994)
EMBO J.
13,
4776-4786
24.
Liu, X.,
Wang, H.,
Eberstadt, M.,
Schnuchel, A.,
Olejniczak, E. T.,
Meadows, R. P.,
Schkeryantz, J. M.,
Janowick, D. A.,
Harlan, J. E.,
Harris, E. A.,
Staunton, D. E.,
and Fesik, S. W.
(1998)
Cell
95,
269-277
25.
Yron, I.,
Deckert, M.,
Reff, M. E.,
Munshi, A.,
Schwartz, M. A.,
and Altman, A.
(1999)
Cell Adhes. Commun.
7,
1-11
26.
Fleming, I. N.,
Elliott, C. M.,
Buchanan, F. G.,
Downes, C. P.,
and Exton, J. H.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
12753-12758
27.
Blangy, A.,
Vignal, E.,
Schmidt, S.,
Debant, A.,
Gauthier-Rouviere, C.,
and Fort, P.
(2000)
J. Cell Sci.
113,
729-739
28.
Seipel, K.,
Medley, Q. G.,
Kedersha, N. L.,
Zhang, X. A.,
O'Brien, S. P.,
Serra-Pages, C.,
Hemler, M. E.,
and Streuli, M.
(1999)
J. Cell Sci.
112,
1825-1834
29.
Bellanger, J. M.,
Lazaro, J. B.,
Diriong, S.,
Fernandez, A.,
Lamb, N.,
and Debant, A.
(1998)
Oncogene
16,
147-152
30.
Serra-Pages, C.,
Kedersha, N. L.,
Fazikas, L.,
Medley, Q.,
Debant, A.,
and Streuli, M.
(1995)
EMBO J.
14,
2827-2838
31.
Chou, M. M.,
and Blenis, J.
(1996)
Cell
85,
573-583
32.
Ren, X. D.,
Kiosses, W. B.,
and Schwartz, M. A.
(1999)
EMBO J.
18,
578-585
33.
Serra-Pages, C.,
Medley, Q. G.,
Tang, M.,
Hart, A.,
and Streuli, M.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
15611-15620
34.
Moomaw, J. F.,
and Casey, P. J.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
17438-17443
35.
Ziman, M.,
Preuss, D.,
Mulholland, J.,
O'Brien, J. M.,
Botstein, D.,
and Johnson, D. I.
(1993)
Mol. Biol. Cell
4,
1307-1316
36.
Davis, C. R.,
Richman, T. J.,
Deliduka, S. B.,
Blaisdell, J. O.,
Collins, C. C.,
and Johnson, D. I.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
849-858
37.
Gosser, Y. Q.,
Nomanbhoy, T. K.,
Aghazadeh, B.,
Manor, D.,
Combs, C.,
Cerione, R. A.,
and Rosen, M. K.
(1997)
Nature
387,
814-819
38.
Keep, N. H.,
Barnes, M.,
Barsukov, I.,
Badii, R.,
Lian, L. Y.,
Segal, A. W.,
Moody, P. C.,
and Roberts, G. C.
(1997)
Structure
5,
623-633
39.
Hoffman, G. R.,
Nassar, N.,
and Cerione, R. A.
(2000)
Cell
100,
345-356
40.
Chang, J. H.,
Pratt, J. C.,
Sawasdikosol, S.,
Kapeller, R.,
and Burakoff, S. J.
(1998)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18,
4986-4993
41.
Kamada, Y.,
Qadota, H.,
Python, C. P.,
Anraku, Y.,
Ohya, Y.,
and Levin, D. E.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
9193-9196
42.
Yamazaki, M.,
Zhang, Y.,
Watanabe, H.,
Yokozeki, T.,
Ohno, S.,
Kaibuchi, K.,
Shibata, H.,
Mukai, H.,
Ono, Y.,
Frohman, M. A.,
and Kanaho, Y.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
6035-6038
43.
Kuribara, H.,
Tago, K.,
Yokozeki, T.,
Sasaki, T.,
Takai, Y.,
Morii, N.,
Narumiya, S.,
Katada, T.,
and Kanaho, Y.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
25667-25671
44.
Hu, C. D.,
Kariya, K.,
Tamada, M.,
Akasaka, K.,
Shirouzu, M.,
Yokoyama, S.,
and Kataoka, T.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
30274-30277
45.
Chuang, T. H.,
Bohl, B. P.,
and Bokoch, G. M.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
26206-26211
46.
Johnson, R. C.,
Penzes, P.,
Eipper, B. A.,
and Mains, R. E.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
19324-19333
47.
Kawai, T.,
Sanjo, H.,
and Akira, S.
(1999)
Gene (Amst.)
227,
249-255
48.
Labeit, S.,
and Kolmerer, B.
(1995)
Science
270,
293-296
49.
Moerman, D. G.,
Benian, G. M.,
Barstead, R. J.,
Schriefer, L. A.,
and Waterston, R. H.
(1988)
Genes Dev.
2,
93-105
50.
Benian, G. M.,
Kiff, J. E.,
Neckelmann, N.,
Moerman, D. G.,
and Waterston, R. H.
(1989)
Nature
342,
45-50
51.
Olson, N. J.,
Pearson, R. B.,
Needleman, D. S.,
Hurwitz, M. Y.,
Kemp, B. E.,
and Means, A. R.
(1990)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
87,
2284-2288
52.
Potier, M. C.,
Chelot, E.,
Pekarsky, Y.,
Gardiner, K.,
Rossier, J.,
and Turnell, W. G.
(1995)
Genomics
29,
562-570
53.
Penzes, P.,
Johnson, R. C.,
Alam, M. R.,
Kambampati, V.,
Mains, R. E.,
and Eipper, B. A.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
6395-6403
Copyright © 2000 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.
![]()
CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
C. A. Rabiner, R. E. Mains, and B. A. Eipper Kalirin: A Dual Rho Guanine Nucleotide Exchange Factor That Is So Much More Than the Sum of Its Many Parts Neuroscientist, April 1, 2005; 11(2): 148 - 160. [Abstract] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Moskwa, M.-H. Paclet, M.-C. Dagher, and E. Ligeti Autoinhibition of p50 Rho GTPase-activating Protein (GAP) Is Released by Prenylated Small GTPases J. Biol. Chem., February 25, 2005; 280(8): 6716 - 6720. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Q. G. Medley, E. G. Buchbinder, K. Tachibana, H. Ngo, C. Serra-Pages, and M. Streuli Signaling between Focal Adhesion Kinase and Trio J. Biol. Chem., April 4, 2003; 278(15): 13265 - 13270. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Mongay, S. Plaza, E. Vigorito, C. Serra-Pages, and J. Vives Association of the Cell Cycle Regulatory Proteins p45SKP2 and CksHs1. FUNCTIONAL EFFECT ON CDK2 COMPLEX FORMATION AND KINASE ACTIVITY J. Biol. Chem., June 29, 2001; 276(27): 25030 - 25036. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||