J Biol Chem, Vol. 275, Issue 6, 4374-4382, February 11, 2000
Secreted Frizzled-related Protein-1 Binds Directly to Wingless
and Is a Biphasic Modulator of Wnt Signaling*
Aykut
Üren
,
Frieda
Reichsman§,
Vasiliki
Anest
,
William
G.
Taylor
,
Kanae
Muraiso
,
Donald P.
Bottaro
,
Susan
Cumberledge§, and
Jeffrey S.
Rubin
¶
From the
Laboratory of Cellular and Molecular
Biology, Division of Basic Sciences, NCI, National Institutes of
Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892 and the § Department of
Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Massachusetts,
Amherst, Massachusetts 01002
 |
ABSTRACT |
Secreted Frizzled-related protein-1 (sFRP-1)
contains a cysteine-rich domain homologous to the putative Wnt-binding
site of Frizzleds. To facilitate the biochemical and biological
analysis of sFRP-1, we developed a mammalian recombinant expression
system that yields ~3 mg of purified protein/liter of conditioned
medium. Using this recombinant protein, we demonstrated that sFRP-1 and Wg (wingless) interact in enzyme-linked immunosorbent and
co-precipitation assays. Surprisingly, a derivative lacking the
cysteine-rich domain retained the ability to bind Wg. Cross-linking
experiments performed with radioiodinated sFRP-1 provided definitive
evidence that sFRP-1 and Wg bind directly to each other. Besides
detecting a cross-linked complex consistent in size with 1:1
stoichiometry of sFRP-1 and Wg, we also observed a larger complex whose
size suggested the presence of a second sFRP-1 molecule. The formation
of both complexes was markedly enhanced by an optimal concentration of
exogenous heparin, emphasizing the potential importance of
heparan-sulfate proteoglycan in Wnt binding and signaling. sFRP-1
exerted a biphasic effect on Wg activity in an armadillo stabilization
assay, increasing armadillo level at low concentrations but reducing it
at higher concentrations. These results provide new insights about the
Wnt binding and biological activity of sFRPs.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Wnt proteins comprise a large family of structurally related,
extracellular agents that have a variety of important functions during
embryonic development (reviewed in Refs. 1 and 2). They specify cell
polarity and fate, stimulate proliferation, and contribute to the
patterning of tissue in many animal models. Wnt signaling also has been
strongly implicated in the development of neoplasia. Although the
prevalence of wnt overexpression in human cancer is still an
open question, constitutive activity of Wnt signaling because of
mutations in downstream effectors or modulators occurs with a high
frequency in certain malignancies. In particular, mutations in APC
(encoded by the adenomatous polyposis coli tumor suppressor
gene) and
-catenin occur in 80-90% of human colon carcinomas (3,
4), and
-catenin mutations are common in melanoma (5) and
hepatocellular carcinomas (6, 7). Such mutations mimic Wnt signaling
insofar as they impair the ability of glycogen synthase kinase-3
to
phosphorylate
-catenin and earmark it for rapid degradation. A block
in this process, either because of mutations or Wnt activity, causes an
elevation in cytosolic
-catenin, which accumulates in the nucleus
where it can combine with DNA binding proteins of the TCF-LEF family (8-11). These complexes up-regulate the expression of specific genes
such as c-myc and cyclin-D1 that promote cell
proliferation and predispose to malignant transformation (12-14). An
abundance of regulatory mechanisms have evolved to tightly control the
cellular responses elicited by Wnts (15).
The identification of Wnt receptors was hampered for many years because
of the inability to purify Wnt proteins and label them for classical
binding experiments. This is still a problem, because the proteins tend
to remain associated with the cell surface or extracellular matrix (16,
17). Fortunately, there are now sources of soluble, biologically active
Wnt proteins available for binding studies (18-20). During the past
few years a number of studies have established that Fz
(frizzled) seven-pass transmembrane proteins
can function as Wnt receptors or components of a receptor complex
(21-28). For instance, ectopic expression of particular Fz family
members resulted in binding of Wg to the cell surface and in Wnt
signaling as indicated by increases in armadillo
(Arm),1 the
Drosophila ortholog of
-catenin (21). However, there have been no cross-linking experiments to verify that Wnt proteins bind
directly to Fzs. Nonetheless, a specific portion of the Fz extracellular domain was reported to be responsible for the observed cellular binding of Wg and transduction of Wnt signaling (21). This
region consists of ~120 amino acid residues and was designated the
cysteine-rich domain (CRD) because it contained 10 cysteine residues
that were conserved in all the known Fz family members (eight different
fz genes in vertebrates and additional genes in various
invertebrate species (29). A set of secreted Fz-related proteins (sFRP
or FRP) recently have been described (30-41). These proteins consist
of approximately 300 amino acids, including a CRD that is typically
~30-50% identical to the CRDs of Fz family members. The
carboxyl-terminal portion of these proteins often contains segments
rich in positively charged residues, and two (sFRP-1 and FrzB/sFRP-3)
were reported to bind tightly to heparin (33, 42). When engineered to
remain anchored to the cell membrane via a glycolipid tag, sFRP-2 and
sFRP-3 conferred Wg binding to the cell surface (32). Moreover,
co-expression of sFRP family members with selected Wnts in early
Xenopus embryos caused inhibition of
Wnt-dependent duplication of the dorsal axis (30, 31, 33, 39). Co-precipitation studies suggested that they could associate with
Wnts and thereby block ligand interaction with Fzs, the presumptive signal-transducing membrane receptor (31, 39, 43). However, because
these experiments were performed with unpurified reagents, the evidence
of sFRP/Wnt binding was indirect.
The present study was undertaken to test the hypothesis that sFRP-1
binds directly to Wnt protein, and if so, to determine what portions of
sFRP-1 were required for this interaction. Given that both sFRP-1 and
Wnt proteins bind heparin (33, 44) and that lowering tissue
proteoglycan content, either by genetic or biochemical manipulation,
impaired Wnt signaling (45-48), we also investigated the impact of
heparin on sFRP-1/Wnt interactions. To facilitate this work, we
developed a recombinant expression system that yielded large quantities
of purified, sFRP-1 protein and utilized a previously described source
of soluble, biologically active Wg (19). Results from ELISA,
co-precipitation, and cross-linking experiments provided compelling
evidence of direct binding between sFRP-1 and Wg. This binding was
strongly influenced by heparin. Surprisingly, the Fz-related CRD was
not required for binding. Moreover, sFRP-1 exhibited a biphasic effect
on Wg signaling, enhancing Wg-dependent stabilization of
Arm at low concentrations but inhibiting stabilization at high
concentrations. These findings establish that sFRPs can regulate Wnt
activity and provide a new perspective regarding their biological
effects and mode of action.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Cell Culture--
MDCK cells (American Type Culture Collection)
were grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (Life Technologies,
Inc.) containing 10% fetal calf serum (Colorado Serum Company) in 5%
CO2 at 37 °C. Drosophila S2 cells and S2HSWg
cells transfected with a heat shock promoter/Wg construct (18, 19), and
S2 cells expressing DFz2 (21) were kindly provided by the Nusse lab.
All three S2 lines were cultured in Schneider's Drosophila
medium (Life Technologies, Inc.) supplemented with 10% fetal calf
serum, 100 units/ml penicillin, and 100 µg/ml streptomycin at
25 °C in atmospheric air. Wg-containing and S2 control media were
generated as described previously (44).
Immunoblotting and Immunoprecipitation--
Proteins resolved by
SDS-PAGE were transferred to Immobilon-P membranes (Millipore). Unless
stated otherwise, all subsequent steps were performed at room
temperature. After brief washing in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS),
membranes were blocked with 3% nonfat dry milk in TTBS (20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.0, 0.05% Tween-20, 150 mM
NaCl) for 2 h. Following five washes with TTBS, membranes were
incubated for 2 h with primary antibodies diluted 1:1000 (for a
typical final concentration of 1-2 µg/ml) in 0.5% bovine serum
albumin (BSA)/TTBS. sFRP-1 rabbit antisera were raised either against a
synthetic amino-terminal peptide (33) or the full-length, purified
protein. Monoclonal antibody to Wg, mAb 4D4, first prepared in Dr.
Stephen Cohen's lab, was a gift from the Nusse lab; antibodies to the
c-Myc and polyhistidine epitopes were from Invitrogen. After five
washes with TTBS, membranes were incubated for 1 h with
horseradish peroxidase conjugated to anti-mouse or anti-rabbit secondary antibodies (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) diluted 1:2000 in
0.5% BSA/TTBS. Following five more washes with TTBS, bound antibodies
were visualized by chemiluminescence (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) using
X-Omat AR film (Kodak).
For immunoprecipitation, Wg-containing medium (80 µl) was
preincubated with individual sFRP-1 derivatives (300 nM)
for 10 min at room temperature. Subsequently, anti-Myc (0.2 µg) was
added to the samples, which were then incubated overnight at 4 °C.
Sample volumes were adjusted to 500 µl with lysis buffer (50 mM HEPES, pH 7.5, 50 mM NaCl, 1% Triton X-100,
5 mM EDTA, 50 mM NaF, 6.7 mM
Na4P2O7, 1 mM
NaVO4, 10 µg/ml aprotinin, 10 µg/ml leupeptin, 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride) and 50 µl of a 50%
protein G-Sepharose slurry (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) was added.
After 1 h of incubation at 4 °C in a rotary shaker, samples
were washed three times with 1 ml of lysis buffer. Final pellets were
resuspended in 2× SDS sample buffer and boiled for 4 min, and the
proteins were resolved by SDS-PAGE.
Expression, Purification, and Analysis of Recombinant sFRP-1 and
Its Derivatives--
The human sFRP-1 NotI-SmaI
cDNA fragment (33) was subcloned into an XhoI site in
the pcDNA3.1 expression vector (Invitrogen). To prepare derivatives
containing c-Myc and polyhistidine epitopes at their carboxyl termini,
cDNAs encoding full-length sFRP-1 or deletion mutants were
generated by polymerase chain reaction with primers that introduced
EcoRV and HindIII restriction sites at the 5' and
3' ends, respectively. The sequences comprising the various derivatives
are indicated in Fig. 2A. Purified polymerase chain reaction
products were ligated into the pcDNA3.1Myc/His, C(
) expression
vector (Invitrogen), and plasmid samples prepared from transformed
DH5-
competent cells (Life Technologies, Inc.). The fidelity of
cDNAs was verified by sequence analysis.
MDCK cells (1.5 × 106) were transfected with 10 µg
of DNA of the various sFRP-1 constructs, using the calcium phosphate
precipitation method. Mass cultures were selected with Geneticin (500 µg/ml) for 21 days. To isolate clonal cell lines, mass cultures were subcultured at a 1:50,000 dilution in collagen-coated wells and subsequently transferred to culture dishes for further analysis. Expression of recombinant protein was determined by immunoblotting equal quantities of total protein from conditioned medium and/or cell
lysates. For large scale preparations, sFRP-1/MDCK transfectants were
grown in T175 flasks until confluent. After washing with PBS, the cells
were maintained in serum-free Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium, and
conditioned media were collected every 3 days for five to seven
consecutive harvests. Media were clarified by centrifugation at
10,000 × g for 10 min at 4 °C and filtration (pore
size, 0.4 µm; Corning). Subsequently, media were concentrated ~40-fold by ultrafiltration in a stirred chamber apparatus (Amicon M2000) using a Millipore YM membrane with either a 10- or 3-kDa molecular mass cut-off. Concentrated samples were snap-frozen for
subsequent purification.
Native sFRP-1 was purified with HiTrap-Heparin columns (Amersham
Pharmacia Biotech) equilibrated with PBS/0.3 M NaCl. After applying the sample to the column, the resin was washed with 10 column
volumes of equilibration buffer. Protein was eluted with a step
gradient of increasing NaCl concentration. Aliquots from representative
fractions were resolved by SDS-PAGE and analyzed by immunoblotting or
silver staining (Bio-Rad). sFRP-1 derivatives containing Myc/histidine
epitopes were purified in a similar manner, only using HiTrap Chelating
Affinity columns (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). The resin (1.0 ml) was
washed with 5.0 ml of water, charged with 0.5 ml of 0.1 M
NiSO4, and washed again with 5.0 ml of water. Following
equlibration with 50 mM phosphate/10 mM imidazole buffer (pH 7.4), protein was eluted with a step gradient of
increasing imidazole concentration. Selected fractions were analyzed by
immunoblotting and silver staining. Typically, sFRP-1 derivatives were
recovered with 0.1 M imidazole. The identity of individual
sFRP-1 preparations was verified by microsequencing with an Applied
Biosystems protein sequencer (model 476). For sFRP-
CRD, 30 rounds of
Edman degradation were carried out to ensure that the entire CRD was deleted.
sFRP-1/Wg ELISA Binding Assays--
sFRP-1 diluted in 0.02%
NaN3/PBS was incubated in 96-well Falcon ELISA plates (300 ng/50 µl/well) for 2 h at 37 °C. After decanting, all wells
were filled with 4% BSA/0.02% NaN3/PBS and incubated for
an additional 2 h at 37 °C. Following five washes with TAPS
(0.05% Tween-20 in 0.02% NaN3/PBS), 50-µl aliquots of Wg-containing or S2 control medium diluted in 1% BSA/TAPS were incubated overnight at room temperature. After five washes with TAPS,
50 µl/well of Wg mAb diluted in 1% BSA/TAPS to a final concentration of 1 µg/ml was incubated in wells for 2 h at 37 °C. Another
five washes in TAPS were followed by a 2-h treatment at 37 °C with 1:400 dilution of conjugated alkaline phosphatase-goat anti-mouse IgG
(Sigma). After a final set of five washes with TAPS, 2 mg/ml p-nitrophenolphosphate (Sigma) in carbonate buffer (0.1 M Na2CO3, 1 mM
MgCl2, pH 9.8) was added. Absorbance at 405 nm was measured with an ELISA plate reader (Bio-Rad). When the solid phase assay was
performed with the various sFRP-1 derivatives, wells were coated with
60 nM solutions of the respective derivatives. ELISA competition experiments were performed as described above, except the
indicated concentrations of sFRP-1 derivatives were preincubated with
Wg conditioned medium for 45 min at room temperature prior to addition
to wells that had been coated with native sFRP-1.
Covalent Cross-linking--
sFRP-1 was iodinated as described
previously (49). Briefly, 10 µg of sFRP-1 was reacted with 1 mCi of
Na125I in the presence of 30 µg/ml chloramine T for
30-60 s. After addition of 80 µg/ml sodium metabisulfite, the
reaction mixture was applied to a heparin-Sepharose column (bed volume,
0.3 ml) equilibrated in 0.1% BSA/PBS. Labeled sFRP-1 was eluted with
equilibration buffer containing 1.0 M NaCl and stored in
frozen aliquots. Approximately 50 µl of Wg-containing or control
medium was incubated with 1 µCi of 125I-sFRP-1 for 40 min
at room temperature. In some experiments, varying concentrations of
heparin (12 kDa from porcine intestine; Fisher) or unlabeled sFRP-1
were also present (see figures for details). After addition of 1 mM bis(sulfosuccinimidyl) suberate (BS3)
cross-linking agent (Pierce), the incubation continued for 20 min. The
reaction was quenched with 20 mM glycine/1 mM
Tris-HCl, and the mixture was incubated with Wg mAb (10 µg/ml)
overnight at 4 °C. After addition of 0.5 ml of lysis buffer and 50 µl of a 50% protein G-Sepharose slurry, samples were incubated for
1 h at 4 °C. Beads were pelleted by centrifugation at
1000 × g for 3 min at 4 °C and washed three times
with 1 ml of lysis buffer. The final pellets were resuspended in 2×
SDS sample buffer, boiled for 4 min, and briefly microfuged to
facilitate transfer. Protein samples were resolved in 8%
polyacrylamide gels by SDS-PAGE. After fixation in 20% methanol/10%
acetic acid for 45 min, the gel was dried and exposed to X-Omat AR film
(Kodak) for autoradiography.
Armadillo Stabilization Assay--
This assay was performed as
described previously (44). The blots were probed with two primary
antibodies, mouse monoclonal anti-Arm antibody N27A at 1:50 and mouse
monoclonal anti-HSP70 at 1:200,000 and one secondary antibody, goat
anti-mouse IgG conjugated to horseradish peroxidase (Bio-Rad).
Immunoreactive protein bands were visualized by treating the blots with
ECL reagents (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) and then exposing them to
x-ray film. Equal loading of total protein was confirmed by inspection
of the HSP70 protein band in each sample lane.
 |
RESULTS |
Mammalian Expression System Provides an Abundant Source of
Recombinant sFRP-1--
To generate a plentiful supply of sFRP-1
protein, we stably transfected MDCK cells with a pcDNA3.1 vector
containing the coding sequence of human sFRP-1. MDCK cells have
favorable properties for recombinant expression because they grow
rapidly and, once confluent, can remain attached to plastic for several
weeks in serum-free medium. Consequently, several sequential harvests
of conditioned medium can be collected from the same monolayer. A one-step preparative scheme involving heparin-Sepharose affinity chromatography was sufficient to purify sFRP-1 from concentrated conditioned medium (Fig. 1A).
Typically we recovered 0.25-0.50 mg of sFRP-1/liter of medium from the
transfected mass culture. Silver staining and immunoblot analysis
confirmed the purity and identity of the recombinant protein that
eluted from heparin-Sepharose with 1.0 M NaCl (Fig. 1,
B and C). The protein band in both analyses usually was broad and occasionally resolved into two or three components (Fig. 1B, inset), indicative of
microheterogeneity. This was borne out by microsequencing, which
revealed that the majority of protein had an amino-terminal sequence
beginning at Ser-31, one residue downstream from the proposed signal
peptide cleavage site (33). Two other sequences, beginning at Asp-41 and Phe-50, also were obtained and presumably resulted from partial proteolysis. Glycosylation may account for additional
heterogeneity.2 To optimize
the yield of recombinant protein, clonal lines were isolated from the
mass culture, and their conditioned media were screened for sFRP-1
content (Fig. 1D). Clone 11 cells (lane 11 in
Fig. 1D) were expanded for large scale preparations and
yielded 2-4 mg of sFRP-1/liter of conditioned medium.

View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Purification of recombinant sFRP-1.
A, concentrated conditioned medium from sFRP-1/MDCK cells
was applied to heparin-Sepharose resin (bed volume, 1 ml). Samples were
eluted with increasing NaCl concentration (dashed line), and
protein content was assessed by measuring optical density at 280 nm
(solid line). Fractions (1 ml) are indicated on the
horizontal axis. The thick bar indicates
fractions containing sFRP-1. B, selected fractions were
separated by 12% SDS-PAGE, and proteins were visualized by silver
staining. The molar concentration of NaCl for eluted fractions is
indicated above the lanes. The positions of
molecular mass markers are shown at the left.
Inset, silver staining of three 1.0 M NaCl
fractions resolved in an 8% polyacrylamide gel. C,
anti-sFRP-1 immunoblot of aliquots from the same fractions viewed in
B, again separated by 12% SDS-PAGE. D,
anti-sFRP-1 immunoblot of conditioned media from clonal lines derived
from sFRP-1/MDCK mass culture.
|
|
sFRP-1 Deletion Mutants Define Heparin-binding Region--
We
generated a series of deletion mutants that would allow us to correlate
binding properties with particular regions of the sFRP-1 molecule. To
facilitate detection and purification, c-Myc and polyhistidine epitope
tags were attached to the carboxyl terminus of each derivative (Fig.
2A). The sFRP-
1 sequence
extends through amino acid residue 171, a short distance beyond the
CRD. sFRP-
2 and sFRP-
3 contain progressively more of the
carboxyl-terminal region. Included within sFRP-
3 is a lysine-rich
domain previously identified as a consensus binding site for hyaluronic
acid (33). sFRP-
CRD lacks the CRD but contains the remaining
amino-terminal and entire carboxyl-terminal sequences. All the sFRP-1
derivatives were readily secreted and remained in solution after
ultrafiltration, chromatography, dialysis, and repeated freeze-thawing,
suggesting that there were no gross defects in folding. The proteins
were purified to homogeneity by using nickel resin chromatography (Fig. 2B). Initial characterization of these molecules focused on
their heparin-binding properties because of the potential importance of
this binding trait to the interaction with Wnt proteins. Although full-length sFRP-1 labeled with the c-Myc and histidine tags (sFRP-M/H) eluted from heparin-Sepharose in the same position as native sFRP-1, sFRP-
1 and sFRP-
2 were not retained on the resin (Fig.
2C). Inclusion of the lysine-rich segment in sFRP-
3
resulted in a protein with intermediate heparin-binding capability,
eluting with 0.5 M NaCl. This implied that the
heparin-binding properties of intact sFRP-1 probably involve multiple
sites distributed in the carboxyl-terminal third of the molecule.
Consistent with this view, sFRP-
CRD bound heparin-Sepharose in a
manner similar to that of the native protein (Fig. 2C).

View larger version (40K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Identification of sFRP-1 heparin-binding
domain. A, schematic of sFRP-1 and its derivatives.
Numbers indicate amino acid residues in sFRP-1 sequence at
boundaries of recombinant proteins. CRD (hatched boxes)
borders also are shown. The white boxes correspond to
lysine-rich segments. M/H indicates the Myc-His epitope
tags. B, anti-Myc immunoblot (left panel) and
silver stain (right panel) analysis of purified sFRP-1
mutant proteins. The positions of molecular mass markers are indicated
at the left. C, conditioned media from MDCK cells
transfected with sFRP-1 derivatives were applied to heparin-Sepharose
columns. Samples were eluted with indicated concentrations of NaCl, and
fractions were analyzed by Western blotting with anti-Myc.
|
|
Wg Binds to sFRP-1, but the CRD Is Not Required for This
Interaction--
We used several independent approaches to test the
hypothesis that Wnt protein can bind to sFRP-1. First, we employed an
ELISA to measure sFRP-1 binding to Wg. Wells were coated with purified full-length sFRP-1 and then blocked with an excess of BSA.
Subsequently, conditioned medium from S2HSWg cells expressing soluble
Wg was incubated in the wells overnight at room temperature. As a
control, aliquots of the same medium were incubated in wells treated
with BSA but not sFRP-1. In addition, other wells coated with sFRP-1 were incubated with medium from S2 cells that did not express Wg. As
illustrated in Fig. 3A, Wg
bound specifically to the wells coated with sFRP-1, and the amount of
bound Wg varied with the dilution of Wg medium. In contrast, little Wg
was detected in wells that had not been treated with sFRP-1, and no
signal was observed when medium lacking Wg was used in the assay (Fig.
3, A and B). These results strongly suggest that
sFRP-1 can bind Wg and presumably other Wnt proteins as well.

View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
sFRP-1/Wg ELISA binding experiments.
A, ELISA wells were coated with sFRP-1 or BSA alone and
incubated with dilutions of Wg-containing or S2 control medium. Bound
Wg protein was detected with anti-Wg and secondary immune reagents as
described under "Experimental Procedures." B,
conditioned media from control S2 or Wg-expressing S2 cells were
analyzed by immunoblotting with anti-Wg. The arrow at the
right indicates primary Wg band. Positions of molecular mass
markers are shown at the left. C, ELISA wells
were coated with sFRP-1 derivatives and incubated with indicated
dilutions of conditioned media containing Wg. D, ELISA wells
were coated with sFRP-1 and incubated with Wg-containing media that had
been preincubated with the indicated concentrations of sFRP-1
derivatives. Each panel is representative of several experiments.
|
|
Based on these findings, we performed a similar analysis using wells
coated with the various sFRP-1 deletion mutants (Fig. 3C).
Surprisingly, the data indicated that the CRD was not required for Wg
binding. In fact, the amount of Wg detected in wells coated with
sFRP-
CRD matched that seen in wells treated with full-length, epitope-tagged sFRP-1. On the other hand, derivatives lacking portions
of the carboxyl-terminal region showed reduced Wg binding. sFRP-
2
exhibited intermediate binding avidity, whereas sFRP-
1 and sFRP-
3
had only limited binding activity. No binding was observed in wells
treated with BSA alone (data not shown). These results implied that
although the CRD might confer a component of the binding capacity, the
carboxyl-terminal region of sFRP-1 was primarily responsible for its
ability to bind Wg.
In these experiments, wells were coated in parallel with the same molar
concentration of the various sFRP-1 derivatives, and analysis indicated
that comparable amounts of each derivative adhered to the well surface.
Therefore, the contrasts in relative binding efficiency were not
attributable to differences in the concentration of protein coating the
wells. However, it was conceivable that the sFRP-1 derivatives could
adsorb to the well surface in ways that would differentially mask a Wg
binding site. Therefore, we also compared their ability to bind Wg in
solution. To wells coated with native sFRP-1, we added Wg medium that
had been preincubated for 45 min with varying concentrations of the
sFRP-1 mutants. The ability of the mutants to interact with Wg was
indicated by the extent to which they could inhibit Wg binding to the
wells. The results of these experiments (Fig. 3D) were in
good agreement with the previous pattern: sFRP-
CRD competed for Wg
binding as effectively as sFRP-M/H, whereas sFRP-
2 had a partial
effect. sFRP-
1 and sFRP-
3 had little or no efficacy in the
competition assay. Thus, the observed differences in Wg binding to the
sFRP-1 derivatives were not caused by inadvertant masking of binding sites but were due to the intrinsic properties of the derivatives.
The association of sFRP-1 proteins with Wg was also examined in
co-precipitation experiments. Following incubation of epitope-tagged sFRP-1 mutants with Wg medium, proteins were precipitated with anti-Myc
and subsequently immunoblotted with anti-Wg (Fig.
4). Approximately 10-20% of Wg protein
was precipitated with either sFRP-
CRD or sFRP-M/H. A weak
association was detected with sFRP-
2, but none was observed with
sFRP-
1 or sFRP-
3. Thus, both ELISA and co-precipitation
experiments showed that the CRD was not required for Wg binding.

View larger version (42K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Co-precipitation of sFRP-1 derivatives and
Wg. sFRP-1 mutant proteins were incubated with Wg-containing
media, precipitated with anti-Myc, and immunoblotted with anti-Wg
(upper panel) or anti-Myc (lower panel). Serial
dilutions of Wg medium were also analyzed. Note that sFRP- 1 migrated
near the bottom of the gel in the lower panel. The positions
of molecular mass markers are shown at the right.
IP, immunoprecipitation.
|
|
Cross-linking Establishes Direct Interaction of sFRP-1 with Wg That
Is Enhanced by Optimal Dose of Heparin--
All the binding studies
described above provided evidence that sFRP-1 and Wg can associate with
each other. However, because only one of the reagents, sFRP-1, was
purified to homogeneity, we could not exclude the possibility that an
unidentified factor in the Wg medium might mediate the binding
interaction between sFRP-1 and Wg. To examine this possibility,
covalent affinity cross-linking experiments were performed with
radiolabeled sFRP-1 and conditioned medium from Wg-expressing and
control S2 cells. Following incubation of reactants as described under
"Experimental Procedures," proteins were immunoprecipitated with
anti-Wg and resolved by SDS-PAGE, and cross-linked complexes were
detected by autoradiography (Fig.
5A). No complexes were
observed in the absence of cross-linker or Wg. In contrast, two
distinct radiolabeled bands were evident when the cross-linking
reaction was carried out in the presence of Wg. The lower band had an
apparent molecular mass consistent with a complex comprised of one
molecule each of sFRP-1 and Wg. This is the strongest evidence to date
that the two proteins can interact directly with each other.

View larger version (40K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Covalent cross-linking of sFRP-1 and Wg.
A, 125I-sFRP-1 was incubated with medium from S2
or Wg-expressing S2 cells, followed by addition of BS3
cross-linking agent. In some reactions, unlabeled sFRP-1 (1.7 µM) and/or heparin (10 µg/ml) were also present.
Proteins immunoprecipitated with anti-Wg were separated by 8% SDS-PAGE
and processed for autoradiography. Smaller and larger cross-linked
complexes are indicated by arrowhead and arrow,
respectively. The positions of molecular mass markers are shown at the
left. B, competition with unlabeled sFRP-1.
C, effect of varying heparin concentrations on
cross-linking.
|
|
The difference in apparent size of the upper and lower bands was
35 ± 2.9 kDa (mean ± S.D., calculated from four
experiments), which corresponds closely to the molecular mass of sFRP-1
(33). This suggests that the upper band might represent a complex
containing two sFRP-1 molecules and one Wg molecule. Another
possibility is that the upper band represents a ternary complex with a
third unidentified partner linked to sFRP-1 and/or Wg. The absence of both bands when Wg was lacking from the cross-linking reaction, when
anti-Wg immunoprecipitation was omitted, or in the presence of an
excess of unlabeled sFRP-1 demonstrated that sFRP-1 and Wg were present
in both complexes (Fig. 5A and data not shown). Comparable
displacement of 125I-sFRP-1 by unlabeled sFRP-1 suggested
that the binding affinity of tracer in the two complexes was similar
(Fig. 5B). Unlabeled sFRP-
CRD and sFRP-
2 also competed
with tracer for binding in both complexes, although neither was as
potent as full-length sFRP-1 (data not shown).
Because sFRP-1 and Wg are both heparin-binding proteins and because
heparan-sulfate proteoglycan (HSPG) had been shown to regulate Wg/Wnt
activity in vivo, we investigated the effect of heparin in
the cross-linking experiment. Initial studies revealed that heparin at
a concentration of 10 µg/ml caused a dramatic increase in the
intensity of both bands corresponding to cross-linked complexes (Fig.
5A). Subsequently, a dose-response analysis indicated a
biphasic pattern in which optimal stimulation was observed with 1-10
µg/ml of heparin (Fig. 5C). This effect was specific for heparin, because no stimulation was observed when chondroitin sulfate,
keratan sulfate, or hyaluronic acid were used under similar conditions
(data not shown). These data indicated that heparin and presumably HSPG
have a marked impact on the interaction of sFRP-1 and Wnt proteins, as
represented by Wg in this study.
sFRP-1 Has a Biphasic Effect on Wg-dependent
Stabilization of Armadillo--
We also tested the biological activity
of recombinant sFRP-1 proteins. Because Wg had been used in the binding
experiments, sFRP-1 activity was examined in a Wg-dependent
bioassay. As previously reported (21), soluble Wg increases the
steady-state level of Arm in cells engineered to express DFz2
(Drosophila frizzled 2) (Fig. 6A).
Inhibition of Wg/DFz2 signaling by sFRP-1 was expected, given earlier
reports that sFRP-1 and other sFRP family members antagonized
Wg-dependent and other Wnt-dependent
duplication of the dorsal axis in early Xenopus embryos (30,
31, 33, 39). Indeed, high concentrations of sFRP-1 (10 and 25 µg/ml)
blocked Wg activity (Fig. 6A). However, lower concentrations
of sFRP-1 had the opposite effect: as little as 20 ng/ml (~0.6
nM) of sFRP-1 incubated with Wg medium caused a significant
increase in the amount of Arm protein relative to that observed with Wg
medium alone. Maximal Arm response was seen with 100-500 ng/ml of
sFRP-1. This potentiating effect was not attributable to a prolongation of the Wg half-life in solution, because Wg half-life was much longer
than the duration of the assay, even in the absence of sFRP-1.3 sFRP-1 had no effect
on Arm levels in the absence of Wg and no effect on S2 cells lacking
DFz2 expression (data not shown). Thus, sFRP-1 activity presumably
involved an interaction with Wg that required signaling through
DFz2.

View larger version (52K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Biological activity of sFRP-1 and its
derivatives in Arm stabilization assay. A,
DFz2-expressing S2 cells were incubated with Wg medium and the
indicated concentrations of sFRP-1. Cell lysates were analyzed by
immunoblotting with anti-Arm (upper panel) and anti-HSP70
(lower panel). Similar experiments as in A were
performed with sFRP-M/H (B), sFRP- CRD (C), and
sFRP- 2 (D). Each panel is representative of three to five
separate experiments.
|
|
We also compared sFRP-M/H, sFRP-
CRD, and sFRP-
2 in the Arm assay.
sFRP-M/H behaved like native sFRP-1 at the concentrations tested
(0.02-2 µg/ml), enhancing Wg-dependent stabilization of Arm (Fig. 6B). This implied that the addition of Myc and
histidine epitope tags did not alter its biological activity.
sFRP-
CRD and sFRP-
2 also increased the activity of Wg in this
assay, although their potency was reduced, especially that of
sFRP-
2, relative to sFRP-M/H (Fig. 6, B-D). For
technical reasons, we were unable to test their ability to inhibit Wg
signaling at the highest concentrations. Nonetheless, taken together
these results demonstrated that the recombinant proteins used in the
binding analysis were biologically active. This reinforced the
conclusions drawn above concerning the structural requirements for Wg
binding. In particular, the CRD was not required either for binding or
biological activity, although its absence reduced the specific activity
of sFRP-1.
 |
DISCUSSION |
One of the primary objectives of the present study was to test the
hypothesis that sFRP-1 and Wnt protein bind directly to each other.
Previous reports described co-precipitation experiments in which
various sFRP family members were shown to associate with one or more
Wnt proteins. Although these results supported the idea that sFRP and
Wnt molecules interact, they did not address the possibility that their
association might be indirect, mediated by a factor that could bind
both parties. This was a distinct possibility because neither protein
was used in a purified state. In addition, some of the earlier
observations were made with cells co-expressing both recombinant
proteins such that association might occur during their synthesis and
would not reflect a normal pattern of interaction. We endeavored to
minimize the contribution of indirect effects by using purified
preparations of sFRP-1 and an independent source of Wg. sFRP-1/Wg
binding was demonstrated both in solid phase and solution assays,
utilizing ELISA and co-precipitation formats. Covalent cross-linking of
125I-sFRP-1 with Wg provided the strongest evidence of a
direct interaction between the two proteins. Surprisingly, besides
detecting a cross-linked complex consistent in size with one sFRP-1 and
one Wg molecule, we also observed a larger complex whose size suggested
the presence of a second sFRP-1 molecule. Although the exact nature of
this larger entity is currently unknown, taken together these results established that sFRP-1 is a direct binding partner for Wnt protein.
Role of Proteoglycan in Binding of sFRP-1 and Wg--
The
125I-sFRP-1/Wg cross-linked complexes were detected in the
absence of added heparin but were more abundant when the reaction was
performed with an optimal concentration of exogenous heparin. Heparin
or endogenous HSPG might promote sFRP-1/Wg binding by serving as a
scaffold to facilitate interaction between sFRP-1 and Wg.
Alternatively, heparin/HSPG might promote binding by stabilizing a
conformation of either sFRP-1 or Wg that would increase their mutual
affinity or by enhancing ligand or receptor oligomerization. Of note,
the ability to bind heparin was not itself sufficient for cross-linking
to Wg; similar experiments conducted with Wg medium and a control
heparin-binding polypeptide did not yield cross-linked Wg complexes
(data not shown). Moreover, the spacer arm of the cross-linking agent
was only 11.4 Å long, reinforcing the conclusion that sFRP-1 binds
directly to Wg and presumably other Wnt proteins.
Although the effect of heparin on sFRP-1/Wg binding was observed in an
artificial, cell-free setting, these results are consistent with other
findings suggesting an important role for HSPG in Wnt signaling
in vivo. In Drosophila, mutations in genes
encoding enzymes involved in proteoglycan biosynthesis disrupt Wg
signaling (46-48). Heparitinase treatment of mouse kidney primordia in
organ culture similarly inhibited Wnt-dependent
developmental processes (45). Although our data indicate that
heparin/HSPG can have a strong effect on sFRP/Wnt binding, it is also
conceivable that they would have an impact on Fz/Wnt interactions.
Indeed recent reports suggest that Dally, a cell surface core protein
containing heparan sulfate modifications, might be a component of a
Wg/Wnt receptor complex (50, 51). In short, our present findings complement the evidence from in vivo studies that HSPG has a
profound effect on Wnt activity and specifically suggest that HSPG can regulate Wnt binding interactions with sFRP proteins.
CRD Is Not Required for Wg Binding to sFRP-1--
Among the most
unexpected findings in the present study was the observation that the
CRD was not required for Wg binding. The prevailing view that the CRD
is the Wnt binding site is based on several experiments in which the Fz
CRD conferred Wnt binding and/or responsiveness (20, 21, 23). In
addition, carboxyl-terminally truncated Fz derivatives containing the
CRD had dominant negative effects on Wg signaling and altered Wg
distribution in vivo (52, 53). Although in some instances,
adjacent non-CRD sequence was also present and conceivably could have
contributed to the interaction with Wnt protein. Nonetheless, the use
of constructs that corresponded more precisely to the boundaries of the
CRD provided compelling evidence that this domain can bind Wnts.
However, these studies do not exclude the possibility that additional
Wnt binding sites might exist elsewhere in Fz or sFRP molecules. The
recent description of another soluble Wnt antagonist that lacks a Fz
CRD but is thought to bind Wnt protein provides support for the idea
that there are other Wnt binding domain(s) (54). With regard to sFRPs,
a small deletion in the CRD of FrzB/sFRP-3 did not eliminate binding to Wnt-1, although it did eliminate the ability to modulate Wnt-1 activity
(43). However a larger deletion in the CRD did disrupt Wnt-1 binding,
although no information was presented regarding the overall stability
of this engineered sFRP-3 derivative (43).
In the present study, we have examined the binding of human sFRP-1 with
Drosophila Wg. Although there is a high degree of conservation between Wg and vertebrate Wnts, it is possible that the
interactions we observed were not entirely representative of the
interactions that occur between sFRP-1 and Wnts within the same
species. Perhaps the relative contributions of the CRD and non-CRD
sequences to sFRP/Wnt binding would differ in a homologous system.
Evidence that sFRP-
CRD can bind Wg came from multiple experimental
models and was highly reproducible. The proteins were shown to interact
both in a solid phase assay and in solution. Lacking from these results
was proof that the proteins bind directly to each other. Our attempts
to document direct binding of sFRP-
CRD and Wg by covalent
cross-linking have thus far been unsuccessful. Although this might be
attributable to a variety of technical issues, it also is consistent
with the idea that their binding is indirect. In this regard, it is
noteworthy that sFRP-
CRD retained the full heparin-binding capacity
of the native protein. Therefore, it is possible that this sFRP-1
derivative associated with Wg via soluble HSPG, whose presence in
Wg-containing S2 conditioned medium had been previously inferred (44).
Such a complex would not likely be detected in our experiments based on
the cross-linking properties of BS3; correspondingly, we
have not observed heparin cross-linked by BS3 to
125I-sFRP-1 or a number of other heparin-binding tracer
proteins (Fig. 5).2 Although the details of their
interaction have not been fully defined, the ability of sFRP-
CRD to
enhance the activity of Wg in the Arm stabilization assay distinguished
it from another heparin-binding protein (data not shown) and indicated
that its association with Wg has biological relevance.
The carboxyl-terminal deletion mutants that retained the CRD were
remarkable for their relatively weak association with Wg. In principle
their limited binding might be attributed to the improper folding of
artificially engineered proteins, although there was no evidence that
this was the case. While our manuscript was in preparation, Bafico
et al. (55) reported that a sFRP-1 truncation mutant
retaining the CRD was able to coprecipitate with Wnt-1 and Wnt-2.
Because their experiments were performed with whole cell lysates from
cells co-transfected with sFRP-1 and either of the Wnt proteins, high
local concentrations and/or cofactors might have contributed to the
observed interactions. Our studies demonstrated that of all the
truncation mutants, sFRP-
2 exhibited an intermediate capacity to
interact with Wg. This implies that sFRP-
2 shares a portion of a Wnt
binding epitope with sFRP-
CRD or that it contains another binding
site involving the CRD that was perturbed in the
1 and
3 mutants.
Biphasic Modulation of Wg Signaling by sFRP-1--
Previous
studies involving co-expression of sFRP and Wnt proteins in the same
cells indicated that sFRP family members can inhibit Wnt signaling.
This was true in early Xenopus embryos because co-injection
of mRNA encoding sFRP and Wnt molecules blocked Wnt-dependent duplication of the dorsal axis (30, 31, 33, 39), and in transfected cells in culture where stabilization of
-catenin was inhibited (43, 55). In these instances, high local
concentrations of the proteins would have been likely, corresponding to
the high end of the sFRP-1 dose-response experiment in the present
report that also resulted in Wnt inhibition. Our work is the first to
show that sFRP can enhance Wnt signaling under certain conditions.
Biphasic regulation by sFRP-1 provides a mechanism to facilitate the
position-dependent properties of Wnt signaling; cells in
close proximity to sources of sFRP-1 would be more refractory to Wnts,
whereas cells at a greater distance would have their response to Wnts
potentiated by a lower sFRP-1 concentration. Such a pattern has
recently been described for short gastrulation (Sog), which
reportedly binds and inhibits Decapentaplegic near the source of Sog
where its concentration is high but enhances Decapentaplegic activity
at a distance through a diffusion-dependent mechanism (56).
Regulation by overlapping Wnt and sFRP gradients could generate a high
degree of spatial specificity to Wnt responses, a well recognized
characteristic of Wnt signaling during development (1).
The molecular mechanism responsible for biphasic modulation of Wg
signaling by sFRP-1 is open to speculation. We postulate that this
effect is due to the presence of two distinct binding sites for sFRP-1
on Wg that vary in their affinity: binding to the high affinity site
would promote Wnt signaling, whereas binding to the low affinity site
would inhibit it. Perhaps a higher affinity interaction of Wg with the
carboxyl-terminal domain of sFRP-1 promotes signaling by presenting a
favorable Wg conformation to Fz, whereas additional lower affinity
binding via the CRD competes with Fz. This might involve a single
sFRP-1 molecule binding to one Wg molecule, but it also could entail
two sFRP-1 molecules interacting with one Wg. The cross-linking data
raise the possibility that sFRP-1 and Wg might interact with both 1:1
and 2:1 stoichiometry. Only a very small percentage of sFRP-1 tracer
was detected as a homodimer in our cross-linking experiments,
suggesting that 2:1 stoichiometry probably is not due to binding of an
sFRP-1 homodimer to Wg. Although displacement experiments with
unlabeled sFRP-1 did not indicate an obvious difference in tracer
affinity in the two complexes, relative affinities of the two
hypothetical sFRP-1/Wg binding sites might vary with local factors
in vivo, such as specific HSPG composition. Even if the
larger cross-linked complex does not contain two sFRP-1 molecules, the
basic hypothesis that there are two distinct sFRP-1 binding sites with
different affinities might still be valid; tracer concentrations in the cross-linking experiments might have been too low for detection of
binding to the proposed lower affinity site. Alternative mechanisms also could account for a biphasic pattern of regulation. For instance, sFRP-1/Wg might act as an agonist at low sFRP-1 concentrations, but at
high concentrations sFRP-1 could interact with Fz or another cell
surface component and block signaling. Bafico et al. (55) recently presented evidence that sFRP-1 and Fz protein can associate with each other. Further investigation is necessary to distinguish between these possibilities.
Quantitative Analysis of sFRP-1/Wg Interactions--
The
experimental designs used in this study did not allow for a direct
determination of an sFRP-1/Wg binding affinity constant. The inability
to ascertain the concentration of Wg in conditioned medium prevented us
from quantifying the ratio of bound versus free ligand in
the ELISA. Use of soluble sFRP-1 derivatives in the ELISA competition
model did enable us to compare the relative affinities of these
molecules in this setting. However, we could not readily estimate
absolute affinity from the competition data because the protein
concentration required for displacement of Wg binding was dependent on
the number of binding sites in the wells. Moreover, even the relative
Wg binding affinities of the sFRP-1 derivatives in our various assay
systems could be affected by differences in experimental conditions,
such as HSPG/heparin content. Estimation of affinity by titrating the
displacement of sFRP-1 tracer with unlabeled ligand in the
cross-linking experiment was complicated by the presence of heparin,
which can bind sFRP-1 and thereby alter the concentration of the free
sFRP-1 pool. Ignoring this effect, the apparent affinity was in the
range of 10-30 nM, rather close to the ~9 nM
affinity recently calculated for the interaction of XWnt8 and mFz8
(20). In addition to these approximations, the Arm stabilization assays
showed that recombinant sFRP-1 elicited a biological response at a
subnanomolar concentration and activation was maximal at ~15
nM. The higher concentrations required for inhibition of
Wnt signaling might occur in restricted locations near the sites of
sFRP-1 synthesis.
Implications for sFRP Research--
The results of the present
study establish that sFRP-1 can bind Wg and regulate Wnt signaling. We
infer that other members of the sFRP subfamily have similar properties,
although much work will be required to define the specific
relationships that govern the interactions of the many Wnts, sFRPs, and
Fzs. The availability of purified recombinant protein, binding, and
biological assays as described in this report will facilitate this
effort. Of particular interest will be the role of proteoglycan in the
various protein-protein interactions that characterize Wnt/Fz/sFRP
signaling and the generality of biphasic regulation by sFRP molecules.
With regard to sFRP-1, recent reports suggest that it has pro-apoptotic
activity (35) and is up-regulated in certain settings following serum
withdrawal (57). Its chromosomal locus at 8p11-12 (33) is a site
associated with loss of heterozygosity for a variety of malignancies,
and sFRP-1 expression is absent from a high percentage of human breast tumor specimens (58). Taken together, these observations suggest that
sFRP-1 might function as a tumor suppressor, consistent with its
ability to inhibit Wnt signaling at high concentrations. Future investigation will address the potential role of sFRP-1 and related molecules in the pathogenesis of cancer as well as in developmental processes mediated by Wnt proteins.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank Veena Kapoor for performing
transfections with sFRP-1 constructs and the Nusse lab for providing S2
cells and S2 cells expressing Wg (S2HSWg) as well as Wg mAb 4D4.
Anti-Arm (mAb N27A1) was kindly provided by Dr. Eric Wieschaus.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
The costs of publication of this
article were defrayed in part by the
payment of page charges. The article
must therefore be hereby marked
"advertisement" in
accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section
1734 solely to indicate this fact.
¶
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Laboratory of
Cellular and Molecular Biology, National Cancer Inst., Bldg. 37, Rm.
1E24, 37 Convent Dr., MSC 4255, Bethesda, MD 20892-4255. Tel.: 301-496-4265; Fax: 301-496-8479; E-mail: rubinj@helix.nih.gov.
2
A. Üren and J. S. Rubin, unpublished observations.
3
S. Cumberledge, unpublished observations.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
Arm, armadillo;
CRD, cysteine-rich domain;
sFRP, secreted Frizzled-related protein;
MDCK, Madin-Darby canine kidney;
BSA, bovine serum albumin;
HSPG, heparan-sulfate proteoglycan;
ELISA, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay;
PAGE, polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis;
PBS, phosphate-buffered
saline;
mAb, monoclonal antibody;
BS3, bis(sulfosuccinimidyl) suberate.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Cadigan, K. M.,
and Nusse, R.
(1997)
Genes Dev.
11,
3286-3305[Free Full Text]
|
| 2.
|
Dale, T. C.
(1998)
Biochem J.
329,
209-223
|
| 3.
|
Korinek, V.,
Barker, N.,
Morin, P. J.,
van Wichen, D.,
de Weger, R.,
Kinzler, K. W.,
Vogelstein, B.,
and Clevers, H.
(1997)
Science
275,
1784-1787[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 4.
|
Morin, P. J.,
Sparks, A. B.,
Korinek, V.,
Barker, N.,
Clevers, H.,
Vogelstein, B.,
and Kinzler, K. W.
(1997)
Science
275,
1787-1790[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 5.
|
Rubinfeld, B.,
Robbins, P.,
El-Gamil, M.,
Albert, I.,
Porfiri, E.,
and Polakis, P.
(1997)
Science
275,
1790-1792[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 6.
|
de La Coste, A.,
Romagnolo, B.,
Billuart, P.,
Renard, C. A.,
Buendia, M. A.,
Soubrane, O.,
Fabre, M.,
Chelly, J.,
Beldjord, C.,
Kahn, A.,
and Perret, C.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
8847-8851[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 7.
|
Devereux, T. R.,
Anna, C. H.,
Foley, J. F.,
White, C. M.,
Sills, R. C.,
and Barrett, J. C.
(1999)
Oncogene
18,
4726-4733[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 8.
|
Behrens, J.,
von Kries, J. P.,
Kuhl, M.,
Bruhn, L.,
Wedlich, D.,
Grosschedl, R.,
and Birchmeier, W.
(1996)
Nature
382,
638-642[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 9.
|
Molenaar, M.,
van de Wetering, M.,
Oosterwegel, M.,
Peterson-Maduro, J.,
Godsave, S.,
Korinek, V.,
Roose, J.,
Destree, O.,
and Clevers, H.
(1996)
Cell
86,
391-399[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 10.
|
van de Wetering, M.,
Cavallo, R.,
Dooijes, D.,
van Beest, M.,
van Es, J.,
Loureiro, J.,
Ypma, A.,
Hursh, D.,
Jones, T.,
Bejsovec, A.,
Peifer, M.,
Mortin, M.,
and Clevers, H.
(1997)
Cell
88,
789-799[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 11.
|
Peifer, M.
(1997)
Science
275,
1752-1753[Free Full Text]
|
| 12.
|
He, T. C.,
Sparks, A. B.,
Rago, C.,
Hermeking, H.,
Zawel, L.,
da Costa, L. T.,
Morin, P. J.,
Vogelstein, B.,
and Kinzler, K. W.
(1998)
Science
281,
1509-1512[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 13.
|
Shtutman, M.,
Zhurinsky, J.,
Simcha, I.,
Albanese, C.,
D'Amico, M.,
Pestell, R.,
and Ben-Ze'ev, A.
(1999)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
96,
5522-5527[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 14.
|
Tetsu, O.,
and McCormick, F.
(1999)
Nature
398,
422-426[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 15.
|
Pennisi, E.
(1998)
Science
281,
1438-1441[Free Full Text]
|
| 16.
|
Papkoff, J.,
and Schryver, B.
(1990)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
10,
2723-2730[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 17.
|
Bradley, R. S.,
and Brown, A. M.
(1990)
EMBO J.
9,
1569-1575[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 18.
|
van Leeuwen, F.,
Samos, C. H.,
and Nusse, R.
(1994)
Nature
368,
342-344[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 19.
|
Cumberledge, S.,
and Krasnow, M. A.
(1993)
Nature
363,
549-552[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 20.
|
Hsieh, J. C.,
Rattner, A.,
Smallwood, P. M.,
and Nathans, J.
(1999)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
96,
3546-3551[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 21.
|
Bhanot, P.,
Brink, M.,
Samos, C. H.,
Hsieh, J. C.,
Wang, Y.,
Macke, J. P.,
Andrew, D.,
Nathans, J.,
and Nusse, R.
(1996)
Nature
382,
225-230[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 22.
|
Yang-Snyder, J.,
Miller, J. R.,
Brown, J. D.,
Lai, C. J.,
and Moon, R. T.
(1996)
Curr. Biol.
6,
1302-1306[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 23.
|
He, X.,
Saint-Jeannet, J. P.,
Wang, Y.,
Nathans, J.,
Dawid, I.,
and Varmus, H.
(1997)
Science
275,
1652-1654[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 24.
|
Rocheleau, C. E.,
Downs, W. D.,
Lin, R.,
Wittmann, C.,
Bei, Y.,
Cha, Y. H.,
Ali, M.,
Priess, J. R.,
and Mello, C. C.
(1997)
Cell
90,
707-716[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 25.
|
Thorpe, C. J.,
Schlesinger, A.,
Carter, J. C.,
and Bowerman, B.
(1997)
Cell
90,
695-705[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 26.
|
Kennerdell, J. R.,
and Carthew, R. W.
(1998)
Cell
95,
1017-1026[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 27.
|
Bhat, K. M.
(1998)
Cell
95,
1027-1036[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 28.
|
Muller, H.,
Samanta, R.,
and Wieschaus, E.
(1999)
Development
126,
577-586[Abstract]
|
| 29.
|
Wang, Y.,
Macke, J. P.,
Abella, B. S.,
Andreasson, K.,
Worley, P.,
Gilbert, D. J.,
Copeland, N. G.,
Jenkins, N. A.,
and Nathans, J.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
4468-4476[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 30.
|
Leyns, L.,
Bouwmeester, T.,
Kim, S. H.,
Piccolo, S.,
and De Robertis, E. M.
(1997)
Cell
88,
747-756[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 31.
|
Wang, S.,
Krinks, M.,
Lin, K.,
Luyten, F. P.,
and Moos, M., Jr.
(1997)
Cell
88,
757-766[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 32.
|
Rattner, A.,
Hsieh, J. C.,
Smallwood, P. M.,
Gilbert, D. J.,
Copeland, N. G.,
Jenkins, N. A.,
and Nathans, J.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
2859-2863[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 33.
|
Finch, P. W.,
He, X.,
Kelley, M. J.,
Uren, A.,
Schaudies, R. P.,
Popescu, N. C.,
Rudikoff, S.,
Aaronson, S. A.,
Varmus, H. E.,
and Rubin, J. S.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
6770-6775[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 34.
|
Salic, A. N.,
Kroll, K. L.,
Evans, L. M.,
and Kirschner, M. W.
(1997)
Development
124,
4739-4748[Abstract]
|
| 35.
|
Melkonyan, H. S.,
Chang, W. C.,
Shapiro, J. P.,
Mahadevappa, M.,
Fitzpatrick, P. A.,
Kiefer, M. C.,
Tomei, L. D.,
and Umansky, S. R.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
13636-13641[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 36.
|
Pfeffer, P. L.,
De Robertis, E. M.,
and Izpisua-Belmonte, J. C.
(1997)
Int. J. Dev. Biol.
41,
449-458[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 37.
|
Mayr, T.,
Deutsch, U.,
Kuhl, M.,
Drexler, H. C.,
Lottspeich, F.,
Deutzmann, R.,
Wedlich, D.,
and Risau, W.
(1997)
Mech. Dev.
63,
109-125[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 38.
|
Wolf, V.,
Ke, G.,
Dharmarajan, A. M.,
Bielke, W.,
Artuso, L.,
Saurer, S.,
and Friis, R.
(1997)
FEBS Lett.
417,
385-389[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 39.
|
Xu, Q.,
D'Amore, P. A.,
and Sokol, S. Y.
(1998)
Development
125,
4767-4776[Abstract]
|
| 40.
|
Chang, J. T.,
Esumi, N.,
Moore, K.,
Li, Y.,
Zhang, S.,
Chew, C.,
Goodman, B.,
Rattner, A.,
Moody, S.,
Stetten, G.,
Campochiaro, P. A.,
and Zack, D. J.
(1999)
Hum. Mol. Genet.
8,
575-583[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 41.
|
Abu-Jawdeh, G.,
Comella, N.,
Tomita, Y.,
Brown, L. F.,
Tognazzi, K.,
Sokol, S. Y.,
and Kocher, O.
(1999)
Lab. Invest.
79,
439-447[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 42.
|
Hoang, B.,
Moos, M., Jr.,
Vukicevic, S.,
and Luyten, F. P.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
26131-26137[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 43.
|
Lin, K.,
Wang, S.,
Julius, M. A.,
Kitajewski, J.,
Moos, M., Jr.,
and Luyten, F. P.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
11196-11200[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 44.
|
Reichsman, F.,
Smith, L.,
and Cumberledge, S.
(1996)
J. Cell Biol.
135,
819-827[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 45.
|
Kispert, A.,
Vainio, S.,
Shen, L.,
Rowitch, D. H.,
and McMahon, A. P.
(1996)
Development
122,
3627-3637[Abstract]
|
| 46.
|
Haerry, T. E.,
Heslip, T. R.,
Marsh, J. L.,
and O'Connor, M. B.
(1997)
Development
124,
3055-3064[Abstract]
|
| 47.
|
Hacker, U.,
Lin, X.,
and Perrimon, N.
(1997)
Development
124,
3565-3573[Abstract]
|
| 48.
|
Binari, R. C.,
Staveley, B. E.,
Johnson, W. A.,
Godavarti, R.,
Sasisekharan, R.,
and Manoukian, A. S.
(1997)
Development
124,
2623-2632[Abstract]
|
| 49.
|
Bottaro, D. P.,
Rubin, J. S.,
Ron, D.,
Finch, P. W.,
Florio, C.,
and Aaronson, S. A.
(1990)
J. Biol. Chem.
265,
12767-12770[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 50.
|
Tsuda, M.,
Kamimura, K.,
Nakato, H.,
Archer, M.,
Staatz, W.,
Fox, B.,
Humphrey, M.,
Olson, S.,
Futch, T.,
Kaluza, V.,
Siegfried, E.,
Stam, L.,
and Selleck, S. B.
(1999)
Nature
400,
276-280[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 51.
|
Lin, X.,
and Perrimon, N.
(1999)
Nature
400,
281-284[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 52.
|
Zhang, J.,
and Carthew, R. W.
(1998)
Development
125,
3075-3085[Abstract]
|
| 53.
|
Cadigan, K. M.,
Fish, M. P.,
Rulifson, E. J.,
and Nusse, R.
(1998)
Cell
93,
767-777 |