J Biol Chem, Vol. 275, Issue 8, 5739-5747, February 25, 2000
Distinct Roles for Amino- and Carboxyl-terminal Sequences of
SPRR1 Protein in the Formation of Cross-linked Envelopes of Conducting
Airway Epithelial Cells*
Jun
Deng,
Ruiqin
Pan, and
Reen
Wu
From the Department of Internal Medicine, and Veterinary Anatomy,
Physiology, and Cell Biology, University of California at Davis,
Davis, California 95616
 |
ABSTRACT |
The small proline-rich protein, SPRR1, is a
marker gene whose expression in conducting airway epithelium is
elevated under a variety of conditions that enhance squamous
differentiation. The purpose of this study is to elucidate the nature
of the SPRR1 sequence involved in cross-linked envelope formation in a
tissue/cell type, such as conducting airway epithelium, that normally
does not express squamous function except after injury or maintenance in culture. For this, a Flag-SPRR1 fusion protein expression system has
been developed. Using the liposome-mediated gene transfer technique on
passage 1 culture of human tracheobronchial epithelial (TBE) cells, the
Flag-SPRR1 fusion protein can be expressed and detected immunologically
by both anti-Flag and anti-SPRR1 antibodies. The incorporation of
Flag-SPRR1 fusion protein into cross-linked envelopes can be
demonstrated when transfected human passage 1 TBE cultures are treated
with phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate and high calcium (1.5 mM). By deletion and site-directed mutagenesis, two
distinct roles of the amino- and carboxyl-terminal sequences of SPRR1
have been demonstrated. First, we demonstrated that the amino-terminal
sequence of SPRR1 protein is required for the incorporation of the
fusion protein into cross-linked envelopes, whereas a deletion on the
carboxyl-terminal region or on the middle repetitive unit has no
effect. Interestingly, insertion of a 24-amino acid peptide of monkey
MUC2 repetitive sequence in the amino-terminus of SPRR1 protein had a
stimulatory effect. Site-directed mutagenesis on the following amino
acid residues, Lys7, Gln88, and
Lys89, which were found previously to participate in the
cross-linked envelope formation of keratinocytes, had no detrimental
effect on the incorporation. However, mutations on Gln clusters, such as Gln4-Gln6 and
Gln22-Gln25, had detrimental effects on the
incorporation. These results suggest an amino-terminal
sequence-dependent and multiple cross-linked sites for the
incorporation of Flag-SPRR1 fusion protein into cross-linked envelopes
of cultured human TBE cells. Second, we demonstrated that the carboxyl
terminus of SPRR1 protein is required for a high level of Flag-fusion
protein expression. A deletion in the carboxyl region or a mutation on
the last lysine residue of the carboxyl end had a detrimental effect on
the level of Flag-SPRR1 fusion protein expressed in transfected cells.
In contrast, there was only a slight decrease in the level of
expression if the amino-terminus was deleted. Interestingly, the
efficiency for fusion protein to incorporate into cross-linked
envelopes was elevated by the mutation at the carboxyl end. These
results suggest distinct roles, perhaps coordinately, for both amino-
and carboxyl-terminal sequences in the regulation of the life cycle of
SPRR1 protein in cultured TBE cells.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Squamous differentiation of tracheobronchial epithelial
(TBE)1 cells is a multi-step
process, just as it is in skin keratinocytes. The end stage of squamous
differentiation is the formation of a cornified envelope (CE), which is
a highly complex and insoluble structure adjacent to the inner leaflet
of the plasma membrane (1). The CE is produced by a covalent fusion of
both cytosolic (2-4) and particulate proteins (5-6) in a reaction
catalyzed by transglutaminase. These proteins are cross-linked into an
insoluble mesh by the formation of N
-(
-glutamyl)
lysine isopeptide and disulfide bonds (7). Several proteins, including
involucrin, loricrin, annexin I, small proline-rich proteins (SPRRs),
and others, have been implicated as CE precursor proteins (1-3,
8).
SPRR1, a small proline-rich protein, belongs to the SPRR gene family,
which contains two SPRR1 genes, eight SPRR2 genes, and one SPRR3 gene.
They are all localized in a 300-kilobase segment of human chromosome 1 area q21, a region referred to as the epidermal differentiation complex
(9). Immunohistochemical studies, using a polyclonal antibody against
carboxyl-terminal peptide (15 amino acid) of the human/monkey SPRR1
protein, demonstrated that SPRR1 is predominantly present in the
suprabasal cell layer of various squamous tissues such as epidermis,
oral mucosa, and esophagus (10).2 This tissue- and
cell-type-specific distribution of SPRR1 gene expression suggests a
useful marker associated with squamous differentiation. SPRR1 protein
structure is characterized by the presence of internal repeats and
conserved amino acid sequences of both amino- and carboxyl-terminal
regions across species (11), including proteins isolated from monkey
TBE cells (12). Furthermore, the amino- and carboxyl-terminal sequences
contain domains similar to several cross-linked envelope precursors,
such as loricrin and involucrin (13-14). Based on this structural
similarity, Backendorf and Hohl (15) suggested that SPRR1 protein is a
potential substrate involved in squamous cell cornification. Recently,
a series of studies of proteolytic digestion of cross-linked envelopes
prepared from human skin have identified the SPRR1 protein as one of
the CE components. Residue Lys7 at the amino-terminal
region and residues Gln88 and Lys89 at the
carboxyl end are thought to be the cross-linked sites with loricrin
(16-17). A similar study using cultured human foreskin keratinocytes
also demonstrated that the amino terminus (residues 1-23) and the
carboxyl terminus (residues 86-89) of the SPRR1A and SPRR1B proteins
are involved in cross-linked formation with involucrin. However, no
loricrin cross-linked formation was detected in this study (8).
It is possible that the composition of cross-linked envelopes varies in
different squamous tissues. Jarnik et al. (18) observed different protein components in various cross-linked envelope preparations from different cornified epithelia. Compositional analysis
of fore-stomach epithelia and epidermis suggested a very high (about
65%) loricrin content in cross-linked envelope preparation. However,
the levels of SPRRs varied. For fore-stomach epithelia, the level of
SPRRs in cornified envelope preparation was 18%, whereas in epidermis
it was only 8%. These results support the idea that cross-linked
envelopes from different squamous epithelia have variable compositions.
When TBE cells undergo terminal squamous differentiation, they also
form cross-linked envelopes. Because almost all studies on cross-linked
envelope composition are performed using epidermis, the composition of
CE in TBE cells is still unknown. Furthermore, the functional role of
SPRR1 in the terminal squamous differentiation of TBE cells remains unknown.
In this study, we focused on the contribution of SPRR1 protein to
cross-linked envelope formation in passage 1 human TBE cultures. We
have demonstrated that cross-linked envelope formation could be induced
in the passage 1 culture after treatment with phorbol 12-myristate
13-acetate (PMA) and high calcium (1.5 mM).3 Using a
Flag-SPRR1 fusion protein expression system, we examined whether SPRR1
is incorporated into the cross-linked envelope of TBE cells and what
the molecular nature of the incorporation is. The Flag sequence in the
fusion protein allows us to see the distinction between the transfected
gene product and the endogenous SPRR1 protein because only the fusion
protein in the transfected cells can be visualized by mono-specific
anti-Flag antibody. Using this approach, the participation of SPRR1
protein in cross-linked envelope formation can be elucidated. By
deletion, insertion, and site-directed mutagenesis, the distinct roles
of the amino- and carboxyl-terminal peptides in the regulation of the
life cycle of SPRR1 protein associated with the terminal squamous
differentiation of TBE cells can be observed.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Cell Culture Conditions--
Human tracheobronchial tissues were
obtained from the University of California at Davis Medical Center or
the Anatomic Gift Foundation (Laurel, MD) with consent. The Human
Subject Review Committee of the University of California at Davis
approved all procedures involved in tissue procurement. Epithelial cell
isolation and culture conditions were performed as described previously with some modification (19, 20). Briefly, protease-dissociated primary
TBE cells were cultured in Ham's F-12/Dulbecco's modified Eagle's
medium (1:1) medium supplemented with six growth factors: insulin (5 µg/ml), transferrin (5 µg/ml), EGF (10 ng/ml), cholera toxin (10 ng/ml), dexamethasone (0.1 µM), and bovine hypothalamus extract (15 µg/ml), as well as 0.2% fetal bovine serum. Cultures were trypsinized until confluence and then plated in a low calcium (0.09 mM) keratinocyte basal medium (Biowhittaker Inc.,
Walkersville, MD) supplemented with these six factors. The low-calcium
culture condition minimizes the expression of terminal squamous cell
differentiation in passage 1 human TBE
cultures.4 The addition of
PMA and high calcium (1.5 mM) to this culture system could
induce cross-linked envelope formation.
The immortalized normal human TBE cell line, HBE 1 clone (21), and
BEAS-2B subclone S (22) were obtained from Drs. Jim Yankaskas
(University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill) and J. F. Lechner
(Wayne State University, Detroit, MI), respectively. These cell lines
were maintained in serum-free F-12 medium supplemented with six
hormonal supplements as described before (19, 20). When appropriate
conditions were applied, such as the addition of vitamin A or
PMA/Ca2+(1.5 mM), HBE l cell line could express
mucin synthesis and secretion, and the formation of cross-linked
envelopes, respectively.5
Preparation of Flag-SPRR1 Fusion Protein Expression
Constructs--
Mammalian expression vector pFLAG-CMV2 was obtained
from Eastman Kodak Company (Rochester, NY). The vector carried
cytomegalovirus (CMV) promoter, Flag sequence (nine amino acids), and
human growth hormone poly(A) adenylation site and intron processing
signal. Various monkey SPRR1 cDNA fragments (12) were cloned into
the multiple cloning sites downstream from the Flag sequence, using the
unique EcoRI and SalI cloning sites for
directional cloning. The CMV promoter can mediate the gene expression
of Flag-SPRR1 fusion protein in various mammalian cells.
The polymerase chain reaction (PCR) method was used to prepare
full-length and different fragments of the monkey SPRR1 cDNA coding
region, using the monkey cDNA clone as a template with two
oligo-primers containing sequences specific for SPRR1 cDNA and the
restriction enzyme cloning site. Amplified DNA fragments were ligated
to vector pFLAG-CMV2 according to the restriction enzyme cloning sites,
and positive clones containing the appropriate inserts were screened by
PCR and further confirmed by restriction enzymatic mapping and DNA
sequencing. Precautions were taken to make sure that the SPRR1 coding
region was in-frame with the Flag coding sequence. To verify the
in-frame nature of the SPRR1 insert, the polyclonal antibody that is
mono-specific to the carboxyl-terminal 15 amino acid sequence of
human/monkey SPRR1 was used. This showed whether this fusion protein,
expressed in culture, could be recognized by this antibody in addition
to the commercial monoclonal antibody (M5) mono-specific to the Flag
amino sequence. For the site-directed mutations, the pFlag-SPRR1
construct was used as a template, and primers carrying the specific
mutation site sequences were used for PCR amplification. The amplified
products were then cloned into the vector as described. DNA sequencing
was carried out to verify the specific site of mutation in the construct.
The PCR reactions were carried out in a total volume of 100 µl,
containing 10 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.4, 50 mM KCl,
1.5 mM MgCl2, 0.01% gelatin, 10 pmol of each
primer, and 250 µM each of dATP, dCTP, dGTP, and dTTP.
Initial denaturation was at 95 °C for 5 min followed by 35 cycles at
94 °C for denaturation (1 min), 55 °C annealing (1 min), and
72 °C extension (2 min) and a final extension at 72 °C for 10 min
in an automated thermal cycler (Perkin-Elmer).
DNA Transfection Study--
DNA transfection was carried out by
a LipofectinTM-mediated gene transfer technique, according
to the instructions of the manufacturer (Life Technologies, Inc.).
Briefly, DNA and LipofectinTM were mixed with keratinocyte
basal medium without serum and antibiotics in two separate tubes and
incubated at room temperature for 30 min. Then DNA and
LipofectinTM were mixed in a 1:4 ratio by weight and
incubated at room temperature for another 30 min. Each culture dish
with 80% confluence of TBE cells was washed with serum-free culture
medium once and then transfected with 2 µg of pFlag-CMV2 plasmid DNA,
carrying different SPRR1 inserts in 0.5 ml of culture medium. The
transfected culture dishes were kept in an incubator at 37 °C with
5% CO2 for 4-6 h, and then 1 ml of fresh six
factor-supplemented low calcium keratinocyte basal medium was added to
each dish. Medium change was carried out the next day, and the dishes
were continuously maintained in the same culture medium. For induction
of cell cornification, cultures at day 2 of transfection were treated
with PMA (5 ng/ml) and high calcium (1.5 mM) as described
before.6 Cross-linked
envelopes were harvested the next day after the PMA/Ca2+
(1.5 mM) treatment.
Western Blot Analysis--
Cultured cells were lysed with
ice-cold keratin extraction buffer (KEB: 20 mM Tris-Cl, pH
7.0, 0.6 M KCl, 1% Triton X-100, and 1 mM
phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride) and centrifuged at 5000 rpm for 10 min
(23). The supernatant was recovered, and the protein concentration was
quantified by DC-protein assay kit (Bio-Rad). To prepare a Western blot
membrane, an equal amount of protein (20 µg) was loaded into each
well and separated by SDS-PAGE electrophoresis and then blotted onto
nitrocellulose membranes. The Flag-SPRR1 fusion proteins were detected
by immunostaining with polyclonal anti-SPRR1 and M5 monoclonal
anti-Flag (Kodak) antibodies. The immunoreactive bands were visualized
by a VectastainTM ABC kit from the Vector Laboratory
(Burlingame, CA).
Isolation and Characterization of Cross-linked Envelope--
One
day after PMA/Ca2+(1.5 mM) treatment, cultures
were trypsinized, and the total cell number/dish was counted by a
hemocytometer under a light microscope. Cross-linked envelope
preparation was carried out as described before with a modified
procedure to ensure the purity of cross-linked envelope
preparation.6 Briefly, trypsinized cell suspensions were
first treated with 1% SDS and centrifugation to reduce the viscous
nature of the suspension. The pellets were then treated with 2% SDS
and 2%
-mercaptoethanol and centrifugation. Pellets resistant to
SDS and the reducing agent were spun down on a glass slide in a
Cytospin Centrifuge from Statspin Technologies (Norwood, MA). Glass
slides were fixed in ice-cold methanol and processed for
immunofluorescent staining based on instructions provided by the
pCMV2-Flag vector supplier (Kodak). Briefly, glass slides were first
reacted with primary monoclonal antibody against Flag sequence (M5)
and/or against human/monkey C-terminal peptide polyclonal antibody.
After extensive washing, glass slides were then reacted with an
FITC-conjugated goat anti-mouse IgG antibody (Antibodies Inc., Davis,
CA) and/or rhodamine-conjugated goat anti-rabbit antibody. After
washing and air drying, one drop of mounting medium, Vectashield H-1000 (Vector Laboratory) was applied to each slide and covered with coverslip. For each immunostaining set, a negative control was carried
along to exclude the nonspecific binding of these antibodies. These
slides were observed under a fluorescent microscope or a Bio-Rad
scanning laser confocal microscope detected with two filter sets,
excitation/emission = 494/520 nm and excitation/emission = 505/533 nm, for FITC and rhodamine fluorescences, respectively.
 |
RESULTS |
Characterization of Flag-SPRR1 Fusion Protein Expression in
Transfected TBE Cells--
To verify whether the pFlag-SPRR1 construct
expresses the correct fusion protein, the synthesis of the fusion
protein was characterized in BEAS-2B (S) cell line by transfection.
BEAS-2B cell line expressed a very low level of SPRR1, and this cell
line was also deficient in forming a cross-linked envelope even after PMA/Ca2+(1.5 mM)
treatment.7 As shown in Fig.
1, in pFLAG-CMV2 vector transfected
cells, both anti-Flag and anti-SPRR1 antibodies did not stain a protein
band in the Western blot analysis. By contrast, if cells were
transfected with pFlag-SPRR1 construct, a protein band at a molecular
mass slightly larger than 20.4 kDa was stained by both anti-Flag and anti-SPRR1 antibodies. In a separate control study, if cells were transfected with pFlag-CMV2-BAP (bacterial alkaline phosphatase), a
protein band (at a molecular weight recommended by the supplier) was
stained by anti-Flag antibody but not by anti-SPRR1 antibody. This
result supports the in-frame nature of the cloning of SPRR1 gene onto
the pFlag-CMV2 vector.

View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Western blot and immunostaining analysis of
Flag-SPRR1 fusion protein from transfected BEAS-2B S6 cells.
pFlag-CMV2-SPRR1 (lane 2), pFlag-BAP (positive
control, lane 3), and pFlag-CMV2 (lane
1) plasmids DNA were transfected separately into 70-80%
confluent BEAS-2B S6 cells. A, Flag-SPRR1 construct;
B, Western blot analysis. Forty-eight hours after
transfection, the total protein was harvested and 20 µg of proteins
from each sample were separated by 15% SDS-PAGE and transferred onto
membranes. The proteins on the membrane were stained with anti-Flag or
anti-SPRR1 antibodies as described under "Materials and
Methods."
|
|
Because Flag sequence is not a native peptide in most mammalian cells,
the above study raises two concerns: can the fusion protein perform
identically to the native one, and is the fusion protein just as
stable. To address the first concern, we performed immunofluorescent
staining on passage 1 human TBE cultures after transfection with
pFlag-SPRR1 construct DNA. As shown in Fig. 2, A-C, prior to the
induction of cell cornification by PMA/Ca2+(1.5
mM), both anti-Flag (FITC) and anti-SPRR1 (rhodamine)
antibody recognized a similar immunofluorescent stain pattern in
transfected cells. A majority of stain was in cytoplasm, and both
patterns could be superimposed (Fig. 2C). In contrast, the
control experiments in which cultures were transfected with pFlag-CMV2
vector with no SPRR1 insert showed only rhodamine anti-SPRR1 antibody
staining (Fig. 2, D-F). The additional control experiment
with no primary antibody demonstrated no fluorescent stain on these
cultures (data not shown). This similarity was extended to cultures
24 h after PMA/Ca2+(1.5 mM) treatment
(Fig. 3, A-C) and to
cornified envelope preparation (Fig. 3, D-F). The
PMA/Ca2+(1.5 mM) treatment enhanced the
incorporation of both anti-Flag and anti-SPRR1 antigens into various
cornified envelopes which appeared on the apical side of cultured cell
layer (Fig. 3, A-C). In the cross-linked envelope
preparation (Fig. 3, D-F), anti-Flag antibody-specific
antigens could be seen. A majority of anti-Flag and anti-SPRR1 stains
were dense at the edge of the cross-linked envelope. For cultures
transfected with vector pFlag-CMV2 only, no Flag-specific antigen could
be seen (data not shown). These results provide the first direct
evidence that SPRR1 is incorporated into cross-linked envelopes of TBE
cells.

View larger version (50K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Double immunostaining analysis of Flag-SPRR1
fusion protein in transfected passage 1 human TBE cells. Passage 1 human TBE cells were transfected with pFlag-CMV2-SPRR1 plasmid
(A-C) or the control vector, pFlag-CMV2 (D-F).
Forty-eight hours later, cells were treated with
PMA/Ca2+(1.5 mM) for 24 h
(D-F) as described under "Materials and Methods",
whereas A-C were not treated. Cultures were fixed by
ice-cold methanol for 2 min, and a double immunostaining was carried
out. Both anti-Flag monoclonal antibody and anti-SPRR1 polyclonal
antibody were used as primary antibodies, which were followed by
staining with two secondary antibodies, FITC-conjugated goat anti-mouse
IgG antibody and rhodamine-conjugated anti-rabbit IgG antibody. A
Bio-Rad scanning laser confocal microscope was used to examine the
resultant FITC and rhodamine fluorescence. A and
D, anti-Flag antibody positive stained with FITC-conjugated
secondary antibody; B and E, same focal plane of
same field as panels A and D, respectively,
reacted positively with anti-SPRR1 antibody and stained with
rhodamine-conjugated secondary antibody; C and F,
composite picture merged for both FITC and rhodamine stains.
Bar = 5 µm.
|
|

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Double immunostaining analysis of Flag-SPRR1
fusion protein in transfected human TBE cells. Passage 1 human TBE
cells were transfected with pFlag-SPRR1 plasmid. Forty-eight hours
later, cells were treated with PMA/Ca2+ (1.5 mM) for 24 h, as described under "Materials and
Methods." At the end of transfection, portions of culture dishes were
fixed, and double immunostaining was carried out as described in Fig. 2
(A-C), whereas the other portion of culture dishes were
subjected to preparation for cornified envelope (D-F).
Purified cornified envelopes were cytospun down on glass slides and
subjected to double immunostaining similar to that described for Fig.
2. A Bio-Rad scanning laser confocal microscope was used to examine the
double immunostaining results. A and D, anti-Flag
antibody positive stained with FITC-conjugated secondary antibody;
B and E, same focal plane of same field as panels
A and D, respectively, reacted positively with
anti-SPRR1 antibody and stained with rhodamine-conjugated secondary
antibody; C and F, composite picture merged for
both FITC and rhodamine stains. Bar = 4 µm (for
A-C) or 10 µm (D-F).
|
|
To address the second concern, fusion protein stability, we looked into
the relative protein stability between SPRR1 and Flag-SPRR1 fusion
protein in transfected culture after cycloheximide treatment, which
blocked new protein synthesis. Western blot revealed that both
Flag-SPRR1 and SPRR1 proteins were quite stable in culture. More than
70% levels of SPRR1 and Flag-SPRR1 proteins, detected by anti-SPRR1
antibody, were still intact in cells 24 h after cycloheximide
treatment (data not shown). This result supports the notion that Flag
sequence does not alter the stability of SPRR1 peptide in transfected cells.
Sequence-dependent Incorporation of Flag-SPRR1 Fusion
Protein into Cross-linked Envelopes--
To elucidate the nature of
the amino acid sequence of SPRR1 protein that is involved in its
incorporation into cross-linked envelopes, various Flag fusion proteins
with different SPRR1 deletions were prepared. As shown in Fig.
4A, several deletions in the
SPRR1 gene were developed: a 30-amino acid sequence of the amino
terminus of SPRR1, D1-(31-89); a 16-amino acid sequence of carboxyl
terminus of SPRR1, D2-(1-73); the middle repetitive unit,
D3-(1-30/74-89); and both amino- and carboxyl-terminal peptides,
D4-(31-73). Using these fusion expression constructs for transfection,
we observed the synthesis of these fusion peptides in transfected cells
(Fig. 4B). As shown in the Western blot, both wild-type and
D1 transfected cells expressed higher levels of Flag-fusion proteins
than those cells transfected with D2, D3, or D4. There was an
additional protein band at a higher molecular weight than the predicted
one in both wild-type (pFlag-SPRR1) and D1 transfected cells. The nature of these bands is unknown. However, it was previously observed that heat treatment could cause a change of molecular weight on purified human SPRR1 protein (24, 25). The other possibility is a
simple overloading of the sample in the gel. In either case, the
deletion construct of D1 resulted in a decrease of molecular weight,
compared with the wild type fusion protein. Similarly, D2 and D3, under
different deletions, had different molecular weights than those of the
D1 and wild type fusion proteins. However, D4 fusion protein had a
molecular mass around 30 kDa, which was much larger than the predicted
mass. This was probably because of an unusually high proline content at
the 37% level in the D4 fusion protein, which might influence the
mobility of this fusion protein in gel. Interestingly, as compared with
the amino terminus deletion, the carboxyl terminus deleted mutants D2
and D4 had very low levels of expression in transfected cells. For D4,
as much as 100 µg of cell protein extract was needed for each Western blot to be detected by anti-Flag, as compared with the other
transfection, in which only 20 µg was enough.

View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
A, systematic deletion of SPRR1 gene
product. The wild type Flag-SPRR1 expression construct was used as a
template, and different fragments of SPRR1 cDNA coding region were
amplified by PCR. Amplified fragments were cloned into pFlag-CMV2
expression vector with the N termini of the fragments fused with Flag
sequence as described under "Materials and Methods." The positive
clones were confirmed by sequencing. D1-(31-89): N-terminal 30 amino
acids deleted; D2-(1-73): C-terminal 16 amino acids deleted;
D3-(1-30/74-89): middle 44 amino acids deleted; and D4-(31-73): N-
and C termini deleted. B, confirmation of deleted Flag-SPRR1
fragments expression after transient transfection. Human TBE cells were
transfected with various deleted Flag-SPRR1 fragments, and the proteins
were harvested 72 h after transfection for Western blot analysis.
For Flag-SPRR1, D1, D2, and D3 transfected cells, 20 µg of sample
protein was loaded onto each well. For D4, 100 µg of sample protein
was loaded.
|
|
The incorporation of deleted fusion proteins into cross-linked
envelopes was examined using these deletion-construct transfected cultures. As shown in Fig. 5, these
transfected cultures could be induced to form a cross-linked envelope,
and Flag-specific antigen could be detected in these cross-linked
envelope preparations. Both D2 and D3 fusion proteins were as effective
as wild type Flag-SPRR1 transfected cultures in the incorporation. In
contrast, the Flag antigen was greatly reduced in D1 transfected
cultures (Fig. 5, B and B'). These results
suggest that the amino-terminal region of SPRR1 is required for the
formation of cross-linked envelope. For D4-transfected cultures,
probably because of low abundance of D4 fusion protein in the culture,
no anti-Flag antigen was found in cross-linked envelope preparation
(data not shown).

View larger version (98K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Effects of SPRR1 deletion on the
incorporation of Flag-SPRR1 into cross-linked envelopes.
Flag-SPRR1 and various deleted Flag-SPRR1 fragment constructs were
transfected into cultured human TBE cells. Forty-eight hours after
transfection, the cells were induced to terminal squamous
differentiation as described under "Materials and Methods."
Cross-linked envelopes were purified and stained with mouse anti-Flag
antibody and goat anti-mouse IgG antibodies. Pictures were taken under
fluorescent (A-D) and phase-contrast microscope
(A'-D'). A, A':
Flag-SPRR1; B, B': D1; C,
C': D2; D, D': D3; D4: data not shown.
Bar = 10 microns.
|
|
In addition to deletion analysis, we examined the effect of insertion
on Flag-SPRR1 incorporation into cross-linked envelopes. Because
amino-terminal sequence is important to the incorporation, we inserted
a DNA fragment with a sequence not found in any SPRRs-one corresponding
to the 24-amino acid repetitive sequence of monkey MUC 2 (26),
PTSTPITTTTTTATPTPTPTSTQT, between Flag and SPRR1 in pFlag-SPRR1
construct. When passage 1 TBE cells were transfected with this
construct DNA, a protein with a molecular weight larger than Flag-SPRR1
fusion protein could be detected by both anti-Flag (Fig.
6) and anti-SPRR1 (data not included)
antibodies. This indicates that the coding region of pFlag-MUC2-SPRR1
expression construct is in frame with the correct amino acid sequence.
However, there was a persistent 2-fold decrease of fusion protein
expressed in cells transfected with the insertion construct, even
though a well controlled transfection protocol was carried out for this study (Fig. 6). As shown in Fig. 7 and
Table I, the insertion seemed to have a
stimulatory effect on Flag-fusion protein incorporation into the
cross-linked envelope preparation. Quantitative data based on the
amount of Flag-fusion protein produced in culture and incorporated into
cross-linked envelope preparation had suggested a 3-fold higher
incorporation rate for Flag-MUC2-SPRR1 than Flag-SPRR1. As shown in
Table I, there was 1.36-fold more anti-Flag fluorescent, positive
cross-linked envelope in pFlag-MUC2-SPRR1 than in pFlag-SPRR1 transfected cells. However, the Flag-MUC2-SPRR1 fusion protein expressed by the cells was only half of the Flag-SPRR1 protein (Table
I). Therefore, the relative incorporation efficiency of Flag-MUC2-SPRR1
was 2.72-fold that of Flag-SPRR1. A similar conclusion was obtained
from another passage 1 TBE culture derived from a different human
donor.

View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Western blot and immunostaining analysis of
Flag-SPRR1 and Flag-MUC2-SPRR1 expression in transient transfected
human TBE cells. A, Flag-MUC2-SPRR1 construct; B,
Western blot analysis. Flag-SPRR1 (lane 1) or
Flag-MUC2-SPRR1 (lane 2) expression construct DNA was
transfected into passage 1 human TBE cells. Seventy-two hours after
transfection, proteins were harvested for Western blot and
immunostaining with anti-Flag antibody. The density of the protein
bands was quantified by a densitometer.
|
|

View larger version (141K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
Effects of N-terminal insertion of MUC2
sequence on the incorporation of Flag-SPRR1 into cross-linked
envelopes. Cross-linked envelopes were purified from Flag-SPRR1
(A, A') or Flag-MUC2-SPRR1 (B,
B') transfected cells and stained with mouse anti-Flag and
goat anti-mouse IgG fluorescent antibodies. The pictures were taken
under fluorescent (A, B) and phase-contrast
(A', B') microscope. Bar = 10 microns.
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table I
Analysis of Flag-SPRR1 and Flag-MUC2-SPRR1 expression and incorporation
into cross-linked envelopes
Experiments were carried out as described in Fig. 6. Cell cornification
was induced by PMA/Ca2+ as described under "Materials and
Methods." Cornified envelopes were cytospun down on a glass slide and
stained with anti-Flag antibody, with stain from FITC-conjugated second
antibody. Data were obtained from one representative experiment. A
duplicated experiment was carried out in a separate passage 1 TBE
culture from a different human donor, with a similar result.
|
|
Effects of Site-directed Mutations on the Incorporation of
Flag-SPRR1 into Cross-linked Envelopes--
In a previous study,
Steinert and coworkers demonstrated that the residues Lys7,
Gln88, and Lys89 of SPRR1 were cross-linked
with loricrin in an envelope preparation from keratinocytes (13).
Therefore, the first task of our site-directed mutagenesis study was to
determine whether these mutations are also responsible for the
incorporation of Flag-SPRR1 into cross-linked envelopes. Using a PCR
approach, the following site-directed mutations on the SPRR1 gene were
developed. As shown in Fig.
8A, M1 construct contained the
change from Lys89 to Arg89, M2 for
Gln88 to Asp88, M3 for Lys87 to
Arg87, M4 for Gln88/Lys89 to
Asp88/Arg89, M5 for
Lys7/Gln88/Lys89 to
Arg7/Asp88/Arg89, and M6 for
Lys7 to Arg7. Western blot analysis revealed no
change in molecular weight; however, the level of expression in
transfected passage 1 human TBE cells varied (Fig. 8B).
Despite these variations, all the mutated fusion proteins were able to
incorporate into cross-linked envelopes (Fig.
9). These results suggest that the
residues on Lys7, Gln88, Lys87, and
Lys89 are not the only unique sites participating in the
cross-linked envelope formation. One noticeable change was that there
was a 5-fold decrease in the levels of M1, M4, and M5 fusion proteins as compared with the wild type and other mutated ones (Table
II). These M1, M4, and M5 constructs,
unlike the others, all had the mutation on Lys89 residue,
and despite a low level of expression, they were more efficient than
other Flag-fusion proteins in being incorporated into cross-linked
envelopes (Fig. 9 and Table II). These experiments were repeated in a
separate passage 1 TBE culture, derived from a different human donor,
with similar results.

View larger version (44K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
A, Site-directed mutation of SPRR1.
Residues Lys7, Lys87, Gln88, and
Lys89 of SPRR1 were mutated to Arg7,
Arg87, Gln88, and Arg89
individually or in different combinations as shown in graph panel
A, labeled M1 to M6. B, Western blot and immunostaining
analysis of various mutated Flag-SPRR1 expressions in transient
transfected passage 1 human TBE cells. Seventy-two hours after
transfection, proteins were harvested for Western blot and
immunostaining with anti-Flag antibody as described in the text. The
density of each protein band was quantified with densitometer.
|
|

View larger version (68K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 9.
Effects of various mutations on the
incorporation of SPRR1 into cross-linked envelopes. Cross-linked
envelopes were purified from various mutated Flag-SPRR1 transfected
cells and stained with mouse anti-Flag and goat anti-mouse IgG
fluorescent antibodies. Pictures were taken under fluorescent
(A-G) and phase-contrast (A'-G')
microscope. A, A' for Flag-SPRR1; B,
B' for M1; C, C' for M2; D,
D' for M3; E, E' for M4; F,
F' for M5; G, G' for M6.
Bar = 10 microns.
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table II
Analysis of mutated Flag-SPRR1 expression and incorporation into
cross-linked envelopes
Experiments were carried out as described in Table I and Fig. 8. Data
were obtained from one representative experiment. A duplicated
experiment has been carried out in a separate passage TBE culture
derived from a different human donor, with a similar result.
|
|
To further elucidate the nature of low level M1, M4, and M5 expression
in transfected cells, RT-PCR was used to evaluate the message levels of
these Flag-SPRR1 fusion genes. No difference was observed (data not
shown), suggesting that the low levels of M1, M4, and M5 proteins are
not because of a lack of message expression in these transfected cells.
Subsequently, cycloheximide was used to inhibit new protein synthesis,
and the turnover rates of these fusion proteins were assessed. As shown
in Fig. 10, both Flag-SPRR1 wild type
and M2 forms were quite stable in transfected culture cells, whereas M1
and M4 fusion proteins turned over rapidly, with a half-life of 24 h in culture. A similar result was observed with M5 protein (data not
shown). One common mutation in M1, M4, and M5, but not in M2 and M3,
was the mutation on the Lys89 of C-terminal region. These
results further support the critical role of this Lys89
residue in the regulation of SPRR1 protein turnover in cultured cells.

View larger version (74K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 10.
Effects of various mutations on the protein
half-life of Flag-SPRR1 protein in transfected cells. Cultures
were transfected as described in Fig. 9. Cycloheximide (10 µg/ml) was
added to these cultures, and cellular proteins were isolated at various
times as indicated after cycloheximide treatment. Western blot
analysis, using anti-Flag antibody, was carried out on gel with an
equal load of protein. A, composite blot of wild type
(W), M1, M2, and M4 fusion protein at the time before
cycloheximide treatment; B, time course study of W protein
level in culture; C, time course study of M1 protein level
in culture; D, time course study of M2 protein level in
culture; E, time course study of M4 protein level in
culture.
|
|
Because there are clusters of Gln amino acid in the amino-terminal
region which are potential substrates for cross-linked enzymes, we
carried out mutation studies on these clusters to see whether they are
involved in cornified envelope formation. As shown in Fig.
11, mutations on
Gln4-Gln5-Gln6 and
Gln22-Gln23-Gln24-Gln25
were performed. NM1 construct has mutations on the first Gln cluster
(Gln4-Gln5-Gln6), and NM2 construct
has mutations on the second Gln cluster
(Gln22-Gln26), whereas NM3 has mutations on
both Gln clusters (Fig. 11A). These mutations appeared to
have no significant effect on the level of Flag-fusion protein
expression (Fig. 11B); however, their incorporation seemed
to be affected by these mutations. As shown in Table
III, mutations on each Gln cluster
reduced the incorporation of fusion protein into cornified envelope by
half, and the incorporation was greatly reduced when both Gln clusters
were mutated, suggesting the participation of these Gln clusters in the
process of cell cornification.

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 11.
A, site-directed mutations on Gln
cluster of N-terminal region of Flag-SPRR1 protein. NM1 contained
mutations on Gln4-Gln5-Gln6
cluster, and NM2 contained mutations on
Gln22-Gln23-Gln24-Gln25
cluster, whereas NM3 had mutations on both Gln clusters. B,
Western blot analysis of these mutant fusion proteins in transfected
human TBE cells, using anti-Flag antibody.
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table III
Effects of mutations on the incorporation of Flag-SPRR1 protein into
cross-linked envelopes
Experiments were carried out as described in Table I and Fig. 11.
Cross-linked envelopes were prepared as described under "Materials
and Methods." Total envelopes were counted under a light microscope
on cytospin glass slides, while Flag-positive envelopes were counted
under a fluorescent microscope on the same slides after immunostaining.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
It has been suggested before, based on the sequence similarity of
amino and carboxyl termini between SPRRs and two other cornified envelope precursor proteins, involucrin and loricrin, that SPRR1 is
also a precursor protein of cross-linked envelopes (9-10, 13). Direct
evidence to support such a physical and biochemical link comes from two
different approaches. One is by immunostaining with anti-SPRR1 antibody
on cross-linked envelope preparation (18). The other is by proteolytic
digestion of cross-linked envelopes, followed by amino acid sequence
analysis of the isolated oligopeptide from digestion (8, 16). The
current study, utilizing the transfection with Flag-SPRR1 fusion
protein expression approach, further supports the theory that SPRR1 is
involved in cross-linked envelope formation. Additionally, our study
extends the observation, from those cell types that normally express
squamous function, to those of an organ, such as in a conducting
airway, which normally do not express squamous function except during
injury and repair. We demonstrated that the incorporation of Flag-SPRR1
fusion protein into cornified envelope is a
sequence-dependent phenomenon, especially depending on the
amino-terminal region of SPRR1 protein. This result suggests that SPRR1
is an active participant in cell cornification.
The other advantage of using the pFlag-SPRR1 transfection system is
that it allows for sequence analysis of the functional role of the
SPRR1 sequence at various regions and amino acid residues in the
participation of cross-linked envelope formation. We have observed two
distinct roles for the SPRR1 sequence in the regulation of cross-linked
envelope formation. One, described above, is that the incorporation of
SPRR1 into cross-linked envelopes of TBE cells depends on the
amino-terminal sequence. By deletion, we have demonstrated that
amino-terminal peptide is required for SPRR1 protein to participate in
cross-linked envelope formation. Deletions in other portions of SPRR1
gene, such as the carboxyl-terminal region and the middle repetitive
unit, had no effect. However, mutations on these residues,
Lys7, Gln88, and Lys89, which had
been shown to be involved in cross-linked envelope formation of skin
epidermal cells, had no inhibitory effects. This finding is consistent
with the theory that these residues are not the only sites involved in
cross-linked formation. We further examined the potential role of Gln
clusters of amino terminus in the cross-linked envelope formation.
Mutations on one of the Gln clusters (NM1 and NM2 constructs) reduced
the incorporation efficiency of fusion protein into cornified envelope
preparation (Table III). However, mutations on all these Gln clusters,
such as in NM3 construct (Fig. 11A), almost completely
eliminated the chance of incorporation. These results suggest that the
Gln clusters at the amino acid residues from 4 to 6 and 22 to 25 are
important sites for SPRR1 protein involved in cornified envelope
formation. Furthermore, the presence of multiple Gln residues in this N
terminus region suggests multiple cross-linked reactions during the
formation of cornified envelope. Recently, Candi et al. (27)
utilized a bacterial system to express human SPRR1 protein. Using the
purified recombinant product, they found that both G clusters of the
N-terminal region are used by transglutaminase for cross-link
formation. The first G cluster from the amino end is preferred by
transglutaminase 3, whereas the other G cluster is preferred by the
other enzyme of transglutaminase 1. This data is consistent with our
findings, further suggesting that these two G clusters are involved in
cross-link formation.
However, we also noticed that cross-linked envelope occurred in NM3
transfected cells, despite a low efficiency (Table III). This
cornification perhaps took place on amino acid residues other than Gln
clusters. In addition to these Gln clusters, there are 5 Gln and 2 Lys
residues in the amino-terminal region of SPRR1 (Fig. 4A).
These Gln and Lys residues are potential sites for transglutaminase
enzymatic reaction. Determining the potential role of these residues in
cornification may be difficult, since the initial attempt to mutate the
Lys7 residue failed to demonstrate any detrimental effect
on cell cornification. This difficulty is consistent with the idea that cross-linked formation can occur among any of these residues. Nevertheless, our results suggest a major role for these Gln clusters at the amino-terminal region of SPRR1 in cornified envelope formation.
The deletion analysis is largely consistent with proteolytic approaches
on cornified envelopes of keratinocytes (8, 16), except in the carboxyl
terminus. Steinert and Marekov (16) concluded that the three amino acid
residues at Lys7, Gln88, and Lys89
are involved in the cross-linked envelope formation of keratinocytes. Utilizing a similar approach, Robinson et al. (8) were able to recover the central fragments of SPRR1 but not the fragments of
Thr86-Lys89,
Thr86-Lys87, Met1-Lys7,
and Gln8-22Lys from trypsin-digested
cross-linked envelope preparation of keratinocyte cultures. The
recovery of the central fragments of SPRR1 from trypsin-digested
envelope preparation is consistent with the current deletion analysis,
which shows no effect on the incorporation of Flag fusion protein when
the middle repetitive sequence of SPRR1 is deleted.
However, the no-effect phenomenon on the carboxyl-end deletion in the
current study is difficult to understand. There are several possible
explanations. One relates to the difference in the cell type and the
culture condition used. Because TBE cells rarely form cross-linked
envelopes except under cell culture conditions, the cornified envelopes
formed may be different from those of keratinocytes in culture.
Consistent with this notion, Jarnik et al. (18) have
predicted differential incorporation of SPRR1 protein into cross-linked
envelope in different tissues, based on compositional analysis. The
other possibility is that the introduction of Flag sequence at the
amino-end of SPRR1 gene product may negatively interfere with the
accessibility of the carboxyl-end peptide for cross-linked enzyme. This
possibility is less likely since Flag is introduced on the proximal
end, rather than immediately adjacent to the carboxyl terminus;
therefore, the interference should be more pronounced at the amino end.
Furthermore, one would expect more interference to occur on the
molecule if an unrelated amino acid sequence were added on next to this
molecule. However, this study found no such interference on fusion
protein incorporation when a 24-amino acid sequence of MUC2 repetitive
unit was inserted on the amino terminus of SPRR1. On the contrary, the
efficiency was enhanced 3-fold in relation to this insertion.
Therefore, the introduction of Flag and MUC2 sequences in the current
study should not have any negative interference on the carboxyl end. Positive interference may occur on the amino end, which may explain an
unusually higher efficiency of incorporation for Flag-MUC2-SPRR1 fusion
protein. However, we cannot rule out this possibility based on the
current study. To do so, both SPRR1 and Flag-SPRR1 fusion proteins need
to be purified and used for the enzymatic kinetics analysis with
isolated transglutaminase enzyme.
The second distinct role of the SPRR1 sequence is that the
carboxyl-terminal sequence, especially the Lys89 residue,
is involved in the regulation of the level of fusion protein expression
in transfected culture. We noticed a great variation in the expression
of various fusion proteins in transfected cultures. Although the nature
of such a variation is unclear, the following pattern persistently
supports this conclusion. When cells were transfected with a Flag-SPRR1
fusion construct with a deletion on the carboxyl terminus, such as D2
and D4, the level of expression of these mutated fusion proteins
decreased profoundly (Fig. 4B). A similar result was
obtained when Lys89 residue at the carboxyl terminus was
mutated (Fig. 8B). These results support the theory that the
carboxyl end, especially the last lysine residue, is involved in the
maintenance of the level of fusion protein expressed in transfected
cultures. Cycloheximide treatment demonstrated the turnover of mutant
fusion protein when mutation of Lys89 was involved. In
contrast, there was very slow turnover of wild type and other mutant
proteins. One possible explanation is that the Lys89
residue and its surrounding region may protect SPRR1 from proteolytic digestion. Proteolysis will enhance the turnover of SPRR1 protein. To
protect against such a proteolytic action, the lysine residue, especially the amino group, can easily bind other molecules with an
acidic property. To prove this hypothesis, experiments are currently underway.
In summary, this study provides direct evidence that SPRR1 is
incorporated into cross-linked envelopes derived from human TBE cells,
an organ in which cells normally do not express squamous differentiation. Using the Flag-SPRR1 fusion protein expression approach, we observed two distinct roles for SPRR1 amino acid sequences
in the regulation of the life cycle of SPRR1 in transfected TBE cells:
the amino-terminal region of SPRR1 is essential for cross-linked
envelope incorporation, whereas the carboxyl end, especially the last
lysine residue, is essential for the expression level of the fusion
protein. Change of expression level in transfected cells can occur at
the synthesis and degradation level. Further study is needed to
determine the nature of the change of expression level. Interestingly,
however, the incorporation of mutated Flag-SPRR1 fusion protein into
cross-linked envelopes is generally enhanced despite low level of
expression. This phenomenon may suggest a coordinate regulation of the
life cycle of SPRR1 protein through the interactions between the SPRR1
amino acid sequences and the surrounding environment.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We express our appreciation to Drs. Jim
Yankaskas and John Lechner for kindly providing immortalized human TBE
cell lines for this study. The technical help of Yu Hau Zhao is greatly
appreciated. We thank Gary Konas and Philip Boerner for editing this manuscript.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported in part by National Institutes of
Health Grants ES06230, ES05707, ES09701, and HL35635 and by California Tobacco-Related Disease Research Program Grant 7RT-0145.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 all correspondence should be addressed at: Center for
Comparative Respiratory Biology and Medicine, University of California
at Davis, One Shields Ave., Davis, California 95616. Tel.:
530-752-2648; Fax: 530-752-8632; E-mail: rwu@ucdavis.edu.
2
G. An and R. Wu, unpublished data.
3
J. Deng, Y. Chen, and R. Wu, unpublished data.
4
J. Deng and R. Wu, unpublished data.
5
J. Deng, R. Pan, and R. Wu, unpublished observation.
6
J. Deng and R. Wu, submitted for publication.
7
J. Deng and R. Wu, unpublished observation.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
TBE, tracheobronchial epithelium;
SPRR, small proline-rich protein;
PMA, phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate;
CE, cross-linked envelope;
EGF, epidermal growth factor;
CMV, cytomegalovirus;
PCR, polymerase chain
reaction;
FITC, fluorescein isothiocyanate;
BAP, bacterial alkaline
phosphatase.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Reichert, U.,
Michel, S.,
and Schmidt, S.
(1993)
Molecular Biology of the Skin
, pp. 151-179, Academic Press, New York
|
| 2.
|
Rice, R. H.,
and Green, H.
(1979)
Cell
18,
681-694[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 3.
|
Baden, H. P.,
Kubilus, J.,
Philips, S. B.,
Kvedar, J. C.,
and Tahan, S. R.
(1987)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
925,
63-73[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 4.
|
Zettegren, J. G.,
Peterson, L. L.,
and Wuepper, K. D.
(1984)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
81,
238-242[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 5.
|
Simon, M.,
and Green, H.
(1985)
Cell
40,
677-683[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 6.
|
Simon, M.,
and Green, H.
(1984)
Cell.
36,
827-834[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 7.
|
Greenberg, C.,
Brickbichler, P.,
and Rice, R.
(1991)
FASEB J.
5,
3071-3077[Abstract]
|
| 8.
|
Robinson, N. A.,
Lapic, S.,
Welter, J. F.,
and Eckert, R. L.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
12035-12046[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 9.
|
Gibbs, S.,
Fijneman, R.,
Wiegant, J.,
Geurts van Kessel, A.,
van de Putte, P.,
and Backendorf, C.
(1993)
Genomics
16,
630-637[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 10.
|
Kartasova, T.,
van Muijen, G. N. P.,
van Pelt-Heerschap, H.,
and van de Putte, P.
(1988)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
8,
2204-2210[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 11.
|
Tesfaigzi, J.,
Th'ng, J.,
Hotchkiss, J. A.,
Harkema, J. K.,
and Wright, P. S.
(1996)
Am. J. Respir. Cell Mol. Biol.
14,
478-486[Abstract]
|
| 12.
|
An, G.,
Huang, T. H. M.,
Tesfaigzi, J.,
Garcia-Heras, J.,
Ledbetter, D. H.,
Carlson, D. M.,
and Wu, R.
(1992)
Am. J. Respir. Cell Mol. Biol.
7,
104-111
|
| 13.
|
Steinert, P. M.,
and Marekov, L. N.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
2021-2030[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 14.
|
Candi, E.,
Melino, G.,
Mei, G.,
Tarcsa, E.,
Chung, S.,
Marekov, L. N.,
and Steinert, P. M.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
26382-26390[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 15.
|
Backendorf, C.,
and Hohl, D.
(1992)
Nat. Genet.
2,
91[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 16.
|
Steinert, P. M.,
and Marekov, L. N.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
17702-17711[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 17.
|
Steinert, P. M.,
Kartasova, T.,
and Marekov, L. N.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
11758-11769[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 18.
|
Jarnik, M.,
Kartasova, T.,
Steinert, P. M.,
Lichti, U.,
and Steven, A. C.
(1996)
J. Cell Sci.
109,
1381-1391[Abstract]
|
| 19.
|
Wu, R.,
Groelke, J. W.,
Chang, L. Y.,
Porter, M. E.,
Smith, D.,
and Nettesheim, P.
(1982)
Growth of Cells in Hormonally Defined Media
, pp. 641-656, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, NY
|
| 20.
|
Robison, C. B.,
and Wu, R.
(1991)
J. Tissue Cult. Method.
13,
95-102
|
| 21.
|
Yankaskas, J. R.,
Haizlip, J. E.,
Conrad, M.,
Koval, D.,
Lazarowski, E.,
Paradiso, A. M.,
Rinehart, C. A., Jr.,
Sarkadi, B.,
Schlegel, R.,
and Boucher, R. C.
(1993)
Am. J. Physiol.
264,
C1219-C1230[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 22.
|
Ke, Y.,
Reddel, R. R.,
Gerwin, B. I.,
Miyashita, M.,
McMenamin, M.,
Lechner, J. F.,
and Harris, C. C.
(1988)
Differentiation
38,
60-66[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 23.
|
Huang, T. H.,
Ann, D. K.,
Zhang, Y. J.,
Chang, A. T.,
Crabb, A. T.,
and Wu, R.
(1994)
Am. J. Respir. Cell Mol. Biol.
10,
192-201[Abstract]
|
| 24.
|
Kartasova, T.,
Darwiche, N.,
Kohno, Y.,
Koizumi, H.,
Osada, S. I.,
Huh, N. H.,
Lichti, U.,
Steinert, P. M.,
and Kuroki, T.
(1996)
J. Invest. Dermatol.
106,
294-304[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 25.
|
Kartasova, T.,
and van de Putte, P.
(1988)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
8,
2195-2203[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 26.
|
An, G.,
Luo, G.,
and Wu, R.
(1994)
Am. J. Respir. Cell Mol. Biol.
10,
546-551[Abstract]
|
| 27.
|
Candi, E.,
Tarcesa, E.,
Idler, W. W.,
Kartasova, T.,
Marekov, L. N.,
and Steinert, P. M.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
7226-7237[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
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:

|
 |

|
 |
 
N. G. Sandler, M. M. Mentink-Kane, A. W. Cheever, and T. A. Wynn
Global Gene Expression Profiles During Acute Pathogen-Induced Pulmonary Inflammation Reveal Divergent Roles for Th1 and Th2 Responses in Tissue Repair
J. Immunol.,
October 1, 2003;
171(7):
3655 - 3667.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
H. Vuong, T. Patterson, P. Adiseshaiah, P. Shapiro, D. V. Kalvakolanu, and S. P. M. Reddy
JNK1 and AP-1 regulate PMA-inducible squamous differentiation marker expression in Clara-like H441 cells
Am J Physiol Lung Cell Mol Physiol,
February 1, 2002;
282(2):
L215 - L225.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. Marshall, M. J. Hardman, K. M. Nield, and C. Byrne
Differentially expressed late constituents of the epidermal cornified envelope
PNAS,
November 6, 2001;
98(23):
13031 - 13036.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|