|
Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M109110200 on October 10, 2001
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 276, Issue 50, 47421-47433, December 14, 2001
Carcinoembryonic Antigen Cell Adhesion Molecule 1 Directly Associates with Cytoskeleton Proteins Actin and
Tropomyosin*
Detlef
Schumann ,
Charng-Jui
Chen ,
Bruce
Kaplan§, and
John E.
Shively ¶
From the Division of Immunology and the
§ Division of Biology, Beckman Research Institute of the
City of Hope, Duarte, California 91010
Received for publication, September 20, 2001
 |
ABSTRACT |
CEA cell adhesion molecule 1 (CEACAM1), a type 1 transmembrane and homotypic cell adhesion protein belonging to the
carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) gene family and expressed on epithelial
cells, is alternatively spliced to produce four major isoforms with
three or four Ig-like ectodomains and either long (CEACAM1-L) or short (CEACAM1-S) cytoplasmic domains. When murine MC38
(methylcholanthrene-induced adenocarcinoma 38) cells were
transfected with human CEACAM1-L and stimulated with sodium
pervanadate, actin was found to co-localize with CEACAM1-L at cell-cell
boundaries but not in untreated cells. When CEACAM1-L was
immunoprecipitated from pervanadate-treated MC38/CEACAM1-L
cells and the associated proteins were analyzed by two-dimensional gel
analysis and mass spectrometry, actin and tropomyosin, among other
proteins, were identified. Whereas a glutathione
S-transferase (GST) fusion protein containing the L-isoform (GST-Cyto-L) bound poorly to F-actin in a
co-sedimentation assay, the S-isoform fusion protein (GST-Cyto-S)
co-sedimented with F-actin, especially when incubated with G-actin
during polymerization (KD = 7.0 µM).
Both GST-Cyto-S and GST-Cyto-L fusion proteins bind G-actin and
tropomyosin by surface plasmon resonance studies with binding constants
of 0.7 × 10 8 and 1.0 × 10 7
M for GST-Cyto-L to G-actin and tropomyosin, respectively,
and 3.1 × 10 8 and 1.3 × 10 7
M for GST-Cyto-S to G-actin and tropomyosin, respectively.
Calmodulin or EDTA inhibited binding of the GST-Cyto-L fusion protein
to G-actin, whereas calmodulin and G-actin, but not EDTA, stimulated binding to tropomyosin. A biotinylated 14-amino acid peptide derived from the juxtamembrane portion of the cytoplasmic domain of CEACAM1-L associated with both G-actin and tropomyosin with
KD values of 1.3 × 10 5 and
1.8 × 10 5 M, respectively. These
studies demonstrate the direct interaction of CEACAM1 isoforms with
G-actin and tropomyosin and the direct interaction of CEACAM1-S with
F-actin.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
CEACAM11 (biliary
glycoprotein, CD66a) is a member of the carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA)
family, which in turn belongs to the Ig superfamily (1-4). Alternative
splicing of the transcripts of a single gene results in expression of
at least four CEACAM1 isoforms (5, 6), all of which contain a
transmembrane region, followed by a 74-amino acid long (CEACAM1-L) or a
14-amino acid short (CEACAM1-S) cytoplasmic domain. CEACAM1 is a highly
glycosylated type 1 transmembrane protein expressed on the surface of
epithelial, endothelial, and granulocytic cells (7). The human as well as the rat and mouse isoforms of CEACAM1 have been characterized as
homotypic cell adhesion molecules (8, 9). Murine CEACAM1 also functions
as a receptor for murine hepatitis virus (10), whereas human CEACAM1
can bind bacterial membrane proteins from Escherichia coli,
Salmonella typhimurium, or Neisseria gonorrhoeae (11,
12). CEACAM1 expression is down-regulated in human colon (13) and
prostate (14) cancer and in 30% of breast cancers (15). Transfection
of rat CEACAM1-L into a human tumorigenic prostate cell line rendered
the cells non-tumorigenic in nude mice (16), suggesting a tumor
inhibitory function of CEACAM1. Transfection of human CEACAM1-L into
the breast cancer cell line MCF7 leads to massive apoptosis when the
cells are cultured in three-dimensional matrigel (17). The effect of
the ratio of cytoplasmic domain isoforms on tumorigenicity reveals that
an excess of the murine CEACAM1-L over the CEACAM1-S isoform is
dominant and renders murine colon adenocarcinoma CT51 cells
non-tumorigenic (18).
To understand the biological function of the two isoforms, studies have
focused on the identification of cellular proteins interacting with the
cytoplasmic domain of CEACAM1-L. CEACAM1-L has been shown to be
phosphorylated in vitro on its tyrosine as well as its
serine and threonine residues (19), in neutrophils after antibody
binding (20), or in hepatocytes after activation of the insulin
receptor (21, 22). The reported association of human CEACAM1-L or its
murine and rat homologues with Src family kinases (23, 24) as well as
the protein-tyrosine phosphatases SHP-1 (25) and SHP-2 (26) suggests a
signal transduction role for CEACAM1-L. Along with interactions with
kinases and phosphatases, rat CEACAM1 isoforms have been shown to bind
calmodulin (27). Calmodulin is a cytoplasmic regulator of enzymatic and
cytoskeletal functions in cells, and its direct association to the long
and the short cytoplasmic domain of human, rat, or mouse CEACAM1
synthetic peptides has been reported (28). Most recently, binding of
the cytoplasmic domain of rat CEACAM1-L to actin has been reported (29,
30). Sadekova et al. (30) have shown that when Swiss 3T3
cells are microinjected with murine CEACAM1-L, Rho GTPase activation is
required for localization to cell-cell boundaries and co-localization
with actin filaments.
To gain more direct evidence of the interaction of CEACAM1-L with the
cytoskeleton, we transfected murine MC38 cells with human CEACAM1-L and
showed that actin and tropomyosin, among other proteins, were
immunoprecipitated with CEACAM1 from MC38/CEACAM1-L cells stimulated
with sodium pervanadate, a treatment that caused tyrosine
phosphorylation of CEACAM1-L. In agreement with the requirement for
tyrosine phosphorylation, co-sedimentation studies showed that a
GST-Cyto-L fusion protein does not co-sediment with F-actin. However,
the GST-Cyto-S fusion protein does co-sediment with F-actin, especially
if incubated with G-actin during polymerization to F-actin. Surface
plasmon resonance binding studies with both the GST-Cyto-L and
GST-Cyto-S fusion proteins showed direct binding to both G-actin and
tropomyosin. Similar studies using synthetic peptides from the
juxtamembrane region of the L-isoform cytoplasmic domain show binding
to G-actin. From these studies, we conclude that G-actin and
tropomyosin share at least one binding site in the juxtamembrane region
of the long cytoplasmic domain. Calmodulin, which has been previously
shown to bind to this region (27, 28), abrogates binding of both actin
and tropomyosin, suggesting a regulatory function of this protein in
the association of CEACAM1 cytoplasmic domains to the cytoskeleton.
Taken together, these studies provide important clues to the
differential function of the CEACAM1 cytoplasmic isoforms on the
tumorigenicity of epithelial cells.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Transfection and Cell Culture--
Murine MC38 cells
(methylcholanthrene-induced adenocarcinoma) were transfected
with full-length human CEACAM1-L cDNA (6) inserted into the pH
-actin vector (31), transfected with Lipofectin (Life Technologies,
Inc.), and selected in 0.1-1.0 mg/ml G418 for 8 weeks. The cells were
negative prior to transfection and uniformly positive for CEACAM1-L
after transfection and selection in G418. Transfected cells were grown
to confluency in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's high glucose medium with
10% fetal calf serum before each experiment. Cells (1 × 107 cells/ml) were treated with sodium pervanadate (10 mM H2O2 and 0.1 mM
Na3VO4) for 15 min at 37 °C in 5%
CO2 in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's high glucose medium
with 10% fetal calf serum. Cells were harvested by resuspension in
Dulbecco's modified Eagle's high glucose medium without fetal calf serum.
Antibodies, Recombinant Proteins, and Synthetic
Peptides--
The murine anti-CD66 mAb T84.1, which recognizes an
epitope in the extracellular NH2-terminal domain of human
CEACAM1, was used for immunoprecipitation and immunoblotting (32). The
murine anti-phosphotyrosine mAb 4G10 (Upstate Biotechnology, Inc.) was used for immunoblotting. Horseradish peroxidase-labeled goat anti-mouse antibody (Pierce) was used for immunoblot detection. Unless mentioned, all proteins and chemicals were obtained from Sigma. Purified rabbit
muscle actin for BIAcore binding experiments was obtained from
Cytoskeleton Inc. and polymerized according to the manufacturer's instructions. GST-cytofusion proteins containing the 74 or 14 amino
acids of the cytoplasmic domains of CEACAM1-L or -S, respectively, were
amplified from CEACAM1 cDNAs (6) by polymerase chain reaction with
primers incorporating 5'-BamHI and 3'-EcoRI sites
and subcloned into pGEX-4T-2 (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) for
expression of GST-Cyto fusion proteins. The nucleotide sequences of
Cyto-L and Cyto-S correspond to nucleotides 1423-1656
and1423-1447/1502-1520 (including stop codons), respectively, of the
Barnett et al. (33) report. GST-Cyto fusion proteins were
bacterially expressed and purified on glutathione-agarose according to
the manufacturer's instructions. The size of the GST-Cyto fusion
proteins was confirmed by SDS-gel electrophoresis and matrix-assisted
laser desorption ionization/time of flight-MS. Synthetic peptides
containing 14 amino acids adjacent to the transmembrane domain of the
CEACAM1 long cytoplasmic domain or the complete CEACAM1 short
cytoplasmic domain were synthesized using Fmoc chemistry with an
amino-terminal biotin residue linked to the peptide via a Gly-Gly
linker (Table I). The conditions for
coupling biotin are briefly described as follows: biotin (122 mg, 0.5 mmol) was dissolved in 1 ml of Me2SO and 1 ml of
dimethylformamide, 0.5 M 1-hydroxybenzotriazole, reacted with 0.5 ml of 1 M dicyclohexylcarbodiimide in
dichloromethane for 1 h, filtered to remove the
precipitated urea, and added to the peptide/solid support (0.1 mmol)
containing a free amino group. Coupling was performed at 65 °C for
15 min, the resin washed with dimethylformamide,
dichloromethane, dried, and cleaved in the usual manner.
O-Benzyl-protected phosphoserine and phosphothreonine Fmoc
amino acids were purchased from Novabiochem and coupled to the
peptide/solid support (0.1 mmol) according to the manufacturer's instructions. Peptides were purified to >95% purity by reversed-phase HPLC on a Poros RP2 or Oligo R3 column and their masses confirmed by
electrospray ionization mass spectrometry on a Finnigan LCQ ion
trap mass spectrometer.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table I
Synthetic peptides used in SPR experiments
Peptides were synthesized at the City of Hope as described under
"Experimental Procedures." All peptides start with the linker
biotin-Gly-Gly (BGG) and continue through cytoplasmic
residues 419-432 from either the long (Cyto-L) or short (Cyto-S)
cytoplasmic domains. Thr(P) and Ser(P) denote phosphorylated threonine
and serine, respectively. Cyto-L-scrambled has the same amino acids
composition as Cyto-L-(419-432) but in a random order.
|
|
Confocal Microscopy--
Immunofluorescent staining of
CEACAM1-L-transfected MC38 cells with antibodies and subsequent
confocal microscopy experiments were performed according to Griffiths
(34). Cells (1 × 104) were grown for 2 or 24 h
at 37 °C on polylysine-coated glass coverslips, treated or untreated
with pervanadate (0.1 mM, 15 min), and fixed with 2%
paraformaldehyde (w/v) in phosphate-buffered saline. Fixed cells were
permeabilized with 0.01% saponin (w/v), 0.25% gelatin (v/v), and
0.1% Nonidet P-40 (v/v) in phosphate-buffered saline and then stained
with Oregon Green-conjugated phalloidin (Molecular Probes) and
anti-CEACAM1 antibody (T84.1) followed by goat anti-mouse Texas
Red-conjugated antibody (Molecular Probes). Imaging was performed on a
Leica TCS-SP spectral confocal microscope.
Immunoprecipitation and Gel
Electrophoresis--
Immunoprecipitation of CEACAM1-L from
CEACAM1-L-transfected MC38 cells was performed using the anti-CD66 mAb
T84.1 and protein G-agarose (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) as described
in the manufacturer's manual. Harvested cells were frozen overnight at
70 °C and extracted with 1 ml of lysis buffer (50 mM
Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 150 mM NaCl, 1% Nonidet P-40 (v/v),
0.5% sodium deoxycholate (w/v)) by vortexing for 30 s at 4 °C.
Preclearing of the cell lysates was performed by incubation for 1 h at 4 °C with 4 µg of mAb T84.66 (an isotype matched anti-CEA
antibody), addition of 20 µl of protein G-agarose, and continued
incubation for 2 h at 4 °C. Following the preclearing, 4 µg
of mAb T84.1 was added to the lysates for 2 h, followed by addition of 20 µl of protein G-agarose and incubation overnight at
4 °C. Precipitated proteins were recovered by incubation of the
slurry for 1 h at 37 °C in solubilization buffer (9 M urea, 4% Nonidet P-40, 2% ampholytes, pH 2-11, 2%
-mercaptoethanol) and subsequently stored at 20 °C. Samples
were analyzed by one-dimensional SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis
on 8-16% Tris glycine gradient gels (NOVEX) as described previously
(35). Two-dimensional gel electrophoresis was performed as described by
O'Farrell (36) using the Bio-Rad Protean IIxi system. Samples were
analyzed in the first dimension on a pH 2-11 gradient (Sigma
ampholytes), followed by a separation on a 10% SDS-polyacrylamide gel
in the second dimension. Polyacrylamide gels were silver-stained
according to Shevchenko et al. (37). For immunoblotting,
proteins were transferred onto a nitrocellulose membrane (Bio-Rad)
using the Bio-Rad semidry blotting system and subsequently probed with
the monoclonal antibodies T84.1 or 4G10 as described previously (38). Visualization of immunocomplexes was performed by incubation of the
membranes with Pierce SuperSignal CL/horseradish peroxidase chemiluminescence solution and subsequent exposure of Kodak BIOMAX-MR autoradiography films.
Mass Spectrometry--
Silver-stained protein spots were excised
from two-dimensional gels and in-gel digested with trypsin (Promega) as
described by Shevchenko et al. (37). All solutions were
prepared fresh prior to the digestion using HPLC-grade chemicals
(Sigma) and 0.2 µm of filtered MilliQ water. To ensure successful
tryptic digestion, two additional washing steps involving dehydration of the gel pieces with 100% acetonitrile (MeCN) and rehydration using
100 mM NH4HCO3 were added before
and after the reduction/alkylation step. Extracted peptides were
concentrated in a SpeedVac and resuspended in 10 µl of 0.1%
trifluoroacetic acid. To minimize introduction of contaminating
proteins, all in-gel digestion steps were carried out in a laminar flow
hood. LC/MS/MS analyses were performed using an Apple Macintosh
controlled microcapillary HPLC system developed at the City of Hope
(39). The standard gradient was from 2 to 92% Buffer B over 120 min
using low TFA buffers (Buffer A, 0.02% trifluoroacetic acid; Buffer B,
90% MeCN, 0.014% trifluoroacetic acid) at 50 p.s.i. Sample
injection was performed at 1500 p.s.i. for 2 min followed by 10 min of washing at high pressure with Buffer A for desalting and removal
of contaminating components. Prior to the injection of the preformed
gradient, the system pressure was reduced to 50 p.s.i. over 1 min.
The 150-µm inner diameter × 350-µm outer diameter on-line
microspray needles were pulled using a laser-based micropipette puller
(Sutter Instrument Co.) to a terminal inner diameter of ~5 µm. The
tip was packed at 4000 p.s.i. using a Zorbax, 5 µm,
C18 packing as described previously by Davis et
al. (39). The packed tip was connected to a 75-µm inner
diameter × 350-µm outer diameter transfer line using a PEEK capillary Tee (Valco) and graphite ferrules. A 0.3-mm gold wire was
introduced through the off-axis inlet to apply the electrospray potential. All mass spectral analyses were performed using a Finnigan LCQ ITMS equipped with a custom microspray interface. The
LCQ was operated under Automatic Gain Control and enabled
dynamic exclusion in the Navigator view. The automatic gain control
targets are as follows: full MS, 5e + 007; MSn, 2e + 007, and
Zoom MS, 2.55e + 006. The default maximum injection time was 500 ms
with a single microscan count.
Co-sedimentation Assays--
Co-sedimentation assays were
performed with the actin protein binding kit (Cytoskeleton) essentially
according to the manufacturer's instructions. Briefly, G-actin (2.7 µM) was polymerized in the presence or absence of
the GST-Cyto fusion proteins (2-18 µM) for 60 min at
28 °C and pelleted at 150,000 × g for 1 h in a
Beckman L8-M ultracentrifuge using an SW50.1 rotor. The pellets and
supernatant fractions were run on 12% polyacrylamide SDS gels and
stained with Coomassie Blue. Bands were scanned on a Bio-Rad GS710
calibrated densitometer, integrated, and expressed as GST-Cyto-S fusion
protein/actin ratios. Experiments were repeated 3 times, and the
results were plotted as GST-Cyto-S fusion protein/Actin
versus [GST-Cyto-S fusion protein] (Hill plots).
The KD was determined from the [GST-Cyto-S fusion
protein] at half-maximal binding. Controls included -actinin
(positive binding), BSA (negative binding), and the GST only protein
(negative binding).
SPR Analysis--
Biomolecular interaction analyses were carried
out in HBS Buffer (150 mM NaCl, 0.05% (v/v) Surfactant
P20, 10 mM HEPES, pH 7.4) using the BIAcore® 2000 (BIAcore, Inc.). Depending on the experiment, CaCl2 at
varying concentrations or 10 mM EDTA was added to the HBS.
G-actin or tropomyosin were immobilized on a CM5-rg sensorchip
(BIAcore) using the Amine Coupling Kit (BIAcore). The surface of the
sensorchip was activated with 30 µl of 100 mM
N-ethyl-N'-(dimethylaminopropyl)carbodiimide
hydrochloride, 400 mM N-hydroxysuccinimide using
a flow rate of 5 µl/min. For immobilization of the protein, 1 µg of
G-actin or 5 µg of tropomyosin in 100 µl of 10 mM
sodium acetate, pH 4.0, were applied (flow rate, 5 µl/min).
Subsequently, the sensorchip was deactivated with 30 µl of 1 M ethanolamine hydrochloride, pH 8.5 (flow rate, 5 µl/min), and conditioned with 10 µl of 100 mM HCl (flow
rate, 5 µl/min). Binding studies and regeneration of the chip surface between injections were carried out at a flow rate of 20 µl/min unless otherwise noted. Samples were diluted in HBS Buffer immediately prior to injection. Between sample injections the surface was regenerated with 15 µl of 6 M guanidine HCl followed by
three 30-s injections of HBS.
 |
RESULTS |
Identification of CEACAM1-L-associated
Proteins--
Previous studies (30) demonstrated that murine CEACAM1-L
interacts with the cytoskeleton in a Rho kinase-dependent
manner. This study suggested that the interaction was indirect,
requiring CEACAM1-L modification or interaction through associated
proteins. Possible modifications for CEACAM1-L such as phosphorylation
on one or both of its tyrosines located in the cytoplasmic domain have
been shown previously to affect its biological properties (18, 26, 30).
We explored these possibilities further using murine MC38 cells
transfected with human CEACAM1-L. This murine colon cancer cell line,
in contrast to most human colon cancer cell lines, does not express
CEACAM1, and when transfected with the human CEACAM1-L cDNA and
grown for 24 h on polylysine-coated glass slides, the cell
line expressed high levels of CEACAM1-L that localize to cell-cell
junctions with little evidence of co-localization with actin
(red only, Fig.
1C). Actin is found mainly at
the periphery of the cells in stress fibers (green only).
When these cells were treated with sodium pervanadate, a treatment
which increases tyrosine phosphorylation by inhibition of tyrosine
phosphatases (40, 41), CEACAM1-L remained at cell-cell boundaries and
co-localized with actin (yellow, Fig. 1D). These
results show that pervanadate treatment causes CEACAM1-L to associate
with the actin cytoskeleton in a phosphorylation-dependent
manner. In contradiction to our results, Sadekov et al. (30)
showed extensive co-localization of murine CEACAM1-L with actin in
murine CT-51 carcinoma cells; however, their cells exhibited a rounded
morphology with extensive cortical actin. Indeed, when our transfected
cells were grown for only 2 h on glass slides, they exhibited a
rounded morphology, cortical actin, and co-localization of actin with
CEACAM1-L at the cell-cell junctions (Fig. 1, A and
B). Because this does not mimic the morphology of these
cells when grown on plastic, we believe the results shown in Fig. 1,
C and D, for cells grown on slides for 24 h
are more relevant.

View larger version (73K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Confocal microscopy of MC38 cells
transfected with CEACAM1-L before and after treatment with
pervanadate. The cells were stained with Oregon Green-phalloidin
(green) and anti-CEACAM1 antibody T84.1 followed by Texas
Red-conjugated anti-mouse IgG. A, cells grown on plastic for
2 h prior to treatment with pervanadate. Note rounded morphology
and cortical actin (green) co-localizes with CEACAM1-L
(yellow) at cell-cell junctions. B, cells grown
on plastic for 2 h and treated with pervanadate (15 min). Results
are similar to A. C, cells grown on plastic
24 h prior to treatment with pervanadate. Actin (green)
is found primarily in stress fibers at the cell periphery and CEACAM1
(red) at cell-cell junctions. Little or no co-localization
(yellow) is evident. D, cells grown on plastic
and treated with pervanadate for 15 min. Co-localization of actin and
CEACAM1 at cell-cell junctions (yellow).
|
|
Pervanadate has been shown previously to stimulate tyrosine
phosphorylation of murine CEACAM1-L (26). To provide more direct evidence of CEACAM1-L tyrosine phosphorylation and association of
CEACAM1-L with the cytoskeleton, CEACAM1-L was immunoprecipitated from
MC38/CEACAM1-L cell lysates, before and after pervanadate treatment,
using the mAb T84.1. This antibody binds to the extracellular amino-terminal domain of CEACAM1 as well as other members of the human
CEA family. However, it does not cross-react with murine CEACAM1 and is
therefore specific for human CEACAM1-L in our model system. To minimize
contamination of the immunoprecipitates with proteins binding
nonspecifically to either antibody or protein G-agarose, the cell
lysates were precleared for 3 h with the CEA-specific mAb T84.66
and protein G-agarose prior to the immunoprecipitation with mAb T84.1.
The anti-CEA mAb T84.66 is an isotype-matched, control antibody that
does not react with CEACAM1-L.
Successful immunoprecipitation of CEACAM1-L was verified by
immunoblotting immunoprecipitates with anti-CEACAM1 antibody T84.1 (Fig. 2A). The 15-min
treatment of the cells with sodium pervanadate led to about a 2-fold
difference in the amount of immunoprecipitated CEACAM1-L. This
difference may be due to the decreased solubility of the
immunoprecipitates in solubilization buffer after pervanadate treatment. Due to this difference we may have underestimated the amount
of co-immunoprecipitated proteins by a factor of 2 in subsequent experiments. Immunoblotting was also used for detection of tyrosine phosphorylation using the anti-phosphotyrosine mAb 4G10 (Fig. 2B). Precipitates from untreated cells showed no detectable
tyrosine phosphorylation of CEACAM1-L, either due to the lack of
tyrosine phosphorylation or the activity of tyrosine phosphatases in
the lysates of pervanadate untreated cells. However, upon treatment of
the cells with sodium pervanadate, tyrosine phosphorylation of
CEACAM1-L was readily detectable, either due to in vivo
inhibition of phosphatases, activation of tyrosine kinases, or
both.

View larger version (43K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Immunoprecipitation of CEACAM1-L from
CEACAM1-L-transfected MC38 cells. Cells (5 × 107) were harvested before (A, lanes 1-3;
B, lanes 1-3; and C, lane 1) or after
15 min of sodium pervanadate treatment (A, lanes
4 and 5; B, lanes 4 and
5; and C, lane 2) and subjected to
immunoprecipitation with mAb T84.1. Immunoprecipitates from 1 × 107 cells were then analyzed on 10% SDS-polyacrylamide
gels and subsequently either transferred to nitrocellulose
(A and B) or silver-stained (C).
A, T84.1 immunoblot. Lanes 1-3, before sodium
pervanadate treatment; lanes 4 and 5, after
sodium pervanadate treatment (0.1 mM, 15 min). Each lane
represents a separate experiment with identical amounts of protein
loaded. The position of CEACAM1-L (CC1) is shown with an
arrow. The band at 50 kDa is immunoprecipitated Ig heavy
chain. The results show about a 2-fold difference in the amount of
CEACAM1-L immunoprecipitated before and after pervanadate treatment.
B, 4G10 immunoblot. Lanes 1-3, before sodium
pervanadate treatment; lanes 4 and 5, after
sodium pervanadate treatment (0.1 mM, 15 min). Tyrosine
phosphorylation is only detectable in immunoprecipitates from sodium
pervanadate-treated MC38/CEACAM1-L cells (lanes 4 and
5). C, silver staining. Immunoprecipitates from
samples before (lane 1) and after (lane 2) sodium
pervanadate treatments are shown. The bands corresponding to
co-precipitated actin (A) and myosin (M) are
shown with arrows. The large band at 50 kDa is
immunoprecipitated Ig heavy chain.
|
|
Analysis of silver-stained SDS gels of immunoprecipitated samples
revealed the co-precipitation of two major proteins at 200 and 45 kDa
with CEACAM1-L (Fig. 2C) which correlate directly with the
increased tyrosine phosphorylation of CEACAM1-L due to pervanadate treatment. The identification of these proteins as myosin and actin is
based on further studies shown below. Whereas de novo co-precipitation of proteins occurred mainly for the 200- and 45-kDa
proteins, other proteins present in immunoprecipitates from untreated
cells co-precipitated in higher amounts after treatment of the cells
with sodium pervanadate (Fig. 2C). These results indicate
either a general phosphorylation event caused increased protein
association with CEACAM1-L or a specific tyrosine phosphorylation of
CEACAM1-L caused enhanced association of proteins to its phosphorylated cytoplasmic domain. These data do not distinguish the two
possibilities. The silver-stained gels do not reveal a band
corresponding to immunoprecipitated CEACAM1-L, which due to its high
level of glycosylation stains poorly with silver.
To obtain better resolution and identification of the
immunoprecipitated proteins, immunoprecipitates from cells before and after treatment with sodium pervanadate were further analyzed by
two-dimensional gel electrophoresis. Two-dimensional gel analysis of
immunoprecipitates from untreated cells revealed ~15 co-precipitated proteins, 5 of which were highly abundant (spots 1-5 in
Fig. 3A), and the remaining
were barely detectable even using silver staining. Upon treatment of
the cells with sodium pervanadate, the intensity of the co-precipitated
proteins (Fig. 3B) increased significantly (up to 5-fold). A
close analysis of the two gels suggests that no new spots appeared, but
many of the spots increased in intensity. Prominent among these were
spots 1, 2, 4, and 5, later identified as - and -actin, keratin,
and myosin, all components of the cytoskeleton. In addition to these
five prominent proteins visible in Fig. 3A, increased
co-precipitation of proteins 6-8 was observed (Fig. 3B).
Two of these proteins were later identified as tropomyosin (spot 6) and
vimentin (spot 7). From these immunoprecipitation studies, we conclude
pervanadate treatment leads to (a) increased tyrosine
phosphorylation of CEACAM1-L, and (b) increased binding of
co-precipitating proteins. These effects may be direct (due to
phosphorylation of CEACAM1-L) or mediated by other events caused by
pervanadate (indirect). However, because the results are specifically due to pervanadate treatment, we proceeded to identify the
CEACAM1-L-associated proteins.

View larger version (61K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Two-dimensional gel electrophoresis of
immunoprecipitates from CEACAM1-L-transfected MC38 cells. Cells
(1 × 108) were harvested before (A) or
after 15 min of sodium pervanadate treatment (B) and
subjected to immunoprecipitation with the mAb T84.1. Immunoprecipitates
were then analyzed on pH 2-11 IEF gels followed by 10%
SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. A, no pervanadate
treatment. Numbers indicate major spots (1-5).
B, sodium pervanadate-treated cells. Numbers
indicate spots shown in A and spots with higher intensity
compared with the untreated control. Spots identified by mass
spectrometry are indicate to the left.
|
|
Identification of CEACAM1-binding Proteins by LC/MS/MS--
Seven
of the most abundant spots were excised from the silver-stained
two-dimensional gel obtained from immunoprecipitates from the sodium
pervanadate-treated cells (Fig. 3B). The isolated protein
spots were subjected to in-gel digestion using modified porcine
trypsin. Following the extraction of the peptides and their
concentration, 50% of each sample were used for LC/MS/MS analysis.
Five of the seven selected proteins were identified as cytoskeletal
proteins (Table II) as follows: myosin heavy chain (spot 5),
vimentin (spot 7), the - and
-isoforms of actin (spots 1 and 2), and tropomyosin 2 (spot 6).
These proteins were identified with high confidence (Xcorr value >2 in
SEQUEST) and excellent sequence coverage (11-44%). The isoforms of
actin were identified based on their position on the two-dimensional
gel. The more basic - and -isoforms of actin are expressed in
most cells, whereas expression of the more acidic -actin isoform is
restricted to contractile muscle cells (43). Based on mass spectrometry
alone we were not able to identify peptides unique to either of the analyzed actin isoforms. Sufficient sequence information was obtained from spot 6 to positively identify it as tropomyosin isoform 2 (TM2).
The identification of five of the analyzed proteins as members of the
large and highly conserved family of cytoskeletal proteins demonstrates
their interaction with CEACAM1-L, especially after treatment of the
cells with sodium pervanadate. Two of the identified proteins were
cytokeratin (spot 4) and the IgG light chain (data not shown). The
finding of cytokeratin has to be interpreted with caution because this
is a ubiquitous contaminant in analyses of this type (due to human skin
particles in the air and on surfaces). The IgG light chain is from the
immunoprecipitating antibody and is co-eluted from the protein G
beads.
In these studies, the co-precipitation of myosin and tropomyosin with
actin is not unexpected, given their usual association in
motor-actomyosin fibers and the shape changes induced in these cells by
pervanadate. Scanning densitometry of the two-dimensional gels reveals
a 5-fold increase in actin, a 10-fold increase in myosin, and a 2-fold
increase in TM2 after pervanadate treatment. Although these data are
suggestive, they do not prove a direct association of the
phosphorylated form of CEACAM1-L with these members of the
cytoskeleton. As mentioned earlier, we believe that we have
underestimated the amount of co-precipitated proteins, because lesser
amounts of CEACAM1-L were immunoprecipitated in the pervanadate-treated
versus untreated cells (Fig. 2A). To gain further
insights into the potential associations of these proteins with
CEACAM1-L, we next attempted to show a direct association of the
cytoplasmic domain of CEACAM1-L with actin. We chose actin first
because of its prominent role in thin filaments. In later experiments
we also investigated the role of tropomyosin, because its interaction
with actin is well described and its interaction with CEACAM1-L
previously undescribed.
Co-sedimentation Assays for GST-Cyto Fusion Proteins with the
Cytoplasmic Domains of CEACAM 1 Isoforms to Actin--
To determine
whether F-actin directly associates with the cytoplasmic domain of
CEACAM1-L, we generated a GST fusion protein (GST-Cyto-L) containing
the L-isoform cytoplasmic domain (74 amino acids) fused to the carboxyl
terminus of GST and performed an F-actin co-sedimentation (spin down)
assay. In the standard actin co-sedimentation assay, the protein is
mixed with F-actin, the sample centrifuged, and the F-actin pellet
analyzed by SDS-gel electrophoresis for any associated proteins. When
we found that GST-Cyto-L did not co-sediment with pre-polymerized
F-actin (Fig. 4A), we
investigated the possibility that it could bind to G-actin in a
competitive manner, reducing the amount of F-actin formed during the
polymerization process. In this pre-polymerization assay, we found that
GST-Cyto-L fusion protein did not bind to F-actin and did not prevent
actin polymerization (Fig. 4A). Thus, these data agree with
our immunoprecipitation results that demonstrated low binding of
CEACAM1-L to the cytoskeleton in the absence of tyrosine
phosphorylation. These results further confirm the study of Sadekova
et al. (30) who showed that murine CEACAM-L did not bind to
F-actin in a spin-down assay.

View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Actin co-sedimentation analysis for GST
fusion proteins with cytoplasmic domains from the L- and S-isoforms of
CEACAM1. A, SDS gel analysis of pellets from
co-polymerized (lanes 1-3) versus prepolymerized
(lanes 4-6) actin. Lanes 1 and 4, GST
only. Lanes 2 and 5, GST-Cyto-L. Lanes
3 and 6, GST-Cyto-S. Arrows indicated
positions of actin (A), GST-Cyto-L (L),
GST-Cyto-S (S), and GST only (G). B,
SDS gel analysis of supernatants (lanes 1-3) and pellets
(lanes 4-6) from actin polymerized with control samples.
Lanes 1 and 4, GST only. Lanes 2 and
5, -actinin. Lanes 3 and 6, BSA.
Arrows indicate positions of -actinin (At),
BSA (B), actin (A), and GST only (G).
C, Hill plot for co-sedimentation actin polymerized in the
presence of the cytoplasmic S-isoform GST fusion protein. The pellets
were run on SDS gels, and the bands were quantitated by densitometry
and plotted as shown. The results (± error bars) are shown
for the sum of three experiments.
|
|
As a further control, we tested the binding of GST-Cyto-S to F-actin.
In the alternatively spliced variant, the cytoplasmic S-isoform is only
14 amino acids long and has no tyrosines. Surprisingly, GST-Cyto-S
bound F-actin strongly, especially when preincubated with G-actin in
the pre-polymerization assay (Fig. 4A). Negative controls
showed no binding of GST only or BSA to F-actin, and a positive control
showed binding of -actinin to F-actin (Fig. 4B). Because
GST-Cyto-S bound to F-actin in the co-polymerization assay, we
performed further studies on this fusion protein. When increasing
amounts of the GST-Cyto-S fusion protein were used in the
co-polymerization sedimentation assay, a KD of 7.0 µM was calculated (Fig. 4C). This analysis
(Hill plot) shows the usual saturation curve over the expected
concentration range for a membrane-expressed protein.
Because these studies suggested that the minimum sequence required for
actin binding was present in the cytoplasmic S-isoform which partially
overlaps the L-isoform, we synthesized peptides corresponding to this
sequence and compared their binding by SPR to the analogous sequence in
the L-form and to the binding of the GST-Cyto fusion proteins. The
above studies also suggested the possibility that one or both of the
isoforms bind G-actin but not in a competitive way (i.e. not
blocking polymerization to F-actin). Therefore, both fusion proteins
were tested for their ability to bind G-actin using SPR. SPR allows a
direct measurement of binding and dissociation kinetics and calculation
of KD from the ratio of the kinetic constants.
SPR Studies on the L-isoform--
G-actin was immobilized at a
binding level of 3 ng/mm2 on a BIAcore CM5-rg chip, based
on the assumption that an SPR response of 1000 relative units (RU)
translates to 1 ng/mm2 immobilized protein (44). Gel
filtration analysis of GST-Cyto-L revealed a single species of
143 kDa, corresponding to tetramers (GST alone shows a mixture
of dimers, tetramers, and multimers). Binding of the GST-Cyto-L fusion
protein to G-actin was measured at concentrations ranging from 0.25 to
2.5 µM (Fig.
5A). No binding of the GST
control was observed at the highest concentrations tested (10 µM was assumed for monomeric GST, although it is a mixture of oligomers). Because GST constitutes the bulk of the fusion
protein, this indicates that the 74-amino acid fusion domain is
responsible for the binding of GST-Cyto-L to G-actin. The regular kinetics of association and dissociation indicate that the binding is
specific. In addition, we showed that immobilized and regenerated G-actin binds DNase I (data not shown), a well established binding partner for native G-actin (45), and GST-Cyto-L bound equally well to
immobilized G-actin after the DNase I binding experiments. The
KD for the GST-Cyto-L fusion protein binding to
G-actin was determined as 0.74 × 10 8 M
(Table III).

View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Binding of the GST-Cyto-L fusion protein to
immobilized actin or tropomyosin. A, the GST-Cyto-L
fusion protein (50 µl of 0.25 and 2.5 µM diluted in HBS
buffer) was passed at 20 µl/min in the presence of 2 mM
CaCl2 over actin immobilized on a CM5 chip. GST (10 µM) was injected as a control. Each injection is followed
by HBS (dissociation phase). B, the GST-Cyto-L fusion
protein was passed over immobilized tropomyosin under the same
conditions.
|
|
Based on the work of Obrink and co-workers (28, 46) who showed binding
of calmodulin to synthetic peptides derived from the extreme
juxtamembrane cytoplasmic portion of rat CEACAM1-L and the entire
cytoplasmic domain of rat CEACAM1-S, we decided to synthesize and
further investigate the human equivalents of these peptides regarding a
possible interaction with immobilized G-actin. Peptides corresponding
to the cytoplasmic juxtamembrane sequence of the CEACAM1-L
(Cyto-L-(419-432)) or the complete sequence of the CEACAM1-S
cytoplasmic domain (Cyto-S-(419-432)), including an amino-terminal
biotin-Gly-Gly-sequence (Table I), were synthesized and tested for
binding by SPR to immobilized G-actin.
High binding was observed for the wild type long peptide
(Cyto-L-(419-432)) to G-actin at 0.5 (Fig.
6A) or 1.0 mM
(Table III). At this concentration, Cyto-L-(419-432) gave a RU of
880.5 to immobilized actin after 140 s injection time at a flow
rate of 20 µl/min (Table IV). Longer
injections indicated saturation was not achieved even at this
concentration, suggesting that only a small percentage of the peptide
was binding (data not shown). The calculated kon
and koff values were 5.86 M 1 s 1 and 7.31 × 10 5 s 1, respectively, resulting in a
KD of 1.25 × 10 5 M
(Table III). Whereas the on-rate was considerably slower than that
obtained for the GST-Cyto-L fusion protein (1242-fold less), the
off-rates are comparable. A control peptide was synthesized and tested
to establish the specificity of the interaction. Under identical
conditions, the control peptide (Cyto-L-scrambled) had the same amino
acid composition as Cyto-L-(419-432) but with the amino acids in a
random order. This peptide gave only 6% of the binding of
Cyto-L-(419-432), demonstrating that the Cyto-L-(419-432) binding was
specific (Table IV). We also tested the possibility that the
G-actin-bound Cyto-L-(419-432) peptide was available for binding to
streptavidin. No streptavidin binding was observed to either
immobilized G-actin or G-actin incubated with 1 mM
Cyto-L-(419-432) (data not shown). In addition, Cyto-L-(419-432)
bound poorly to streptavidin immobilized on a BIAcore chip and rapidly
dissociated, preventing us from using this approach to measure actin
binding to the biotinylated peptide (data not shown). Omission of
biotin-Gly-Gly from the amino terminus of the peptide also resulted in
lower binding to actin. We conclude 1) the peptide requires additional residues at the amino terminus (i.e. the juxtamembrane
portion) to provide a scaffold for the binding site, and 2) the
actin-bound peptide has sufficient structure to prevent high affinity
binding of biotin to streptavidin. The low streptavidin binding was not due to the length of the linker (Gly-Gly), because when the linker was
replaced with aminocaproic acid (an equivalent linker length to
Gly-Gly), identical results were obtained (data not shown). Overall,
these studies indicate that at least a portion of the binding activity
of the long cytoplasmic domain was due to the 14-amino acid sequence
adjacent to the cell membrane.

View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Binding of synthetic peptide
Cyto-L-(419-432) to immobilized G-actin or tropomyosin. The
peptide Cyto-L-(419-432) derived from the long cytoplasmic domain of
CEACAM1-L (0.5 mM) was passed over immobilized actin
(A) or tropomyosin (B) at 20 µl/min in the
presence of 2 mM CaCl2 in HBS. The peptide
Cyto-S-(419-432) derived from the short cytoplasmic domain of
CEACAM1-S (0.5 mM) is shown under identical conditions.
Each injection is followed by HBS (dissociation phase).
|
|
Because Obrink and co-workers (47) have shown that pseudophosphorylated
versions of the rat cytoplasmic domain of CEACAM1-S have lower binding
to calmodulin than the wild type sequences and are potential sites for
PKC phosphorylation, we also synthesized pseudophosphorylated and
phosphorylated versions of the Cyto-L-(419-432) peptide (Table I). The
peptides with amino acid substitutions at T425E and S429E
(Cyto-L-T425E,S429E), as well as the three phosphorylated peptides
(Cyto-L-Thr(P)-425, Cyto-L-Ser(P)-429, Cyto-L-Thr(P)-425, and
Ser(P)-429) showed more than 80% decreased binding to G-actin compared
with wild type Cyto-L-(419-432) (Table IV). Similar results were
obtained for the pseudophosphorylated (Glu substituted or Thr or Ser)
and the dual-phosphorylated peptides (Table IV). Mutation of the Ser
and Thr residues to Ala (Cyto-L-T425A,S429A) also resulted in greater
than 80% decreased binding (Table IV). The low binding of these
peptides even at 1 mM prevented measurement of their
KD values. We interpret these results as follows: modification of these key residues reduces the magnitude of binding to
the G-actin-binding site (relative RUs) by lowering the amount of
peptide in the correct conformation for binding.
Because tropomyosin was also immunoprecipitated with
CEACAM1-L and is, in fact, found in the immunoprecipitates before and after pervanadate treatment, we performed analogous SPR binding studies
with the GST-Cyto-L fusion protein to immobilized tropomyosin. 2500 RU
of tropomysin were immobilized, corresponding to 2.5 ng/mm2
of tropomyosin on the chip surface. GST-Cyto-L bound to tropomyosin but
with kinetic and KD constants lower than to G-actin (Fig. 5B and Table III). However, the relative binding
measured in RUs was similar for both tropomyosin and G-actin. Once
again, the control experiments showed that GST itself had no binding to
immobilized tropomyosin. Thus, the binding is specific and direct.
When the synthetic peptides from the CEACAM1-L cytoplasmic domain were
tested (e.g. Fig. 6B), lower relative binding to
tropomyosin was observed (Table IV) in every case for the mutated
peptides versus the wild type peptide (Cyto-L-(419-432)).
These results are similar to those obtained for the actin binding study
(Table IV). Thus, it is likely that amino acid substitutions in the
critical Ser and Thr residues lower the percent peptide in the correct conformation for binding. In addition, these data suggest that this
peptide sequence shares a binding site for G-actin and tropomyosin. Indeed, the binding of Cyto-L-(419-432) to G-actin is inhibited by
tropomyosin, and its binding to tropomyosin is inhibited by G-actin
(Fig. 7). However, when
tropomyosin is tested for its ability to inhibit the binding of the
GST-Cyto-L fusion protein to actin, no decrease in binding was
observed. This result suggests that there is a second G-actin-binding
site in the CEACAM1-L cytoplasmic domain (i.e. both are
allowed to bind simultaneously). This hypothesis was supported in
experiments testing inhibition of GST-Cyto-L fusion protein binding
to tropomyosin by addition of 1 µM G-actin, resulting in
a >2-fold increase in binding (Fig. 7B).

View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
Modulation of binding of CEACAM1 fusion
proteins and peptides to immobilized G-actin or tropomyosin.
GST-Cyto-L, GST-Cyto-S fusion proteins (50 µl of 2.5 µM, diluted in HBS + 10 µM
CaCl2 buffer), or Cyto-L-(419-432) peptide (50 µl of 0.5 mM, diluted in HBS + 10 µM CaCl2
buffer) were passed at 20 µl/min over actin or tropomyosin
immobilized on a CM5 biosensor chip. EDTA (10 mM),
tropomyosin (TM, 10 µM), actin
(ACT, 1 µM), or calmodulin (CaM, 10 µM), respectively, were added to the fusion proteins or
the synthetic peptide prior to injection to inhibit binding to the
immobilized ligand. Association of the fusion proteins or the peptide
in the absence of inhibitors in each experiment served as a reference.
A, GST-Cyto fusion proteins or peptides binding to
immobilized actin in the presence of inhibitors. B, GST-Cyto
fusion proteins or peptides binding to immobilized tropomyosin in the
presence of inhibitors.
|
|
Because calmodulin is known to bind to the cytoplasmic domain of rat
CEACAM1 peptides (46, 47), binding studies were also performed in the
presence of 10 µM calmodulin (Fig. 7). Calmodulin showed
50-60% inhibition for the synthetic peptides versus
0-10% inhibition for the GST-Cyto fusion proteins binding to G-actin. For example, although 10 µM calmodulin reduced binding of
the Cyto-L-(419-432) peptide to actin by >50%, binding of the
GST-Cyto-L fusion protein was <10% inhibited by 10 µM
calmodulin (Fig. 7A). On the other hand, although 10 µM calmodulin inhibited binding of the Cyto-L-(419-432)
peptide to tropomyosin as much as to G-actin, binding of GST-Cyto-L
fusion protein was increased more than 2-fold. This result is
consistent with two binding sites for calmodulin, the second of which
is positively correlated with the binding of tropomyosin. It should be
noted that Obrink and co-workers (28) also found a second binding site
for calmodulin in the cytoplasmic domain of rat CEACAM1-L.
SPR Studies on the S-isoform--
We also synthesized a GST-Cyto-S
fusion protein containing the 14-amino acid cytoplasmic peptide from
CEACAM1-S. When analyzed by gel filtration, GST-Cyto-S was a single
species with a mass of 59 kDa, corresponding to a
dimer.2 GST-Cyto-S
showed a 4-fold lower KD for binding to G-actin compared with GST-Cyto-L (Table III). The binding to G-actin was <15%
inhibited by 10 µM calmodulin (Fig. 7A), in
agreement with the previous prediction that this domain interacts with
calmodulin (47). Similar to our strategy for the CEACAM1-L cytoplasmic domain, peptides with a variety of substitutions were synthesized corresponding to the CEACAM1-S cytoplasmic domain (Table I). All of
these peptides, including the wild type, showed negligible binding to
G-actin with unmeasurable KD values (Fig. 6A and Table IV). Based on the observed decreased binding in
going from the GST-Cyto-L fusion protein to the synthetic peptides in the CEACAM1-L case, it is likely that the binding constants for the
short cytoplasmic domain peptides are below the threshold of
sensitivity for this instrument. We conclude that their
KD values are <10 4 M.
The GST-Cyto-S fusion protein derived from the CEACAM1-S cytoplasmic
domain showed a similar KD for tropomyosin binding compared with GST-Cyto-L binding to tropomyosin (Table III), which is,
in turn, 10-fold lower than for the binding of either fusion protein
domain to G-actin (Table III). As with the GST-Cyto-L fusion protein,
binding of GST-Cyto-S to G-actin was increased in the presence of
tropomyosin (Fig. 7A), and binding of GST-Cyto-S to tropomyosin was increased by G-actin (Fig. 7B). Calmodulin
inhibited binding of the GST-Cyto-L fusion protein to tropomyosin
similar to the synthetic peptide (Fig. 7B). The synthetic
peptides derived from the CEACAM1-S cytoplasmic domain showed
negligible binding to tropomyosin (Table IV), similar to the result
obtained for these peptides binding to G-actin (Table IV).
G-actin is normally associated with both Ca2+
and ATP (43). To regenerate the BIAcore chip between binding studies, we used 6 M guanidinium HCl, a treatment that is likely to
remove both Ca2+ and ATP from the immobilized G-actin. To
ensure renaturation of the chip surface, we routinely included 2 mM CaCl2, but not ATP, in the post-regeneration
buffer. When lower concentrations of Ca2+ were used (1, 10, and 100 µM), the same rank order of peptide binding was
observed (data not shown). However, when EDTA (10 mM) was
added to the injected protein, binding of the GST-Cyto fusion proteins
and the synthetic peptide Cyto-L-(419-432) was inhibited by >50% for
the fusion proteins and >40% for the peptide Cyto-L-(419-432) (Fig.
7), suggesting an important role for Ca2+ in the
association of CEACAM1 cytoplasmic domains to actin, e.g. through stabilization of the native structure of actin on the BIAcore
chip, similar to its function in CEACAM1 cytoplasmic domains binding to
calmodulin (28). When the GST-Cyto fusion proteins or synthetic
peptides were tested in the same way with tropomyosin, a similar result
was obtained (Fig. 7B), although inhibition of GST-Cyto-L
binding with EDTA was much lower than that of the other tested proteins
or synthetic peptides.
The dependence of the CEACAM1 GST-Cyto fusion proteins on the presence
of both Ca2+ and ATP for binding to G-actin was also
tested. The results show that for both fusion proteins the absolute
amount of binding to G-actin increased in the presence of 10 mM ATP with little or no change in the observed
KD values (data not shown). For example, GST-Cyto-S
showed >3-fold higher binding to G-actin in the presence of 10 mM ATP versus the absence of ATP, and the binding of GST-Cyto-L increased >7-fold. These results suggest that
both Ca2+ and ATP play important roles in the association
of CEACAM1 cytoplasmic domains to actin, most likely through
stabilization of actin in its native structure.
 |
DISCUSSION |
Actin Binding Studies--
CEACAM1 is a cell-cell adhesion
molecule that has distinct short and long cytoplasmic domains (48).
When we transfected murine MC38 cells with human CEACAM1-L, we observed
localization of CEACAM1-L to cell-cell interfaces with little or no
co-localization with actin (Fig. 1C). Upon treatment with
pervanadate virtually all of the CEACAM1-L was co-localized with actin
(Fig. 1D). This result is similar to the findings of
Sadekova et al. (30) who showed that microinjected murine
CEACAM1-L cDNA in Swiss 3T3 cells caused accumulation of CEACAM1-L
at cell-cell boundaries and co-localized with actin. A key difference
in our study was that actin co-localization required pervanadate
treatment, suggesting a requirement for a tyrosine phosphorylation
event, perhaps on the CEACAM1-l itself. As will be seen later, this
information may explain why these researchers did not detect a direct
interaction between murine CEACAM1-L and F-actin in
vitro.
Because most, if not all, cell surface proteins are capable of
transmitting outside-in signals upon activation, it is reasonable to
ask which type of signal transduction systems are associated with
CEACAM1-L. In the case of CEACAM1-L, its cytoplasmic domain has been
shown to be phosphorylated on Ser/Thr residues by PKC (49) and on Tyr
residues in its ITIM motif by Src kinases (19, 23). Attempts to disrupt
cell-cell association by mutation of the Tyr residues to Phe in the
ITIM motif failed to change the cell-cell adhesion phenotype (50), and
the large number of Ser/Thr residues in the CEACAM1-L domain have
discouraged investigators from performing further mutational analysis.
Although some light was thrown on the problem when Obrink and
co-workers (27, 28, 46) showed that the cytoplasmic domain of rat
CEACAM1-S and the juxtamembrane residues of the CEACAM1-L cytoplasmic
domain bound calmodulin, little was known about further downstream
targets or the consequences of the PKC phosphorylation events. To
investigate this matter further, we used a direct approach to isolate
CEACAM1-L-associated proteins by immunoprecipitation of CEACAM1-L
followed by two-dimensional gel separations and LC/MS/MS analysis of
the separated proteins. This approach revealed a number of major and
minor proteins associated with CEACAM1-L, especially after activation
of the cells with pervanadate. Whereas the activation conditions cannot
be construed as physiological, they did cause CEACAM1-L to co-localize
with actin (Fig. 1D) and caused extensive phosphorylation of
CEACAM-1 on its Tyr residues (Fig. 2B). Concomitantly with
these changes, increased amounts of two major proteins at 200 and 45 kDa were observed in the CEACAM1-L immunoprecipitates (Fig.
2C and Fig. 3). Further analysis revealed the major proteins
as actin and myosin, suggesting that CEACAM1-L associates with
actomyosin filaments, especially at cell-cell boundaries.
Immunoprecipitation studies by Da Silva-Azevedo and Reutter (29) on rat
small intestinal cells have shown an association of rat CEACAM1-L with
actin. Our work further extends their studies by identifying actin,
myosin, and tropomyosin association with human CEACAM1-L. In addition,
Beauchemin and co-workers (30) microinjected murine CEACAM1-L cDNA
into Swiss 3T3 cells and showed that the association between CEACAM1-L
and F-actin depends on activation of Rho GTPases. However, this group
concluded that the interaction between CEACAM1-L and actin was indirect
based on negative results of an F-actin co-sedimentation assay with a
GST fusion protein containing the murine L-cytoplasmic domain. Indeed,
we found that a GST fusion protein containing the human L-cytoplasmic
domain (GST-Cyto-L) also failed to associate with F-actin in this
assay. However, when the GST-Cyto-S fusion protein was tested in the
same assay, it bound F-actin, especially when it was preincubated with
G-actin during the polymerization step (Fig. 4A).
Furthermore, SPR studies showed that both GST-Cyto-L and -S bound
G-actin (Fig. 5 and Table III). Taken together, the data suggest that
the S-isoform may be a site for actin polymerization in that it binds
G-actin and continues to bind nascent F-actin during filament
formation. The reason for the lack of binding for the L-isoform to
F-actin in the co-sedimentation assay may be due to its dependence on
tyrosine phosphorylation (see Fig. 1). However, it should be noted that
both isoforms show amino acid sequence homology in the first 4-8 amino
acids of their juxtamembrane domains. The similar sequences between the
two isoforms in this region may explain their similar binding to
G-actin, but their differential binding to F-actin must be due to the
amino acid differences in the same region, the effects of the extended
sequence of the long isoform (compared with the short form), or both.
The juxtamembrane region of the cytoplasmic domain of CEACAM1-L has an
identical sequence over the first 4-8 amino acids of the CEACAM1-S
cytoplasmic domain, depending on the actual start of the cytoplasmic
domain and end of the transmembrane domain. A comparison of these
regions is shown: CEACAM1-S-Cyto domain, FLHFGKTGSSGPLQ, and CEACAM1-L-Cyto
domain, FLHFGKTGRASDQR. . . . .
...
As shown above, we have indicated the last four amino acids of the
predicted transmembrane domain in bold, and the amino acids shared
between the two domains are underlined. In the gene for CEACAM1, the
codon for the Ser/Arg (the first amino acid difference between the two
isoforms) is completed by alternative splicing leading to the
subsequent amino acid changes between the two domains, which in the
case of CEACAM1-S leads to a stop codon after the Gln residue. With
this information in mind, we synthesized peptides over these regions to
explore their potential difference in binding G-actin. Our strategy for
peptide synthesis was based on retaining a portion of the putative
transmembrane domain (bold, as shown above) and including an
amino-terminal biotin residue with a Gly-Gly linker. When tested in an
SPR binding assay, the synthetic peptide derived from CEACAM1-L
(Cyto-L-(419-432)) bound immobilized G-actin, but the peptide derived
from CEACAM1-S (Cyto-S-(419-432)) bound G-actin poorly (Fig. 6). A
likely explanation of these results is that the Cyto-S-(419-432)
peptide has too low an affinity for detectable binding of G-actin in
the BIAcore flow system. Nonetheless, the Cyto-L-(419-432) peptide has
a KD for immobilized actin that is almost 1000-fold
less than the GST-Cyto-L fusion protein (Table III). We can interpret
this result in at least two ways. First, the shorter synthetic peptide
has less conformers in the correct orientation compared with the longer
GST-Cyto-L fusion protein. Second, the GST-Cyto-L fusion protein may
possess a second actin-binding site. We believe that both possibilities contribute to the observed difference.
When we mutated residues within the Cyto-L-(419-432) sequence
postulated to be PKC phosphorylation sites (47), we found that the
mutated peptides had lower relative binding to immobilized actin
compared with the wild type peptide, and KD values of <10 4 M. These results suggest that amino
acid changes within the peptide sequence lower the percent conformers
capable of binding in a flow system. Because these amino acid changes
were found to decrease calmodulin binding in the studies performed by
Obrink and co-workers (47), it is noteworthy that the presumed
phosphorylation of these key residues by PKC also leads to decreased
G-actin binding, at least at this particular G-actin-binding site.
Unfortunately, we were unable to demonstrate a direct binding of these
peptides to calmodulin immobilized on a BIAcore chip, but neither were Obrink and co-workers able to do so. To demonstrate binding in their
system, it was necessary to synthesize the peptides on a cellulose
filter, a system that leads to an extremely high density of the bound
ligand in a preferred orientation (which may more closely mimic the
situation on the inside surface of the cell membrane).
Tropomyosin Binding Studies--
The finding of tropomyosin in the
CEACAM1-L immunoprecipitates was intriguing (Fig. 3), because the role
of tropomyosin in non-muscle cells is unknown and the change in isoform
expression from non-muscle to muscle type correlates with malignant
transformation. In this case, the immunoprecipitates showed only TM2, a
low molecular weight, muscle-type isoform (Table II). Direct binding of
the cytoplasmic domains of CEACAM1 was explored by an SPR binding assay
in which tropomyosin was immobilized to the hydrogel. Indeed, we
obtained similar results for binding of the synthetic peptides and
GST-Cyto-L fusion protein from the CEACAM1-L cytoplasmic domain to
tropomyosin as we did for G-actin. The most striking differences were
the 10-fold lower KD of the GST-Cyto-L fusion
protein for tropomyosin versus G-actin and the negative
inhibitory effect of G-actin on its binding to tropomyosin. Whereas
tropomyosin is able to inhibit the binding of the GST-Cyto-L fusion
protein to G-actin, the reverse is not true, and in fact, increased
binding is observed. This suggests that there is a second actin-binding site on the long cytoplasmic domain. The emerging interaction model for
the long cytoplasmic domain is shown in Fig.
8. In this model, the juxtamembrane
region is able to bind actin or tropomyosin, and their binding is
inhibited by calmodulin. In addition, the amino acid sequence
differences between the two isoforms in this region leads to different
relative binding to G-actin, at least as measured by synthetic peptide
binding. Because this difference is not observed for the GST-Cyto
fusion proteins, we believe that the presentation of the peptides in a
preferred orientation by either the membrane or the GST protein plays a
critical role. Potential phosphorylation by PKC on key Ser/Thr residues
in this site decreases both calmodulin binding (47) and actin binding (this report). In addition, as predicted by Sadekova et al.
(30), G-actin can bind at a more distal region of the CEACAM1-L
cytoplasmic domain. The second G-actin-binding site, which has not yet
been identified, may be influenced by other modifications, including phosphorylation of Tyr and Ser/Thr residues and the binding of other
modulating proteins. Interestingly, the GST-Cyto-S fusion protein but
not GST-Cyto-L co-sedimented with actin only if it was included during
the polymerization step (Fig. 4A). These results suggest
that neither isoform prevents the polymerization of G- to F-actin and
that the S-isoform may be directly incorporated into newly forming
actin filaments. In the case of the L-isoform, available evidence
suggests that its association with F-actin is indirect (30). Based on
our data, it is likely that the L-isoform must undergo additional
modifications such as phosphorylation (Figs. 1-3) prior to binding
F-actin. In the absence of phosphorylation, the L-isoform could serve
as a G-actin-binding site but would dissociate during the
polymerization step. This property may have distinct advantages for the
differential coupling of cell adhesion events to the cytoskeleton.

View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
Model for interactions of CECAM-1 cytoplasmic
domains with actin and tropomyosin. The short form (SF)
forms a complex (SF-A) with G-actin (A) that is
accelerated by tropomyosin (T) and weakly inhibited by
calcium-calmodulin (CaM). Similarly, the short form forms a
complex (SF-T) with tropomyosin that is accelerated by actin
and strongly inhibited by calcium-calmodulin. Presumably, this complex
can form a filament containing actin and tropomyosin
(AnTn; however, there are only
data for an actin filament in this work). The association of the long
form (LF) with G-actin is similar to the long form but
requires tyrosine phosphorylation by an Src kinase to stay associated
with the filament. Conversely, action of a Shp phosphatase would
prevent formation of the complex. The association of the long form with
tropomyosin differs in that it is stimulated by both G-actin and
calmodulin.
|
|
A summary of the interactions of the short and long cytoplasmic
isoforms of CEACAM1 with actin and tropomyosin is shown in Fig. 8. Both
isoforms are capable of binding G-actin or tropomyosin. The stronger
binding of actin may predominate, especially given that tropomyosin
enhances G-actin binding. Calmodulin is able to inhibit binding except
in the case of the long isoform binding to tropomyosin, where it
increases binding. Thus, calmodulin, perhaps via calcium signaling, is
an important regulator of the process. This would agree with the
Ser/Thr phosphorylation studies (Table IV) that predict that PKC (a
calcium-dependent enzyme) phosphorylation of these residues
in the cytoplasmic domain would lower G-actin binding. Once actin
polymerizes, only the short form is able to remain binding, as
evidenced by the actin "spin-down" assay (Fig. 4). In order for the
long isoform to remain bound to F-actin, we postulate that it must be
tyrosine-phosphorylated, as indicated by the confocal analysis
performed in Fig. 1. Because Src kinase and Shp1/2 phosphatase have
been shown to phosphorylate and dephosphorylate these residues in
CEACAM1-L, it is likely that they further regulate the process.
Finally, there is evidence for a second G-actin and calmodulin-binding
site in CEACAM1-L. The influence of these additional sites on the
outcome of F-actin binding is unknown and requires further studies.
The implications of the dual interactions of CEACAM1 cytoplasmic
domains with both actin and tropomyosin are of potential importance.
Tropomyosin and actin are usually found in a complex that is further
modulated by caldesmon in nonmuscle cells (51) or troponins in muscle
cells (52). Tropomyosins have a variety of isoforms that are strictly
regulated in cells (53, 54) and are often dysregulated during
tumorigenesis (55-57). The latter dysregulation may, in turn, affect
other important interactions, perhaps explaining why the
down-regulation of CEACAM1 in colon cancer (13) and other cancers (14)
corresponds with a change in tropomyosin isoforms. In the murine colon
carcinoma cell line used in this study, we found that only a short
isoform of tropomyosin (TM2) co-precipitated with CEACAM1-L, a result
consistent with the cancer phenotype (58, 59). Thus, it is possible
that the cytoplasmic targets of the long or short isoforms of
tropomyosin influence cell morphology changes consistent with the
cancer phenotype. In our GST-Cyto-L cytoplasmic domain binding studies,
a mixture of muscle tropomyosin isoforms was used. Further studies are
required to determine whether both the short and long isoforms of
tropomyosin bind equally well to the cytoplasmic domain of CEACAM1, and
if these binding patterns, in turn, regulate actin binding to CEACAM1 isoforms. It will also be of some interest to see if the reintroduction of CEACAM1 into cancer cells re-establishes a more normal tropomyosin pattern, because transfections of CEACAM1 into tumor cells can restore
a more normal phenotype in prostate (14), bladder (60), and breast (61)
cancer cells.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by NCI Grant CA84202 from the
National Institutes of Health.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. Tel.:
626-359-8111, ext. 62601; Fax: 626-301-8186; E-mail:
jshively@coh.org.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, October 10, 2001, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M109110200
2
The difference in size between Cyto-L and Cyto-S
was predicted by Obrink, Weng, Sigmundsson, and Iyengar at the Eleventh
International CEA 2000 workshop held in Bristol, UK, August 10-13, 2000.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
CEACAM-1, cell
adhesion molecule 1;
CEA, carcinoembryonic antigen;
CEACAM1-L and -S, CEA cell adhesion molecule 1-long and -short;
DC, dichloromethane;
Fmoc, fluorenylmethyloxycarbonyl;
GST, glutathione
S-transferase;
SPR, surface plasmon resonance;
p.s.i., pounds/square inch;
mAb, monoclonal antibody;
MS, mass spectrometry;
PKC, protein kinase C;
HPLC, high pressure liquid chromatography;
LC, liquid chromatography;
RU, relative units;
BSA, bovine serum
albumin.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Thompson, J. A.,
Grunert, F.,
and Zimmermann, W.
(1991)
J. Clin. Lab. Anal.
5,
344-366[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 2.
|
Thompson, J.,
Zimmermann, W.,
Osthus-Bugat, P.,
Scheussner, C.,
Eades-Perner, A.-M.,
Barnett, S.,
Von Kleist, S.,
Willcocks, T.,
Craig, I.,
Tynan, K.,
Olsen, A.,
and Mohrenweiser, H.
(1992)
Genomics
12,
761-772[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 3.
|
Tynan, K.,
Olsen, A.,
Trask, B.,
de Jong, P.,
Thompson, J.,
Zimmermann, W.,
Carrano, A.,
and Mohrenweiser, H.
(1992)
Nucleic Acids Res.
20,
1629-1636[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 4.
|
Williams, A. F.,
and Barclay, A. N.
(1988)
Annu. Rev. Immunol.
6,
381-405[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 5.
|
Barnett, T. R.,
Drake, L.,
and Pickle, W. I.
(1993)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13,
1273-1282[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 6.
|
Hinoda, Y.,
Neumaier, M.,
Hefta, S. A.,
Drzeniek, Z.,
Wagener, C.,
Shively, L.,
Hefta, L. J. F.,
Shively, J. E.,
and Paxton, R. J.
(1988)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
85,
6959-6963[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 7.
|
Prall, F.,
Nollau, P.,
Neumaier, M.,
Haubeck, H. D.,
Drzeniek, Z.,
Helmchen, U.,
Loning, T.,
and Wagener, C.
(1996)
J. Histochem. Cytochem.
44,
35-41[Abstract]
|
| 8.
|
Turbide, C.,
Rojas, M.,
Stanners, C.,
and Beauchemin, N.
(1991)
J. Biol. Chem.
266,
309-315[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 9.
|
McCuaig, K.,
Turbide, C.,
and Beauchemin, N.
(1992)
Cell Growth Differ.
3,
165-174[Abstract]
|
| 10.
|
Dvesksler, G. S.,
Dieffenbach, C. W.,
Cardellichio, C. B.,
McCuaig, K.,
Pensiero, M. N.,
Jiang, G.-S.,
Beauchemin, N.,
and Holmes, K. V.
(1993)
J. Virol.
67,
1-8[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 11.
|
Leusch, H. G.,
Hefta, S. A.,
Drzeniek, Z.,
Hummel, K.,
Markos-Pusztai, Z.,
and Wagener, C.
(1990)
FEBS Lett.
261,
405-409[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 12.
|
Gray-Owen, S. D.,
Dehio, C.,
Haude, A.,
Grunert, F.,
and Meyer, T. F.
(1997)
EMBO J.
16,
3435-3445[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 13.
|
Neumaier, M.,
Paululat, S.,
Chan, A.,
Matthaes, P.,
and Wagener, C.
(1993)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
90,
10744-10748[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 14.
|
Kleinerman, D. I.,
Troncoso, P.,
Lin, S.-H.,
Pister, L. L.,
Sherwood, E. R.,
Brooks, T.,
von Eschenbach, A. C.,
and Hseih, J.-T.
(1995)
Cancer Res.
55,
1215-1220[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 15.
|
Huang, J.,
Simpson, J. F.,
Glackin, C.,
Riethorf, L.,
Wagener, C.,
and Shively, J. E.
(1998)
Anticancer Res.
18,
3203-3212[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 16.
|
Hsieh, J.-T.,
Luo, W.,
Song, W.,
Wang, Y.,
Kleinerman, D. I.,
Van, N. T.,
and Lin, S.-H.
(1995)
Cancer Res.
55,
190-197[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 17.
|
Huang, J.,
Hardy, J. D.,
Sun, Y.,
and Shively, J. E.
(1999)
J. Cell Sci.
112,
4193-4205[Abstract]
|
| 18.
|
Turbide, C.,
Kunath, T.,
Daniels, E.,
and Beauchemin, N.
(1997)
Cancer Res.
57,
2781-2788[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 19.
|
Afar, D. E.,
Stanners, C. P.,
and Bell, J. C.
(1992)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1134,
46-52[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 20.
|
Skubitz, K. M.,
Ducker, T. P.,
and Goueli, S. A.
(1992)
J. Immunol.
148,
852-860[Abstract]
|
| 21.
|
Margolis, R. N.,
Schell, M. J.,
Taylor, S. I.,
and Hubbard, A. L.
(1990)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
166,
562-566[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 22.
|
Najjar, S. M.,
Accili, D.,
Philippe, N.,
Jernberg, J.,
Margolis, R.,
and Taylor, S. I.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
1201-1206[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 23.
|
Brummer, J.,
Neumaier, M.,
Gopfert, C.,
and Wagener, C.
(1995)
Oncogene
11,
1649-1655[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 24.
|
Skubitz, K. M.,
Ducker, T. P.,
Skubitz, A. P.,
and Goueli, S. A.
(1993)
FEBS Lett.
318,
200-204[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 25.
|
Beauchemin, N.,
Kunath, T.,
Roitaille, J.,
Chow, B.,
Turbide, C.,
Daniels, E.,
and Veillette, A.
(1997)
Oncogene
14,
783-790[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 26.
|
Huber, M.,
Izzi, L.,
Grondin, P.,
Turbide, C.,
Houde, C.,
Kunath, T.,
Veillete, A.,
and Beauchemin, N.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
335-344[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 27.
|
Blikstad, I.,
Wikstrom, T.,
Aurivillius, M.,
and Obrink, O.
(1992)
FEBS Lett.
302,
26-30[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 28.
|
Edlund, M.,
Blikstad, I.,
and Obrink, B.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
1393-1399[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 29.
|
Da Siva-Azevedo, L.,
and Reutter, W.
(1999)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
256,
404-408[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 30.
|
Sadekova, S.,
Lamarche-Cane, N.,
Li, X.,
and Beauchemin, N.
(2000)
Mol. Biol. Cell
11,
65-77[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 31.
|
Gunning, P.,
Leavitt, J.,
Muscat, G.,
Ng, S.-Y.,
and Kedes, L.
(1987)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
84,
4831-4835[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 32.
|
Wagener, C.,
Clark, B. R.,
Rickard, K. J.,
and Shively, J. E.
(1983)
J. Immunol.
130,
2302-2307[Abstract]
|
| 33.
|
Barnett, T. R.,
Kretschmer, A.,
Austen, D. A.,
Goebel, S. J.,
Hart, J. T.,
Elting, J. J.,
and Kamarck, M. E.
(1989)
J. Cell Biol.
108,
267-276[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 34.
|
Griffiths, G. M.
(1997)
in
Immunology Methods Manual
(Lefkovits, I., ed)
, pp. 1251-1257, Academic Press, San Diego
|
| 35.
|
Laemmli, U. K.
(1970)
Nature
227,
680-685[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 36.
|
O'Farrell, P.
(1975)
J. Biol. Chem.
250,
4007-4021[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 37.
|
Shevchenko, A.,
Wilm, M.,
Vorm, O.,
and Mann, M.
(1996)
Anal. Chem.
68,
850-858[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 38.
|
Chen, C.,
Lin, T.-T.,
and Shively, J. E.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
28181-28188[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 39.
|
Davis, M. T.,
and Lee, T. D.
(1998)
J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom.
9,
194-201[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 40.
|
Leis, J. F.,
and Kaplan, N. O.
(1982)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
79,
6507-6511[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 41.
|
Swarup, G.,
Chen, S.,
and Garbers, D. L.
(1982)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
107,
1104-1109[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 42.
|
Eng, J. K.,
McCormack, A. L.,
and Yates, J. R., III
(1994)
J. Am. Soc. Mass Spectrom.
5,
976-989[CrossRef]
|
| 43.
|
Steinmetz, M. O.,
Stoffer, D.,
Hoenger, A.,
Brmer, A.,
and Aebi, U.
(1997)
J. Struct. Biol.
119,
295-320[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 44.
|
Fagerstam, L. G.,
Frostell-Karlsson, A.,
Karlsson, R.,
Persson, B.,
and Ronnberg, I.
(1992)
J. Chromatogr.
597,
397-410[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 45.
|
Korn, E. D.
(1982)
Physiol. Rev.
62,
672-737[Free Full Text]
|
| 46.
|
Edlund, M.,
and Obrink, B.
(1993)
FEBS Lett.
327,
90-94[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 47.
|
Edlund, M.,
Wikstrom, K.,
Toomik, R.,
Ek, P.,
and Obrink, B.
(1998)
FEBS Lett.
425,
166-170[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 48.
|
Obrink, B.
(1991)
BioEssays
13,
227-234[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 49.
|
Sippel, C. J.,
Suchy, F. J.,
Ananthanarayanan, M.,
and Perlmutter, D. H.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
2083-2091[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 50.
|
Lin, S. H.,
Luo, W.,
Earley, K.,
Cheung, P.,
and Hixsson, D. C.
(1995)
Biochem. J.
311,
239-245
|
| 51.
|
Hnath, E. J.,
Wang, C. L.,
Huber, P. A.,
Marston, S. B.,
and Phillips, G. N., Jr.
(1996)
Biophys. J.
71,
1920-1923[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 52.
|
Perry, S. V.
(1998)
J. Muscle Res. Cell Motil.
19,
575-602[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 53.
|
Temm-Grove, C.
(1998)
Cell Motil. Cytoskeleton
40,
393-407[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 54.
|
Boyd, J.,
Risinger, J. I.,
Wiseman, R. W.,
Merrick, B. A.,
Selkirk, J. K.,
and Barrett, J. C.
(1995)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
92,
11534-11538[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 55.
|
Wang, F. L.,
Wang, Y.,
Wong, W. K.,
Liu, Y.,
Addivinola, F. J.,
liang, P.,
Chen, L. B.,
Kantoff, P. W.,
and Pardee, A. B.
(1996)
Cancer Res.
15,
3634-3637
|
| 56.
|
Braverman, R. H.,
Cooper, H. L.,
Lee, H. S.,
and Prasad, G. L.
(1996)
Oncogene
13,
537-545[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 57.
|
Bhattacharya, B.,
Prasad, G. L.,
Valverius, E. M.,
Salomon, D. S.,
and Cooper, H. L.
(1990)
Cancer Res.
50,
2105-2112[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 58.
|
Prasad, G. L.,
Masuelli, L.,
Raj, M. H.,
and Harindranath, N.
(1999)
Oncogene
18,
2027-2031[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 59.
|
Janssen, R. A.,
Veenstra, K. G.,
Jonasch, P.,
Jonasch, E.,
and Mier, J. W.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
32182-32186[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 60.
|
Kleinerman, D. I.,
Dinney, C. P.,
Zhang, W. W.,
Lin, S. H.,
Van, N. T.,
and Hsieh, J. T.
(1996)
Cancer Res.
56,
3431-3435[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 61.
|
Luo, W.,
Wood, C. G.,
Earley, K.,
Hung, M.-C.,
and Lin, S. H.
(1997)
Oncogene
14,
1697-16704[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
Copyright © 2001 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:

|
 |

|
 |
 
L. Jin, Y. Li, C.-J. Chen, M. A. Sherman, K. Le, and J. E. Shively
Direct Interaction of Tumor Suppressor CEACAM1 with Beta Catenin: Identification of Key Residues in the Long Cytoplasmic Domain
Experimental Biology and Medicine,
July 1, 2008;
233(7):
849 - 859.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
C.-J. Chen, J. Kirshner, M. A. Sherman, W. Hu, T. Nguyen, and J. E. Shively
Mutation Analysis of the Short Cytoplasmic Domain of the Cell-Cell Adhesion Molecule CEACAM1 Identifies Residues That Orchestrate Actin Binding and Lumen Formation
J. Biol. Chem.,
February 23, 2007;
282(8):
5749 - 5760.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
Q. Yu, E. M. C. Chow, H. Wong, J. Gu, O. Mandelboim, S. D. Gray-Owen, and M. A. Ostrowski
CEACAM1 (CD66a) Promotes Human Monocyte Survival via a Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinase- and AKT-dependent Pathway
J. Biol. Chem.,
December 22, 2006;
281(51):
39179 - 39193.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
E. Klaile, M. M. Muller, C. Kannicht, B. B. Singer, and L. Lucka
CEACAM1 functionally interacts with filamin A and exerts a dual role in the regulation of cell migration
J. Cell Sci.,
December 1, 2005;
118(23):
5513 - 5524.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. M. Muller, B. B. Singer, E. Klaile, B. Obrink, and L. Lucka
Transmembrane CEACAM1 affects integrin-dependent signaling and regulates extracellular matrix protein-specific morphology and migration of endothelial cells
Blood,
May 15, 2005;
105(10):
3925 - 3934.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
A. L. Servin
Pathogenesis of Afa/Dr Diffusely Adhering Escherichia coli
Clin. Microbiol. Rev.,
April 1, 2005;
18(2):
264 - 292.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. E. McCaw, E. H. Liao, and S. D. Gray-Owen
Engulfment of Neisseria gonorrhoeae: Revealing Distinct Processes of Bacterial Entry by Individual Carcinoembryonic Antigen-Related Cellular Adhesion Molecule Family Receptors
Infect. Immun.,
May 1, 2004;
72(5):
2742 - 2752.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
C.-J. Chen and J. E. Shively
The Cell-Cell Adhesion Molecule Carcinoembryonic Antigen-Related Cellular Adhesion Molecule 1 Inhibits IL-2 Production and Proliferation in Human T Cells by Association with Src Homology Protein-1 and Down-Regulates IL-2 Receptor
J. Immunol.,
March 15, 2004;
172(6):
3544 - 3552.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
U. Sundberg, N. Beauchemin, and B. Obrink
The cytoplasmic domain of CEACAM1-L controls its lateral localization and the organization of desmosomes in polarized epithelial cells
J. Cell Sci.,
March 1, 2004;
117(7):
1091 - 1104.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. Kirshner, D. Schumann, and J. E. Shively
CEACAM1, a Cell-Cell Adhesion Molecule, Directly Associates with Annexin II in a Three-dimensional Model of Mammary Morphogenesis
J. Biol. Chem.,
December 12, 2003;
278(50):
50338 - 50345.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
B. Fournes, J. Farrah, M. Olson, N. Lamarche-Vane, and N. Beauchemin
Distinct Rho GTPase Activities Regulate Epithelial Cell Localization of the Adhesion Molecule CEACAM1: Involvement of the CEACAM1 Transmembrane Domain
Mol. Cell. Biol.,
October 15, 2003;
23(20):
7291 - 7304.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
C. Houde, S. Roy, N. Leung, D. W. Nicholson, and N. Beauchemin
The Cell Adhesion Molecule CEACAM1-L Is a Substrate of Caspase-3-mediated Cleavage in Apoptotic Mouse Intestinal Cells
J. Biol. Chem.,
May 2, 2003;
278(19):
16929 - 16935.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. Kirshner, C.-J. Chen, P. Liu, J. Huang, and J. E. Shively
CEACAM1-4S, a cell-cell adhesion molecule, mediates apoptosis and reverts mammary carcinoma cells to a normal morphogenic phenotype in a 3D culture
PNAS,
January 21, 2003;
100(2):
521 - 526.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
T. A. Plunkett and P. A. Ellis
CEACAM1: A Marker With a Difference or More of the Same?
J. Clin. Oncol.,
November 1, 2002;
20(21):
4273 - 4275.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
U. Sundberg and B. Obrink
CEACAM1 isoforms with different cytoplasmic domains show different localization, organization and adhesive properties in polarized epithelial cells
J. Cell Sci.,
March 15, 2002;
115(6):
1273 - 1284.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 2001 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
|