Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M111627200 on February 21, 2002
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 18, 15376-15384, May 3, 2002
Vav1 Couples T Cell Receptor to Serum Response
Factor-dependent Transcription via a
MEK-dependent Pathway*
Céline
Charvet
§,
Patrick
Auberger¶,
Sophie
Tartare-Deckert
,
Alain
Bernard
, and
Marcel
Deckert
**
From
INSERM U343, IFR50, Hôpital de l'Archet,
06202 Nice Cedex 3 and ¶ INSERM U526 and
INSERM U385,
IFR50, Faculté de Médecine, Avenue de Valombrose,
06107 Nice Cedex 2, France
Received for publication, December 6, 2001, and in revised form, February 11, 2002
 |
ABSTRACT |
The Vav family of guanine nucleotide exchange
factors for Rho family GTPases plays a critical role in lymphocyte
proliferation, gene transcription, and cytoskeleton reorganization
following immunoreceptor stimulation. However, its role in
immediate early gene activation is unclear. In this study, we have
investigated the mechanisms by which Vav1 can regulate
c-fos serum response element transcriptional activity. We
show that T cell antigen receptor (TCR) stimulation induces the
phosphorylation of serum response factor (SRF) on serine 103 and
increases the binding of SRF complexes on serum response element in a
MEK- and p38-dependent pathway. The physiological relevance
of our findings is supported by the inhibition of the interleukin-2
gene transcriptional activity by a dominant negative SRF mutant.
Overexpression of Vav1, which partially mimics TCR stimulation,
promotes SRF-dependent transcription, and dominant negative
Vav1 mutants block SRF activation by TCR. SRF activation by Vav1 occurs
through a signaling cascade consisting of Rac1/Cdc42 and the
serine/threonine kinases Pak1 and MEK, but independently of the
phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase pathway. Interestingly, Vav2 also
enhances SRF through Rho GTPases, suggesting that Vav proteins
are general regulators of SRF activation in lymphocytes. This report
establishes Vav proteins as a direct link between antigen receptors and
SRF-dependent early gene expression.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Antigen receptor engagement on resting T cells activates several
signaling pathways, resulting in transcriptional activation of a large
number of genes. Within minutes of antigenic stimulation, a complex
network of signal transducers enhances the transient transcription of
early genes, which in turn regulate a second phase of nuclear events
essential for T cell survival, proliferation, differentiation, effector
function, and cytokine release (1, 2). Among these early genes,
c-fos plays a critical role in diverse physiological
processes, including lymphocyte activation. In particular, the binding
of Fos and Jun proteins to AP-1 sites is essential for the
transcription of several lymphokines and other gene products regulating
the immune response (3).
Mitogen-induced c-fos transcription depends
essentially on the cis-acting serum response element
(SRE)1 on its promoter
because mutation of the SRE sequence impairs c-fos induction
by diverse signals. SRE is also important for the transcriptional
induction of other early genes like egr-1. Two transcription
factors, the serum response factor (SRF) and the ternary complex factor
(TCF), bind to the SRE and promote the transcription of the
c-fos promoter and other SRE-regulated genes (4). SRF is
ubiquitously expressed and binds as a dimer to the CarG box of the SRE
sequence (5). SRF is composed of a DNA binding and dimerization domain,
and of a C-terminal trans-activation domain necessary for the
integration of the upstream signals (6). SRF contains several
phosphorylation sites, including serine 103, known to affect the
interaction of SRF with its DNA recognition sequence (7). This serine
103 has been shown to be phosphorylated by
pp90rsk, MAPKAP-K2 (MK2), and CaM kinases II and
IV (8-10). The TCF is composed of transcription factors of the Ets
family, including Elk-1 (11). TCF binds to a purine-rich sequence
(CAGGAT) adjacent to the SRE on the c-fos promoter and
associates with the SRF (12, 13). The transcriptional activity of TCF
proteins is induced after phosphorylation by the mitogen-activated
protein kinase (MAPK) family activated by mitogenic and
stress signals (6). However, depending on the cell type, some mitogens
activate a TCF-independent pathway targeting SRF via the
phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI-3K) (14), or via the Rho family of
GTPases (15).
The Vav family of guanine nucleotide exchange factors (GEFs) represent
a critical link between antigen receptor-coupled protein-tyrosine kinases and the signaling pathways controlled by the Rho family of
GTPases (16-18). Vav GEFs are highly homologous proteins composed of a
catalytic Dbl homologous (DH) domain, a pleckstrin homology (PH)
domain, one Src homology 2 (SH2) domain, and two SH3 domains. Although
Vav1 is mostly restricted to hematopoietic cells (19), Vav2 and Vav3
display a much broader tissue expression (20-22). Vav proteins are
tyrosine-phosphorylated through the stimulation of diverse receptors,
including the epidermal and the platelet-derived growth factor
receptors, integrins, and B and T cell antigen receptors (BCRs and
TCRs) (17). The recruitment of Vav1 into large molecular scaffolds
regulates several cell processes, such as activation of the MAPK
pathway and gene activation. For example, Vav1 was involved in NFAT
(23, 24), NF-
B (25), and AP-1 activation (26). One effector of Vav
proteins could be the Ste-20-related p21-associated kinase 1 (Pak1),
which is activated by GTP-bound Rac1 or Cdc42 (27). In lymphocytes,
Pak1 activation is involved in TCR-mediated actin polymerization (28),
and in the activation of p38MAPK (29), and NFAT (30). Moreover, a
trimolecular complex composed of the adapters SLP-76 and Nck, and Vav1,
has been implicated in the activation of Pak1 following TCR stimulation
(28). Thus, Pak1 could be an important element of the signaling
pathways controlled by Vav proteins.
Vav proteins appear to act as central components, which can integrate
extracellular signals to activate multiple pathways leading to gene
transcription in lymphocytes. Recently, we showed that Vav1 and Vav2
activates c-fos SRE upon TCR stimulation (31). However, how
Vav proteins regulate SRE-dependent transcription in
lymphocytes remains largely unknown. In this study, we show that Vav1
couples TCR stimulation to SRF-dependent transcription via
a MEK-dependent pathway. TCR stimulation leads to the
phosphorylation of SRF on serine 103 and increases binding of SRF
complexes to SRE. Overexpression of Vav1, which partially mimics TCR
stimulation, promotes c-fos SRE transcriptional activity
through SRF activation. SRF activation can occur through a signaling
cascade consisting of Rac1/Cdc42-Pak1-MEK, but independently of the
PI-3K pathway. The physiological relevance of our findings is supported
by the inhibition of the IL-2 gene transcriptional activity by a
dominant negative SRF mutant. Interestingly, Vav2 also enhances SRF
activity via the Rho GTPases family. This report establishes the Vav
family proteins as a direct link between TCR and
SRF-dependent transcription.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Antibodies and Reagents--
Anti-CD3 (OKT3) and anti-Myc (9E10)
monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) were purified from hybridoma supernatants.
Anti-HA mAb (12CA5) was from Roche (Meylan, France). Anti-phospho-MEK,
anti-phospho-ERK1/2, and anti-phospho-p38 antibodies were from Cell
Signaling Biotechnology (Beverly, MA). Antibodies against p38, SRF,
Akt, and Pak1 were provided by Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Inc. (Santa
Cruz, CA). Anti-ERK1/2 antibody was obtained from Upstate
Biotechnology, Inc. (Lake Placid, NY). Anti-phosphoserine 103-SRF was
kindly provided by M. Greenberg. Anti-N-terminal SRF for
electrophoretic shift mobility assay (EMSA) and anti-MEK antibodies
were kindly provided by J. C. Chambard. Anti-phosphoserine 473-Akt
antibody was from New England Biolabs (Beverly, MA). Culture media and
oligonucleotides were from Invitrogen (Groningen, Netherlands). Myelin
basic protein (MBP) was from Sigma. U0126, SB203580, and
Ly294002 were obtained from Promega (Madison, WI) and Calbiochem
(Darmstadt, Germany), respectively.
Plasmids--
The constructs encoding Myc-tagged Vav1 (24),
Myc-tagged Vav1 mutants (
PH, L213A, R695L) (26), and Myc-tagged Vav2
(31) have been described before. Dominant negative Rac1 (Rac1N17), Cdc42 (Cdc42N17), RhoA (RhoAN19), and Pak1 (PakKR) were a gift of M. Schwartz and J. Chernoff, respectively. Constitutive active MEK1
mutant was from Y. Le Marchand-Brustel (32). Dominant negative SRF
mutant (SRF 1-338) was kindly provided by R. Prywes (33). A
constitutive form of PI-3K (p110*) was provided by B. Hemmings. The
c-fos promoter luciferase reporter was obtained from R. Treisman. SRE mutants (SRE
SRF) and Elk-1 (SRE
Elk-1) of SRE
luciferase reporter were a kind gift of S. Poser and have been
described elsewhere (14). NF-
B luciferase reporter was from M. Karin. GAL4-Elk-1 and 5×GAL4-luciferase plasmids were from Stratagene (La Jolla, CA).
Cell Culture and Transfection--
Jurkat T cells (clone JE6.1),
and simian virus 40 T antigen-transfected human leukemic Jurkat T cells
(Jurkat-TAg) were from ATCC and G. Crabtree (Stanford, CA),
respectively. Cells were grown in RPMI 1640 medium, supplemented with
10% fetal bovine serum, 2 mM glutamine, 1 mM
sodium pyruvate, 10 mM HEPES, 1× minimal essential medium
nonessential amino acid solution, and 100 units/ml each of penicillin G
and streptomycin. Cells in a logarithmic growth phase were transfected
with the indicated plasmids by electroporation as described previously
(24).
Immunoprecipitations and Immunoblotting--
Cells were left
unstimulated or stimulated for 5 min with anti-CD3 mAb (5 µg/ml),
washed twice in phosphate-buffered saline, and lysed at 1 × 108 cells/ml in ice-cold lysis buffer (1% Triton X-100 in
150 mM NaCl, 50 mM HEPES, pH 7.4, 5 mM NaF, 5 mM sodium pyrophosphate, 1 mM sodium orthovanadate, 10 µg/ml aprotinin, 10 µg/ml
leupeptin, 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride) for 15 min
on ice. Lysates were clarified by centrifugation at 15,000 × g for 10 min at 4 °C, and protein concentration was
determined using the bicinchoninic acid protein assay (Pierce). Cleared
lysates were directly resolved by SDS-PAGE and analyzed by
immunoblotting or incubated for 3 h at 4 °C with the indicated
antibodies and protein G-Sepharose beads (Sigma). Pellets were then
washed three times with ice-cold lysis buffer containing 0.2% Triton
X-100 and resuspended in SDS sample buffer. Eluted samples from
immunoprecipitations or whole cell lysates were separated by SDS-PAGE
and analyzed by immunoblotting. Reactive proteins were visualized by
enhanced chemiluminescence (ECL).
Pak1 Kinase Assays--
Pak1 was immunoprecipitated from lysates
of 10 × 106 cells using anti-Pak1 antibodies bound to
protein G beads. The immune complexes were washed two times with
ice-cold lysis buffer and two times with kinase buffer containing 50 mM Tris, pH 7.5, 100 mM NaCl, and 10 mM MgCl2. Beads were resuspended in 40 µl of
kinase buffer containing 5 µg of MBP (Sigma), and reactions were
initiated by the addition of 10 µl of kinase buffer containing 5 µM ATP and 10 µCi of [
-32P]ATP.
Reactions proceeded 20 min at 30 °C and were stopped by addition of
sample buffer for electrophoresis. Reactive proteins were separated on
SDS-PAGE. Gels containing radioactive proteins were dried and exposed
for 4 h at
80 °C.
Reporter Assays--
For luciferase assays, transfected Jurkat
cells (5 × 105 cells) were left unstimulated or
stimulated with anti-CD3 mAb as described in the legend to each figure.
Cells were washed twice in phosphate-buffered saline and lysed in 100 µl of reporter lysis buffer. Luciferase was assayed using the Promega
luciferase assay system and a luminometer (Lumat, EG&G Berthold).
Luciferase activity was determined in triplicate and expressed as -fold
increase relative to the basal activity seen in unstimulated
mock-transfected cells. For monitoring Elk-1 activation, Jurkat cells
were co-transfected with GAL4BD:Elk-1 and 5×GAL4-luciferase in the
presence or not of indicated expression plasmids. pEF/
-galactosidase
was included as an internal transfection control to normalize
luciferase reporter activity. For the
-galactosidase assay, 20 µl
of the supernatants were incubated at 37 °C in 150 µl of assay
buffer containing 60 mM Na2HCO, 80 mM NaH2PO4, 10 mM KCl,
1 mM MgCl2, 10 mM dithiothreitol,
and 60 µg of
o-nitrophenyl-
-D-galactopyranoside, until a
yellow color developed. Absorbance was measured at 400 nm in a spectrophotometer.
Electrophoretic Shift Mobility Assay--
EMSAs were performed
as described before (34). Briefly, Jurkat cells (4 × 106) were left unstimulated or stimulated with anti-CD3 mAb
(5 µg/ml) for the indicated periods of time at 37 °C. Cells were
then lysed in Hepes buffer containing 350 mM NaCl, 20%
glycerol, 1% Nonidet P-40, 1 mM MgCl2, 0.5 mM EDTA, 0.1 mM EGTA. Double-stranded synthetic SRE sequence (5'-GGATGTCCATATTAGGACATCT-3') was
[
-32P]ATP-end-labeled using T4 polynucleotide kinase
(Amersham Biosciences). Ten µg of cellular proteins were
preincubated in a buffer containing 10 mM Tris, pH 7.5, 100 mM NaCl, 1 mM dithiothreitol, 1 mM
EDTA, 4% glycerol, 80 µg/ml salmon sperm DNA, 15 µg/ml poly(dI-dC)
for 10 min on ice. Then, 30,000-50,000 cpm of
-32P-labeled probe were added to the binding reaction
for 20 min at room temperature. For competition experiments, a 50-fold
excess of unlabeled oligonucleotides was added during preincubation. For supershift assays, 1 µl of anti-SRF or anti-Elk-1 antibodies were
added to cellular extracts in the binding reaction buffer and incubated
for 10 min on ice. DNA-protein complexes were resolved by
electrophoresis on 8% polyacrylamide gels (37.5/1
acrylamide/bisacrylamide) in 0.5× TBE buffer (22.5 mM Tris
borate, 0.5 mM EDTA, pH 8) for 3 h at 150 V. Gels
containing radioactive SRE probe complexed with proteins were then
dried and exposed for 4 h at
80 °C.
 |
RESULTS |
TCR Engagement Activates SRF--
SRF can be activated by several
mitogenic stimuli and plays a critical role in the transcription of the
SRE-regulated gene c-fos, a critical component of the AP-1
complex. Although SRF is widely expressed in hematopoietic cells (35),
its activation by lymphocyte antigen receptors has not been studied so
far. To understand the regulation of SRF in T cells, we analyzed the
phosphorylation of SRF upon TCR stimulation. Jurkat cells were
stimulated for indicated times with an anti-CD3 antibody. After
immunoprecipitation with SRF-specific antibodies, phosphorylation of
endogenous SRF was assayed by immunoblotting with antibodies to the
phosphorylated form of SRF at serine 103. SRF phosphorylation increased
after 30 s to 5 min of TCR ligation and decreased after 15 and 30 min (Fig. 1A, upper
panel). As a control, phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate plus
ionomycin stimulation also resulted in the phosphorylation of SRF on
serine 103. Equal expression of endogenous SRF in the immunoprecipitates was observed by immunoblotting with SRF-specific antibodies (Fig. 1A, lower panel). To
investigate whether TCR stimulation regulates binding of SRF complexes
to SRE, we used the c-fos SRE sequence as a probe in band
shift assays. Nuclear extracts from Jurkat cells formed two complexes
with the radiolabeled SRE. The major complex (I) was formed by
homodimeric SRF bound to the SRE motif. SRF is also able to form a
ternary complex with transcription factors of the TCF family, such as
Elk-1 (complex II) (11, 12). Binding of the SRF complexes to the SRE
increased after 5 min of TCR ligation (Fig. 1B, compare
lane 1 with lane 2) and decreased
after 15-30 min (Fig. 1B, lanes 3 and
4). Specificity of the complexes was assessed by competition
with a 50-fold excess of unlabeled SRE probe. To confirm the presence
of SRF and to identify the Ets family member in these TCR-generated SRF
complexes, we preincubated nuclear extracts from activated Jurkat cells
with anti-SRF or anti-Elk-1 antibodies. Fig. 1C shows that
anti-Elk-1 antibody displaced complex II to complex III (lanes
3 and 4), whereas anti-SRF displaced both complexes I
and II (lanes 5 and 6). This result indicates
that complexes I and II contain the SRF protein, whereas Elk-1 is
present only in complex II.

View larger version (27K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
TCR engagement induces SRF phosphorylation
and increases SRF binding to c-fos SRE.
A, Jurkat cells were left unstimulated or stimulated for the
indicated times with an anti-CD3 mAb (5 µg/ml) or phorbol
12-myristate 13-acetate (100 ng/ml) plus ionomycin (1 µg/ml) for 5 min. Endogenous SRF was immunoprecipitated from the lysates with an
anti-SRF antibody or with a control Ig and subjected to Western blot
analysis using an anti-phospho-SRF (upper panel)
or anti-SRF (lower panel) as a control of
endogenous SRF expression. B, Jurkat cells were left
unstimulated or stimulated with anti-CD3 mAb (5 µg/ml) for the
indicated times. Nuclear extracts were prepared and analyzed by EMSA,
using -32P-labeled SRE oligonucleotide probe.
Specificity of the complexes was assessed by competition with a 50-fold
excess of unlabeled SRE probe. Nonspecific binding is indicated as
NS. The results shown are representative of three separate
experiments. C, Jurkat cells were left unstimulated ( ) or
stimulated (+) with an anti-CD3 mAb (5 µg/ml) for 5 min. Nuclear
extracts were incubated with 1 µl of anti-SRF or anti-Elk-1
antibodies and analyzed by EMSA, using -32P-labeled SRE
oligonucleotide probe.
|
|
To confirm the role of SRF in TCR-induced SRE-dependent
transcription, Jurkat cells were transfected with a luciferase reporter driven by the c-fos SRE either wild type or with deletion of
the Ets binding site (SRE
Ets) or of the SRF binding site
(SRE
SRF). Although TCR stimulation increased SRE and SRE
Ets in a
similar manner (2-fold increase over the basal activity), no SRE
activation was observed following TCR stimulation in the absence of the
SRF binding site (Fig. 2A).
Next, Jurkat cells were transfected with the SRF reporter construct, in
combination with a dominant negative HA-tagged SRF mutant deleted at
the transcriptional activation domain (SRF 1-338). SRF mutant blocked
both basal- and TCR-induced SRF activity (Fig. 2B).
Similarly, TCR-induced IL-2 promoter activity was blocked by SRF mutant
(Fig. 2C). As a control, SRF mutant did not affect
TCR-induced Elk-1 transactivation (Fig. 2D). Overexpression of SRF mutant was assayed by immunoblotting with an anti-HA antibody (Fig. 2, B-D, insets). Taken together, these
results show that SRF activation by TCR is required to promote
c-fos SRE activation and IL-2 gene transcriptional
regulation in lymphocytes.

View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
SRF is required for TCR-induced
SRE-dependent transcription. A, Jurkat-TAg
cells were transfected with SRE or SRE mutants luciferase reporter
plasmid (10 µg each) and cultured for 24 h. Cells were left
unstimulated (open bars) or stimulated
(dark bars) with anti-CD3 mAb (5 µg/ml) for the
final 6 h and lysed for luciferase assay. Bars
represent the mean ± S.D. of triplicate samples. The data shown
are representative of three independent experiments. Jurkat-TAg cells
were transfected with empty vector, and HA-tagged SRF mutant (SRF
1-338, 10 µg) along with SRF luciferase reporter (10 µg)
(B) or IL-2 promoter (10 µg) (C), and
stimulated and analyzed as in panel A. D,
Jurkat-TAg cells were transfected with empty vector, and HA-tagged SRF
mutant (SRF 1-338, 10 µg) along with Gal4BD:Elk-1 (2 µg) and
5×GAL4-luciferase (5 µg), cultured for 36 h. Cells were left
unstimulated (open bars) or stimulated
(dark bars) with anti-CD3 mAb (5 µg/ml) for the
final 12 h and lysed for luciferase assay. Lysates were analyzed
for the expression of SRF mutant by anti-HA immunoblotting.
|
|
TCR Engagement Activates SRF via a MEK-dependent
Pathway--
The MAPK pathway regulates SRE-dependent
transcription by phosphorylating Elk-1 but also SRF via the activation
of upstream kinases. To examine the role of MAPK pathway on SRE
activation by TCR, Jurkat cells transfected with SRF reporter construct
were incubated with different amounts of the MEK inhibitor U0126 or the
p38 inhibitor SB203580, and stimulated with an anti-CD3 antibody. Although U0126 rapidly decreased SRF activation by TCR, SB203580 slowly
decreased it (Fig. 3A,
upper panel). As a control, TCR-induced ERK1/2
and p38 phosphorylations were specifically inhibited by U0126 and
SB203580, respectively (Fig. 3A, lower
panel). To test whether MEK and p38 were implicated in the
phosphorylation and in the binding of SRF complexes to SRE, Jurkat
cells were incubated with U0126 or SB203580 and stimulated with an
anti-CD3 antibody. After SRF immunoprecipitation, SRF phosphorylation
was assayed with antibodies against serine 103. TCR-induced SRF
phosphorylation on serine 103 returned to basal level in the presence
of U0126 and SB203580 (Fig. 3B, upper
panels). Next, nuclear extracts of treated cells, as
described above, were incubated with the c-fos SRE probe for
a band shift assay. Binding of SRF complexes to the SRE following TCR
ligation decreased in the presence of U0126 and SB203580 (Fig.
3B, lower panel). Finally, Jurkat
cells transfected with a c-fos promoter reporter or a SRE
reporter were incubated with the indicated concentrations of U0126 then
stimulated with an anti-CD3 antibody. TCR-stimulated c-fos
promoter activation and SRE activation were both blocked in a similar
way by U0126 (Fig. 3C). TCR-induced transcription of the
endogenous c-fos gene also depended on MEK signaling as
visualized by reverse transcription-PCR analysis (data not shown).
These results show that both MEK/ERK and p38 pathways are required for
SRF-dependent transcription induced following TCR
engagement.

View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
TCR-induced SRF activation depends on MEK
activity. A, upper panel,
Jurkat-TAg cells transfected with SRF luciferase reporter were cultured
for 24 h and preincubated for 2 h with indicated
concentrations of U0126 or SB203580. Cells were then left unstimulated
or stimulated with an anti-CD3 mAb for the final 6 h of culture
and lysed for luciferase assay. Lower panel,
Jurkat cells were preincubated 2 h with Me2SO
(DMSO), U0126 (20 µM), or SB203580 (20 µM) and left unstimulated ( ) or stimulated with an
anti-CD3 mAb (+) for 5 min. Lysates were immunoblotted with an
anti-phosphoERK1/2 and anti-ERK1/2 or anti-phospho-p38 and anti-p38
antibodies. B, Jurkat cells, preincubated with
Me2SO, U0126 (20 µM), or SB203580 (20 µM) for 2 h, were left unstimulated ( ) or
stimulated (+) with anti-CD3 mAb (5 µg/ml) for 5 min.
Upper panels, endogenous SRF was
immunoprecipitated from the lysates with an anti-SRF antibody or with a
control Ig and subjected to Western blot analysis using an
anti-phospho-SRF or anti-SRF as a control of endogenous SRF expression.
Lower panel, Jurkat cells were treated as
previously described. Nuclear extracts were analyzed by EMSA, using
-32P-labeled SRE oligonucleotide probe. C,
Jurkat-TAg cells transfected with c-fos promoter luciferase
reporter or SRE luciferase reporter were cultured for 36 or 24 h,
respectively, and preincubated with indicated concentrations of U0126
for 2 h. Cells were left unstimulated ( ) or stimulated (+) with
an anti-CD3 mAb for the final 12 or 6 h of culture, respectively,
and lysed for luciferase assay.
|
|
SRF Activation by TCR Requires Vav1--
Vav1 activates the
MEK/ERK pathway in T cells (25, 36), but its role in early gene
activation is unclear. Therefore, we examined how Vav1 regulates SRE
activity. First, Jurkat cells were transfected with Vav1 along with
SRE, SRE
Ets, or SRE
SRF reporter constructs followed by anti-CD3
stimulation. As shown in Fig.
4A, overexpression of Vav1
increased both basal and TCR-induced SRE stimulation (6- and 11-fold
increase, respectively). These increases were weaker in the absence of
the Ets binding site but were still notable (4- and 6-fold increase,
respectively). Consistent with Fig. 2A, SRE
SRF activation
by Vav1 was abrogated. Vav1 overexpression was confirmed by immunoblot
analysis (Fig. 4A, inset). Jurkat cells
overexpressing dominant negative Vav1 mutants (DH-mutated (L213A), or
SH2-mutated (R695L)) exhibited a strong reduction of SRF activity,
whereas PH-deleted (
PH) Vav1 had no significant effect (Fig.
4B). As controls, TCR-induced SRE, c-fos
promoter, and IL-2 promoter activations were also inhibited by dominant negative Vav1 mutants (Fig. 4, C, D, and
E, respectively). Proper expression of each transfected
protein was confirmed by immunoblot analysis (Fig. 4, B and
E, insets). Second, to assess whether MEK could
be involved in SRF activation by Vav1, Jurkat cells transfected with
Vav1 and the SRF reporter were incubated with indicated concentrations
of U0126 (Fig. 5A). U0126
inhibited SRF activation by Vav1 up to 70%. To confirm the role of MEK
in SRF activation by TCR, Jurkat cells were transfected with a
constitutively active form of MEK (CA-MEK) and SRF reporter construct
and activated with an anti-CD3 antibody. Fig. 5B shows that
CA-MEK strongly increased SRF activation by TCR. As a control, the well
characterized MEK-activated transcription factor Elk-1 was also
activated by overexpression of CA-MEK (Fig. 5C). Finally,
Fig. 5D shows that overexpression of SRF mutant, SRF 1-338, blocked
both TCR- and Vav1-induced SRF activation. Proper expression of each
transfected protein was confirmed by immunoblot analysis (Fig.
5D, inset). These results show that Vav1 can
promote SRF-dependent transcription by targeting SRF
proteins via a MEK-dependent pathway.

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Vav1 couples the TCR to SRF activation.
A, Jurkat-TAg cells were cotransfected with empty vector or
Myc-tagged Vav1 (5 µg) along with SRE or SRE mutant luciferase
reporters (10 µg each) and cultured for 24 h. Cells were left
unstimulated (open bars) or stimulated
(dark bars) with anti-CD3 mAb (5 µg/ml) for the
final 6 h and lysed for luciferase assay. Samples of the lysates
were analyzed for Vav1 expression by anti-Myc immunoblotting
(inset). Jurkat-TAg cells were transfected with empty vector
or Myc-tagged Vav1 mutants (5 µg each) along with SRF luciferase
reporter (10 µg) (B), SRE (10 µg) (C),
c-fos promoter (10 µg) (D), or IL-2 promoter
(10 µg) (E), and cultured for 24 h. Cells
were stimulated and analyzed as in panel A.
|
|

View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Vav1 activates SRF via a
MEK-dependent pathway. A, Jurkat-TAg cells
transfected with empty vector or Myc-tagged Vav1 (5 µg) along with a
SRF luciferase reporter (10 µg) were cultured for 24 h,
preincubated with indicated concentrations of U0126 for 2 h, and
lysed for luciferase assay. Lysates were analyzed for the expression of
Vav1 by immunoblotting with anti-Myc mAb. Jurkat-TAg cells were
transfected with empty vector or CA-MEK (10 µg each) along with SRF
luciferase reporter (10 µg) (B) or Gal4BD:Elk-1 (2 µg)
and 5×GAL4-luciferase (5 µg) (C), and cultured for 24 and
36 h, respectively. Cells were left unstimulated (open
bars) or stimulated (dark bars) with
an anti-CD3 mAb (5 µg/ml) for the final 6 and 12 h of culture,
respectively. Lysates were analyzed for the expression of CA-MEK by
immunoblotting with an anti-MEK antibody. D, Jurkat-TAg
cells were transfected with empty vectors, Myc-tagged Vav1 (5 µg),
and HA-tagged SRF mutant (SRF 1-338, 10 µg) along with SRF
luciferase reporter (10 µg). Cells were stimulated and analyzed as in
panel A. Lysates were analyzed for Vav1 and SRF mutant
expression by immunoblotting with anti-Myc and anti-HA
antibodies.
|
|
Vav1 Activates SRF via a Rac1/Cdc42-Pak1-dependent
Pathway--
Following GTP binding to Rac1 or Cdc42, Pak1 associates
with these GTPases and becomes fully activated. To further assess signaling requirements of SRF activation by Vav1, we transfected Jurkat
cells with Vav1 in the presence of dominant negative GTPases (Rac1N17
and Cdc42N17) or a kinase-deficient Pak1 (PakKR) along with the SRF
reporter (Fig. 6A). Rac1N17,
Cdc42N17, and PakKR blocked both TCR- and Vav1-enhanced SRF activation
after TCR ligation. Pak1 has been shown to phosphorylate MEK at the
binding site of Raf-1, required for MEK activation (37). We therefore
asked whether MEK was downstream of Pak1 in TCR-induced SRF activation. Jurkat cells were transfected with PakKR and stimulated with an anti-CD3 antibody. The evaluation of MEK activation was performed using
antibodies directed against phosphorylated serines 217/221 of MEK.
PakKR decreased TCR-induced MEK activation by 50%, indicating that
Pak1 may act upstream of MEK (Fig. 6B). An in
vitro kinase assay on anti-Pak1 immune complexes isolated from
activated Jurkat cells confirms that Pak1 activity was increased
following TCR stimulation, as visualized by phosphorylation of the
exogenous substrate MBP. As a control of Pak1 expression, immunoblot
analysis was performed on immune complexes (Fig. 6C). This
result shows that TCR engagement activates SRF by a
Vav1-Rac1/Cdc42-Pak1 pathway.

View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Vav1 promotes SRF activation through a
Rac1/Cdc42-Pak1-MEK-dependent pathway. A,
Jurkat-TAg cells were transfected with empty vectors or a combination
of Myc-tagged Vav1 and dominant negative Rac1 (Rac1N17), Cdc42
(Cdc42N17), and Pak1 (PakKR) mutants (10 µg each) along with a SRF
luciferase reporter (10 µg) and cultured for 24 h. Cells were
left unstimulated (open bars) or stimulated
(dark bars) with an anti-CD3 mAb (5 µg/ml) for
the final 6 h of culture and lysed for luciferase assay.
B, Jurkat-TAg cells were transfected with Myc-tagged PakKR
(30 µg each) and the corresponding empty vector as a negative
control. After 24 h, cells were left unstimulated ( ) or
stimulated (+) with anti-CD3 mAb (5 µg/ml) for 5 min. Lysates were
subjected to immunoblot analysis using antibodies against phospho-MEK,
MEK1, Myc, and Vav. Densitometric quantification of MEK phosphorylation
is shown (lower panel). C, TCR
engagement promotes Pak1 activation. Jurkat cells were left
unstimulated ( ) or stimulated (+) with an anti-CD3 mAb (5 µg/ml)
for 2 min and lysed, and anti-Pak1 immune complexes were assayed for a
kinase assay using MBP as an exogenous substrate where indicated. The
same immune complexes were analyzed for Pak1 expression by
immunoblotting with an anti-Pak1.
|
|
TCR Ligation Activates SRF via a PI-3K-independent
Pathway--
The PI-3K pathway mediates SRF-dependent
transcription in some cellular types (14, 38). To investigate whether
this pathway is implicated in SRF activation upon TCR engagement, we
transfected Jurkat cells with Vav1 and the SRF reporter. Cells were
then preincubated or not with Ly294002, an inhibitor of the PI-3K. Fig.
7A shows that Ly294002
affected neither TCR- nor Vav1-induced SRF activation. To test the
efficacy of the inhibitor, we measured the phosphorylation of Akt, a
downstream effector of the PI-3K pathway, using an antiserum specific
for Akt phosphoserine 473. Fig. 7B shows that Ly294002 inhibited Akt phosphorylation in a dose-dependent manner.
Next, Jurkat cells were transfected with constitutive active forms of the catalytic subunit of the PI-3K (p110*) along with either SRF reporter or NF-
B reporter, as a control. As shown in Fig.
7C, p110* had no significant effect on TCR-induced SRF
activation, whereas it increased TCR-induced NF-
B activation (Fig.
7D), consistent with previous studies (39). Taken together,
these results indicate that TCR and Vav1 may activate SRF independently
of the PI-3K pathway.

View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
TCR engagement activates SRF via a
PI-3K-independent pathway. A, Jurkat-TAg cells
transfected with empty vector or Myc-tagged Vav1 (5 µg) along with a
SRF luciferase reporter (10 µg) were cultured for 24 h and
preincubated with Ly294002 (5 µM) for 2 h or ethanol
as a negative control. Cells were left unstimulated (open
bars) or stimulated (dark bars) with
an anti-CD3 mAb (5 µg/ml) for the final 6 h of culture and lysed
for luciferase assay. B, Jurkat cells were incubated with
indicated concentrations of Ly294002 for 2 h. Cells were lysed and
lysates analyzed by anti-phosphoserine 473-Akt (upper
panel) or anti-Akt (lower panel)
immunoblotting. C, Jurkat-TAg cells were transfected with
empty vector or constitutive forms of PI-3K (p110*), along with the SRF
luciferase reporter (10 µg) or NF- B luciferase reporter (10 µg).
D, cells were then left unstimulated (open
bars) or stimulated (dark bars) with
an anti-CD3 mAb (5 µg/ml) for the final 6 h of culture and lysed
for luciferase assay.
|
|
Vav Proteins Activate SRF via a RhoA-dependent
Pathway--
We recently showed that Vav2 can promote SRE activation
in T cells (31). In vitro studies have shown that Vav2 can
act as a potent GEF for Rac1 and Cdc42, but also for RhoA (40).
Moreover, SRF exhibits a strong dependence on functional RhoA (15).
Jurkat cells were transfected with a combination of Vav1 or Vav2 with a
dominant negative RhoA mutant (RhoAN19) and the SRF reporter. Interestingly, Vav2, like Vav1, increased SRF activation by TCR (2-4-fold increase) (Fig.
8A). Overexpression of RhoAN19
blocked TCR-induced SRF activation, and both Vav1- and Vav2-induced SRF activation. Proper expression of Vav1 and Vav2 was analyzed by immunoblot (Fig. 8A, inset). Of note,
Vav2-induced SRF activation was also blocked by Rac1N17 and Cdc42N17
(data not shown), suggesting that Vav1 and Vav2 act through similar
pathways to activate SRF. As a control and consistent with our previous
study (31), Vav1 increased NFAT activity by TCR, whereas Vav2 blocked
TCR-induced NFAT activity (Fig. 8B). Finally, dominant
negative RhoN19 did not inhibited Elk-1 transactivation by TCR (Fig.
8C). These results suggest that Vav proteins regulate SRF
activation by TCR via a Rho GTPase-dependent pathway.

View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
Activation of SRF by Vav1 and Vav2 through a
RhoA-dependent pathway. Jurkat-TAg cells were
transfected with combinations of Myc-tagged Vav1 (5 µg) or Myc-tagged
Vav2 (5 µg) and RhoA N19 (10 µg) and their respective corresponding
empty vectors, along with a SRF luciferase reporter (10 µg)
(A) or NFAT luciferase reporter (10 µg) (B),
and cultured for 24 h. Cells were left unstimulated
(open bars) or stimulated (dark
bars) with an anti-CD3 mAb (5 µg/ml) for the final 6 h of culture and lysed for luciferase assay. Lysates were analyzed for
the expression of Vav1 and Vav2 by immunoblotting with an anti-Myc mAb
(inset). C, Jurkat-TAg cells were transfected
with RhoN19 (10 µg) along with Gal4BD:Elk-1 (2 µg) and
5×GAL4-luciferase (5 µg), cultured for 36 h, and left
unstimulated (open bars) or stimulated
(dark bars) with an anti-CD3 mAb (5 µg/ml) for
the final 12 h of culture, and lysed for luciferase assay.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Vav proteins play an essential role in the activation of multiple
transcription factors, which in turn control gene expression leading to
T cell activation and proliferation. SRE-regulated early genes, such as
c-fos, participate in the formation of AP-1 complexes (3),
but the biochemical pathways leading to early gene activation in
lymphocytes remain uncharacterized. Vav1 regulates AP-1 activation in T
cells following JNK activation and c-Jun phosphorylation (26). The
activity of AP-1 complex can be regulated by a second mechanism that
requires de novo transcription of c-fos. We
recently showed that Vav proteins activate c-fos SRE in T
cells (31). However, the mechanisms by which Vav1 can regulate
c-fos SRE transcriptional activity following TCR engagement
remain unclear.
Here we show that TCR stimulation regulates SRF-dependent
transcription through a pathway connecting Vav proteins to Rho family GTPases and the serine/threonine kinases Pak1 and MEK, but
independently of the PI-3K. Our findings provide the first evidence of
a signaling cascade activating SRF-dependent transcription
by Vav proteins, which could participate in the regulation of
lymphocyte proliferation (Fig. 9). We
clearly demonstrate that TCR engagement increases c-fos SRE
and SRF activation in Jurkat cells. Surprisingly, we observed that
serum has no effect on SRE activation in Jurkat cells and does not
interfere with TCR-increased SRE activation (data not shown). One
explanation could be that Jurkat T cells are leukemic cells, which are
relatively serum-independent. However, our data also indicate that SRF
activation by TCR is a critical step for early gene activation in T
cells. TCR activation is often assisted by costimulatory molecules
present on the T cell surface such as CD28. This costimulation leads to
stronger and more sustained phosphorylation and activation of Vav1 than
when each receptor is cross-linked alone, indicating that Vav1 can
integrate extracellular signals from multiple membrane receptors.
Previous studies have shown that CD3/CD28 costimulation is required for
AP-1 activation, including at the level of c-fos (41). On
the other hand, CD28 costimulation has been shown to differentially
regulate c-fos and c-jun expression (42).
Although Vav1 overexpression, which partially mimics TCR and CD28
costimulation, increased SRF activation, we did not observe a
costimulatory effect of CD28 and CD3 on either SRF or SRE activation
(data not shown). Recent studies have shown that CD28 preferentially
activates a PI-3K-dependent pathway (43, 44). In our
cellular system, SRF activation by TCR occurs via a PI-3K-independent
pathway, which could explain the lack of effect of CD28 costimulation.
We also observed that deletion of the SRF binding sites on SRE
abrogated Vav1-induced SRE activation. By contrast, deletion of the TCF
binding sites on SRE had only limited effect on SRE activation by TCR
or Vav1. This strongly supports the notion that SRF can promote
transcriptional activation of SRE-regulated genes in lymphocytes
independently of TCF. Two observations can support these results: (i)
other factors such as phox/Mhox, C/EBP
, NF-
B, and ATF6, which
have been shown to interact with SRF, could potentiate
SRF-dependent transcription in lymphocytes; (ii) the
assembly of transcriptionally active SRF complexes may be mediated by
co-activators of the CBP/p300 family and chromatin remodeling events
induced by acetylation of specific histones (45, 46).
SRE-regulated early genes control long term gene expression, cell
growth, and survival. The physiological relevance of our findings is
highlighted by the fact that the transcriptional activity of the IL-2
gene, a critical cytokine regulating T cell proliferation, is blocked
by a dominant negative SRF mutant, following TCR stimulation and/or
Vav1 overexpression (data not shown). Consistently, we showed that
Vav1-induced AP-1 activation plays a major role in IL-2 transcriptional
regulation in T cells (26). Moreover, T cells from
Vav1
/
mice fail to proliferate in response to TCR
stimulation, because they essentially fail to secrete IL-2 (25).
Interestingly, the loss of Vav2 also results in impaired
BCR-dependent proliferation, suggesting that a similar
process may regulate B cell growth (47, 48). These observations fully
support our findings that the Vav family play an important role in the
regulation of lymphocyte SRE-dependent early gene
expression, cytokines synthesis, and cell proliferation.
Previous studies have shown that SRE-regulated early gene activation
occurs via a MAPK-dependent pathway. Supporting a role of
MEK in the regulation of early gene transcription, the MEK inhibitor
PD98059 inhibits c-fos induction (49, 50). Vav1-deficient T
cells showed severe defects in ERK1/2 activation (25). Consistently, we
show that the MEK inhibitor U0126 blocks both TCR- and Vav1-enhanced SRF activation. Although activation of Elk-1 by ERK1/2 is well described, the activation of SRF by phosphorylation is less clear. SRF
can be phosphorylated by pp90rsk, a known
effector of ERKs, CaM kinases II and IV, and the MAPKAP-2 (MK2), which
is regulated by p38 MAPK (10). SRF phosphorylation could facilitate
access of SRF to SRE (7). We clearly showed that TCR stimulation
resulted in the phosphorylation of SRF on its serine 103 and modulated
the binding of SRF complexes to SRE in a MEK- and
p38-dependent pathway. Considering the critical role of
Vav1 in ERK1/2 activation in T cells (25, 36),
pp90rsk could be a good candidate for connecting
MEK to SRF in T cells. Another possible intermediate is p38 MAPK
because Vav1 has been shown to regulate p38 MAPK activity in T cells
(51). Supporting this idea, we observed that the p38 MAPK inhibitor
SB203580 decreased TCR-induced SRF activation. Thus, identification of
the SRF kinases implicated in TCR signaling could be of great interest
to understand the regulation of early genes in lymphocytes.
A major question is what are the effectors between Vav1 and MEK
connecting the TCR to SRF-dependent pathway? Lim and
co-workers (52) have shown that active Rac1 and Cdc42 GTPases are
required for Pak1 activation. We show that dominant negative forms of
Rac1, Cdc42, and Pak1 blocked SRF activation by TCR and Vav1,
indicating that these proteins seem to function downstream of Vav1. The
point mutation replacing the lysine 299 in an arginine does not affect the binding of Pak1 CRIB domain to activated Rac1 and Cdc42, suggesting that Pak1 activity per se is required. However, although we
observed that TCR engagement stimulates Pak1 activation, we found that overexpression of wild type Pak1 did not induce SRF activation (data
not shown). This suggests that Pak1 is necessary but not sufficient to
promote SRE activation in T cells. These results are consistent with
the findings that overexpression of Pak1 was not able to activate NFAT
in T cells (30). The association of Pak1 with Vav1, Nck, and SLP-76 is
required for its activation following TCR cross-linking (28).
Consistently, our Vav1 mutants lacking DH (L213A) and SH2 (R695L)
functions blocked TCR-induced SRF and c-fos SRE activation
(data not shown). The PakKR mutant used in this study conserves its
interactive motifs. This rules out the possibility that its dominant
negative effect on SRF activation is a consequence of a defect in
forming molecular complexes. Studies in fibroblasts have shown that
Pak1 phosphorylated MEK at serine 298, a site important for MEK-Raf1
interaction (37). We show that PakKR decreased MEK activation following
TCR engagement, indicating that Pak1 similarly acts upstream of MEK in
the pathway connecting the TCR to SRF activation. Interestingly, Pak1
did not totally block MEK activation by TCR, suggesting that Pak1 and/or MEK might integrate signals from other pathways known to regulate SRE, such as the Ras pathway.
Recent findings have shown that SRF activation can occur through either
RhoA-dependent or RhoA-independent pathways (53). PI-3K has
been implicated in the signaling to SRF depending on extracellular
stimuli (14, 54). PI-3K products participate in Vav1 activation by
permitting its recruitment to the membrane through its PH domain (55).
Therefore, we investigated whether PI-3K is involved in TCR- or
Vav1-induced SRF activation. In Jurkat cells, neither Ly294002 nor
constitutive active PI-3K mutant interfered with TCR-induced SRF
activation. Supporting these observations, our Vav1
PH mutant had no
significant dominant negative effect in SRF activation by TCR. This
indicates that, at least in Jurkat cells, SRF is not activated by a
PI-3K-dependent pathway but preferentially by a Rho
GTPase-dependent pathway. Vav1 and Vav2 seem to
indistinguishably activate members of Rho family GTPases (RhoA,
Rac1, Cdc42) (40, 56), and Vav1 is a critical regulator of actin
cytoskeleton remodeling in T cells (57). Serum-induced SRF activity
occurs via a signaling pathway involving the RhoA GTPase (15, 53). Moreover, RhoA potentiates AP-1 transcription in T cells (58). Consistent with these findings, we show that Vav2 overexpression (as
well as Vav1) increases TCR-induced SRF activation through a
RhoA-dependent pathway. Recent studies have shown that RhoA GTPase activates SRF via its ability to induce cytoskeletal
rearrangement (59). This RhoA-actin signaling pathway could cooperate
with our described Vav1-Pak1-MEK signaling pathway to promote full SRF
activation following TCR engagement.
Activation of Vav proteins can be induced through the stimulation of
different receptors (for a review, see Ref. 17), and we showed that
Vav2 increases ERKs and c-fos SRE activities in T (31) and B
cells (data not shown). Given their structural and functional
properties, Vav proteins can integrate extracellular signals targeting
both Rho/Rac and Ras pathways, leading to gene regulation and, in turn,
complete lymphocyte activation and proliferation. Together with our
findings, this places the Vav family as central components in the
signaling pathways connecting immunoreceptors to SRE-regulated early genes.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank R. Prywes, J. Chernoff, R. Treisman, Y. Le Marchand-Brustel, and B. Hemmings for sharing plasmid
constructs and D. Storm and S. Poser for kindly providing
SRF-luciferase reporter plasmid. We also thank M. Greenberg and J. C. Chambard for providing antibodies. We thank R. A. Hipskind for
helpful comments and discussions and A. Altman for critical reading of
the manuscript.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported in part by INSERM, the Fondation
pour la Recherche Médicale, and the Association pour la Recherche sur le Cancer.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.
§
Recipient of a doctoral fellowship from the Ministère de
l'Enseignement Supérieur et de la Recherche.
**
To whom correspondence should be addressed: INSERM U343, IFR50,
Hôpital de l'Archet, 06202 Nice Cedex 3, France. Tel.:
33-4-92-15-77-00; Fax: 33-4-92-15-77-09; E-mail:
deckert@unice.fr.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, February 21, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M111627200
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
SRE, serum response
element;
AP-1, activating protein-1;
BCR, B cell receptor;
ERK, extracellular signal-regulated kinase;
GEF, guanine nucleotide exchange
factor;
IL-2, interleukin-2;
MAPK, mitogen-activated protein kinase;
NFAT, nuclear factor of activated T cells;
NF-
B, nuclear
factor-
B;
SH, Src homology;
PH, pleckstrin homology;
DH, Dbl
homologous;
SRF, serum response factor;
TCF, ternary complex factor;
TCR, T cell receptor;
TAg, T antigen;
MEK, mitogen-activated protein
kinase/extracellular signal-regulated kinase kinase;
EMSA, electrophoretic mobility shift assay;
PI-3K, phosphatidylinositol
3-kinase;
CA, constitutively active form;
mAb, monoclonal antibody;
HA, hemagglutinin;
MBP, myelin basic protein;
CaM, calmodulin.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Lin, J.,
and Weiss, A.
(2001)
J. Cell Sci.
114,
243-244[Free Full Text]
|
| 2.
|
Glimcher, L. H.,
and Singh, H.
(1999)
Cell
96,
13-23[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 3.
|
Shaulian, E.,
and Karin, M.
(2001)
Oncogene
20,
2390-2400[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 4.
|
Treisman, R.
(1994)
Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev.
4,
96-101[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 5.
|
Norman, C.,
Runswick, M.,
Pollock, R.,
and Treisman, R.
(1988)
Cell
55,
989-1003[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 6.
|
Treisman, R.
(1996)
Curr. Opin. Cell Biol.
8,
205-215[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 7.
|
Janknecht, R.,
Hipskind, R. A.,
Houthaeve, T.,
Nordheim, A.,
and Stunnenberg, H. G.
(1992)
EMBO J.
11,
1045-1054[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 8.
|
Rivera, V. M.,
Miranti, C. K.,
Misra, R. P.,
Ginty, D. D.,
Chen, R. H.,
Blenis, J.,
and Greenberg, M. E.
(1993)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13,
6260-6273[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 9.
|
Miranti, C. K.,
Ginty, D. D.,
Huang, G.,
Chatila, T.,
and Greenberg, M. E.
(1995)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15,
3672-3684[Abstract]
|
| 10.
|
Heidenreich, O.,
Neininger, A.,
Schratt, G.,
Zinck, R.,
Cahill, M. A.,
Engel, K.,
Kotlyarov, A.,
Kraft, R.,
Kostka, S.,
Gaestel, M.,
and Nordheim, A.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
14434-14443[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 11.
|
Hipskind, R. A.,
Rao, V. N.,
Mueller, C. G.,
Reddy, E. S.,
and Nordheim, A.
(1991)
Nature
354,
531-534[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 12.
|
Shore, P.,
and Sharrocks, A. D.
(1994)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14,
3283-3291[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 13.
|
Johansen, F. E.,
and Prywes, R.
(1994)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14,
5920-5928[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 14.
|
Poser, S.,
Impey, S.,
Trinh, K.,
Xia, Z.,
and Storm, D. R.
(2000)
EMBO J.
19,
4955-4966[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 15.
|
Hill, C. S.,
Wynne, J.,
and Treisman, R.
(1995)
Cell
81,
1159-1170[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 16.
|
Altman, A.,
and Deckert, M.
(1999)
Adv. Immunol.
72,
1-101[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 17.
|
Bustelo, X. R.
(2000)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
20,
1461-1477[Free Full Text]
|
| 18.
|
DeFranco, A. L.
(2001)
Nat. Immunol.
2,
482-484[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 19.
|
Collins, T. L.,
Deckert, M.,
and Altman, A.
(1997)
Immunol. Today
18,
221-225[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 20.
|
Schuebel, K. E.,
Bustelo, X. R.,
Nielsen, D. A.,
Song, B. J.,
Barbacid, M.,
Goldman, D.,
and Lee, I. J.
(1996)
Oncogene
13,
363-371[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 21.
|
Movilla, N.,
and Bustelo, X. R.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
7870-7885[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 22.
|
Trenkle, T.,
McClelland, M.,
Adlkofer, K.,
and Welsh, J.
(2000)
Gene (Amst.)
245,
139-149[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 23.
|
Wu, J.,
Katzav, S.,
and Weiss, A.
(1995)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15,
4337-4346[Abstract]
|
| 24.
|
Deckert, M.,
Tartare-Deckert, S.,
Couture, C.,
Mustelin, T.,
and Altman, A.
(1996)
Immunity
5,
591-604[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 25.
|
Costello, P. S.,
Walters, A. E.,
Mee, P. J.,
Turner, M.,
Reynolds, L. F.,
Prisco, A.,
Sarner, N.,
Zamoyska, R.,
and Tybulewicz, V. L.
(1999)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
96,
3035-3040[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 26.
|
Kaminuma, O.,
Deckert, M.,
Elly, C.,
Liu, Y. C.,
and Altman, A.
(2001)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
21,
3126-3136[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 27.
|
Bagrodia, S.,
and Cerione, R. A.
(1999)
Trends Cell Biol.
9,
350-355[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 28.
|
Bubeck Wardenburg, J.,
Pappu, R., Bu, J. Y.,
Mayer, B.,
Chernoff, J.,
Straus, D.,
and Chan, A. C.
(1998)
Immunity
9,
607-616[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 29.
|
Salojin, K. V.,
Zhang, J.,
and Delovitch, T. L.
(1999)
J. Immunol.
163,
844-853[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 30.
|
Yablonski, D.,
Kane, L. P.,
Qian, D.,
and Weiss, A.
(1998)
EMBO J.
17,
5647-5657[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 31.
|
Tartare-Deckert, S.,
Monthouel, M. N.,
Charvet, C.,
Foucault, I.,
Van Obberghen, E.,
Bernard, A.,
Altman, A.,
and Deckert, M.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
20849-20857[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 32.
|
Tanti, J. F.,
Gremeaux, T.,
Grillo, S.,
Calleja, V.,
Klippel, A.,
Williams, L. T.,
Van Obberghen, E.,
and Le Marchand-Brustel, Y.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
25227-25232[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 33.
|
Johansen, F. E.,
and Prywes, R.
(1993)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13,
4640-4647[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 34.
|
Bertolotto, C.,
Ricci, J. E.,
Luciano, F.,
Mari, B.,
Chambard, J. C.,
and Auberger, P.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
12941-12947[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 35.
|
Magnaghi-Jaulin, L.,
Masutani, H.,
Lipinski, M.,
and Harel-Bellan, A.
(1996)
FEBS Lett.
391,
247-251[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 36.
|
Villalba, M.,
Hernandez, J.,
Deckert, M.,
Tanaka, Y.,
and Altman, A.
(2000)
Eur. J. Immunol.
30,
1587-1596[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 37.
|
Frost, J. A.,
Steen, H.,
Shapiro, P.,
Lewis, T.,
Ahn, N.,
Shaw, P. E.,
and Cobb, M. H.
(1997)
EMBO J.
16,
6426-6438[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 38.
|
Wang, Y.,
Falasca, M.,
Schlessinger, J.,
Malstrom, S.,
Tsichlis, P.,
Settleman, J., Hu, W.,
Lim, B.,
and Prywes, R.
(1998)
Cell Growth Differ.
9,
513-522[Abstract]
|
| 39.
|
Kane, L. P.,
Shapiro, V. S.,
Stokoe, D.,
and Weiss, A.
(1999)
Curr. Biol.
9,
601-604[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 40.
|
Abe, K.,
Rossman, K. L.,
Liu, B.,
Ritola, K. D.,
Chiang, D.,
Campbell, S. L.,
Burridge, K.,
and Der, C. J.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
10141-10149[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 41.
|
Woodside, D. G.,
and McIntyre, B. W.
(1998)
J. Immunol.
161,
649-658[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 42.
|
Chatta, G. S.,
Spies, A. G.,
Chang, S.,
Mize, G. J.,
Linsley, P. S.,
Ledbetter, J. A.,
and Morris, D. R.
(1994)
J. Immunol.
153,
5393-5401[Abstract]
|
| 43.
|
Parry, R. V.,
Reif, K.,
Smith, G.,
Sansom, D. M.,
Hemmings, B. A.,
and Ward, S. G.
(1997)
Eur. J. Immunol.
27,
2495-2501[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 44.
|
Kane, L. P.,
Andres, P. G.,
Howland, K. C.,
Abbas, A. K.,
and Weiss, A.
(2001)
Nat. Immunol.
2,
37-44[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 45.
|
Goodman, R. H.,
and Smolik, S.
(2000)
Genes Dev.
14,
1553-1577[Free Full Text]
|
| 46.
|
Alberts, A. S.,
and Treisman, R.
(1998)
EMBO J.
17,
4075-4085[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 47.
|
Tedford, K.,
Nitschke, L.,
Girkontaite, I.,
Charlesworth, A.,
Chan, G.,
Sakk, V.,
Barbacid, |