Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M110473200 on February 27, 2002
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 19, 17112-17116, May 10, 2002
Altered Amelogenin Self-assembly Based on Mutations Observed in
Human X-linked Amelogenesis Imperfecta (AIH1)*
Michael L.
Paine
§,
Ya-Ping
Lei
,
Kenneth
Dickerson¶, and
Malcolm L.
Snead
From the
University of Southern California, School of
Dentistry, Center for Craniofacial Molecular Biology, Los Angeles,
California 90033-1004 and ¶ Biacore, Inc., San Diego, California
92121
Received for publication, October 31, 2001, and in revised form, January 29, 2002
 |
ABSTRACT |
A hallmark of biological systems is a reliance on
protein assemblies to perform complex functions. We have focused
attention on mammalian enamel formation because it relies on a
self-assembling protein complex to direct mineral habit. The principle
protein of enamel is amelogenin, a 180-amino acid hydrophobic protein that self-assembles to form nanospheres. We have used independent technical methods, consisting of the yeast two-hybrid (Y2H) assay and
surface plasmon resonance (SPR), to demonstrate the importance of
amelogenin self-assembly domains. In addition, we have analyzed mutations in amelogenin observed in patients with amelogenesis imperfecta who demonstrate defects in enamel formation. Assessments of
self-assembly of these mutant amelogenins by either SPR or Y2H assay
yield concordant data. These data support the conclusion that the
amelogenin amino-terminal self-assembly domain is essential to the
creation of an enamel extracellular organic matrix capable of directing
mineral formation. It also suggests that a pathway through which point
mutations in the amelogenin protein can adversely impact on the
formation of the enamel organ is by disturbing self-assembly of the
organic matrix. These data support the utilization of the Y2H assay to
search for protein interactions among extracellular matrix proteins
that contribute to biomineralization and provide functional information
on protein-protein and protein-mineral interactions.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The self-assembly of a protein complex is a hallmark of biological
systems. From processive enzymatic reactions to extracellular matrices,
cells achieve control over their microenvironment through the assembly
of a mixture of proteins. Protein assemblies are created with a
specific stoichiometry. Such assembly precision is achieved through the
interaction of protein motifs contained within the constituent protein
members. The yeast two-hybrid
(Y2H)1 assay has been used
successfully to study protein assembly and offers distinct advantages
over many biochemical techniques used previously. An example of the
value of the Y2H assay can be seen in the assembly properties of type X
collagen. Type X collagen is a homotrimer of
1(X) chains encoded by
the COL10A1 gene, which is expressed in hypertrophic chondrocytes
during the process of endochondral ossification. Dwarfism in domestic
pigs is a result of a single change (Gly590
Arg) to the
1(X) chain of type X collagen (1). In humans, a similar phenotype
has been described for a mutation at the equivalent position
(Gly590
Glu) of type X collagen. These patients have
Schmid metaphyseal chondrodysplasia, which is a mild skeletal disorder
associated with dwarfism and growth plate abnormality. The Y2H assay
and in vitro assembly experiments demonstrated that the
amino acid substitution interfered with the ability of the mutated
collagen molecules to engage in trimerization (1). In this example, confirmation of a valid animal model for a human genetic disease has
been possible in part by the Y2H assay. At the same time, the Y2H assay
has given unique information about assembly dynamics that add to the
genetic, radiologic, histologic, and biochemical data previously
available. Although biochemical methods can be used to detect
dimerization, they often lack specificity, they may not be
quantitative, they are not easy to perform, and they do not facilitate
the genetic analysis of protein-protein interactions under
physiological conditions.
We have focused attention on mammalian enamel as an example of the
self-assembly of an extracellular matrix protein complex. In the case
of enamel, a complex mixture of proteins self-assemble to form
supramolecular complexes that are capable of guiding the crystal habit
of hydroxyapatite crystallites (2-4). The crystals organize in such a
way that the final product resists wear from repeated use during
mastication, resisting non-catastrophic failure in a wet and bacterial
laden environment (5). The principal protein of enamel is amelogenin, a
hydrophobic protein that has been shown to undergo self-assembly to
form nanospheres (6). Two domains in amelogenin (an A domain consisting
of amino-terminal residues 1-42 and a B domain consisting of
carboxyl-terminal residues 157-173) were subsequently identified as
mediating amelogenin self-assembly by using the Y2H assay (7). In the
present study, we corroborate the importance of these two self-assembly
domains to the process of amelogenin self-assembly using surface
plasmon resonance (SPR). We further define altered assembly dynamics
for changes in single residues in the A domain, which are altered in
individuals affected with X-linked amelogenesis imperfecta (AIH1).
These mutations result in a Thr21
Ile alteration (8)
and a Pro41
Thr alteration (9). Amelogenesis imperfecta
is a hereditary disease of enamel and, when linked to the amelogenin
locus, severely reduces the ability of amelogenin to self-assembly as
measured by either the Y2H assay or by SPR.
We have used the Y2H system and SPR to perform a genetic analysis of
the determinants of amelogenin self-assembly. The favorable correlation
between assembly parameters for amelogenin as measured by either the
Y2H assay or SPR support the utility of these techniques to further
define and understand the contribution of protein assembly to direct
specific mineralized architecture. Enhanced understanding of the
physicochemical guidelines governing protein self-assembly and the
ability to manipulate these interactions will contribute to the studies
of nanotechnology and biomimetics (10).
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Expression and Purification of Recombinant Proteins for Surface
Plasmon Resonance Studies--
Preparation of the recombinant mouse
amelogenin rM179 has been described elsewhere (11). Preparation of the
recombinant histidine-tagged wild-type mouse amelogenin (rp(H)M180) and
the recombinant, mutated amelogenin constructs (rp(H)M180
A,
rp(H)M180
B, rp(H)M180T21
I, rp(H)M180P41
T, and rp(H)M180T21
I,P41
T) have
been described elsewhere (12). Briefly, polyhistidine-containing recombinant proteins were prepared in the expression vector pQE30 (Qiagen Inc., Valencia, CA) and recovered using nickel-nitrilotriacetic acid metal affinity chromatography using the protocol supplied by
Qiagen Inc. The rp(H)M180
A contains the FLAG (Eastman Kodak Co., New
Haven, CT) epitope in place of domain A (2, 12), and rp(H)M180
B
contains three repeats of the hemagglutinin epitope in place of domain
B (12). The recombinant amelogenin constructs with single or dual point
mutations did not contain any marker peptides besides the polyhistidine
cartridge at the amino terminus (Qiagen Inc.). The A domain and B
domain of mouse amelogenin and the relative positions of the
Thr21
Ile and the Pro41
Thr mutations
for human amelogenesis imperfecta phenotypes are illustrated in Fig.
1. The amino acid sequences for each
construct prepared for SPR have been published previously (12).

View larger version (36K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Amino acid sequence for mouse amelogenin
M180. Domain A (amino-terminal) and domain B
(carboxylregion) are boxed. The relative positions of
altered amino acid residues observed in X-linked amelogenesis
imperfecta (threonine at position 21 and proline at position 41) are
circled.
|
|
Surface Plasmon Resonance--
The Biacore®3000
system, CM5 (carboxymethylated dextran surface) sensor chips, software,
and reagents were obtained from the Biacore AB company (Uppsala,
Sweden). There are four flow cells in a CM5 chip and among these four
cells, three were used for the assay. Flow cell 1 was used as a control
surface, whereas flow cells 2 and 3 were used as test surfaces. The
carboxyl groups on the surface of each flow cell were activated with an
injection of a solution containing 0.2 M
N-ethyl-N'-(3-diethylaminopropyl)carbodiimide and
0.05 M N-hydroxysuccinimide. Recombinant mouse
amelogenin rM179, suspended in 10 mM acetate, pH 4.5, was
injected over flow cells 2 and 3 at a flow rate of 10 µl/min until
~2000 response units of protein was coupled to the sensor surface
(data not included). One response unit corresponds to an immobilized
protein density of 1 pg/mm2 (13). Flow cell 1 was treated
in an identical manner but without any protein. The immobilization was
completed by a 7-min injection of 1 M ethanolamine
hydrochloride to block any remaining activated carboxyl groups.
Protein purity and concentrations were determined by SDS-PAGE analysis
(12) using laser densitometry to compare the recombinant amelogenin to
bovine albumin (molecular mass 69.3 kDa) of a known concentration and subsequently extrapolating molar concentrations for
each of the amelogenin samples. To calculate the concentration of each
amelogenin, individual molecular weights were taken into account (12).
Each test protein was diluted from stock solution in HBS-EP buffer (10 mM Hepes with 0.15 M NaCl, 3.4 mM
EDTA, and 0.005% Surfactant P-20, pH 7.4) to a desired
concentration. The sample was then injected at 10 µl/min at 25 °C
with an ~5-min contact period, followed by a 2-min dissociation
period. The sensor chip was regenerated with 1 M
MgCl2 after each experiment.
Data transformation and overlay plots for all experimental interactions
were prepared with BIAevaluation software 3.0 (Biacore AB). To correct
for refractive index changes and nonspecific binding, the binding
responses generated from flow cell 1 were subtracted from the responses
generated in flow cells 2 and 3.
Plasmid Constructs Prepared for the Yeast Two-hybrid
Assay--
Wild-type and mutated amelogenin cDNAs were engineered
into the GAL4 DNA-binding hybrid vector pPC97 (7). The signal peptide of amelogenin has been excluded from all constructs in this study. Briefly, the plasmids prepared above (rM180, rp(H)M180, rp(H)M180
B, rp(H)M180T21
I, rp(H)M180P41
T, and
rp(H)M180T21
I,P41
T M180) were used as
template DNA for PCR using the forward primer
TTCGGATCCTATGCCCCTACCACCT and the reverse primer
TAGGGAGCTCTTAATCCACTTCTTCCCG. These two primers included a
BamHI (forward primer) and SacI (reverse primer)
restriction endonuclease restriction sites (underlined) to allow for
efficient, in-frame cloning of the PCR product into pPC97. The
construct rp(H)M180
B includes the hemagglutinin epitope (12).
Respectively, these amelogenin-containing, GAL4 DNA-binding hybrid
vectors have been called p97-M180, p97-M180
B,
p97-M180T21
I, p97-M180P41
T and
p97-M180T21
I,P41
T M180. DNA
nucleotide sequences for each plasmid were obtained to confirm correct
orientation, framing, and sequence of the cDNA insert. The domain
A-deleted amelogenin in the GAL4 binding domain plasmid had been
prepared for a previous study (pMa97/3 (7)) and will be referred to in
this work as p97-M180
A. Construct p97-M180
A does not contain the
FLAG epitope. The wild-type amelogenin-containing GAL4 DNA
transcriptional activating hybrid vector had also been prepared for a
previous study (pMa86/N (7)) and will be referred to in this
communication as p86-M180. Positive hybrid plasmids for p53 and SV40
large T antigen and hybrid plasmids for H-ras and CDC25 have been used
and reported previously (7).
Yeast Two-hybrid Assay--
The liquid assay used to quantitate
-galactosidase activity has been reported previously (7).
 |
RESULTS |
Mutations to Amelogenin Domain A Interfere with Amelogenin
Self-assembly Using the Yeast Two-hybrid Assay--
The results from
the yeast liquid culture assay are presented (Table
I). Yeast hybrid assay was used to
compare relative interaction strengths (including standard deviations)
between wild-type and mutated amelogenin proteins. For each
double-transformant combination eight yeast clones were grown until an
A600 reading of 0.6-0.8 was reached and assayed
for
-galactosidase activity. Wild-type amelogenin interacting with
itself is calculated at unity; and other readings are reported relative
to this including calculated p values. Each of the mutated
amelogenin proteins studied showed a statistically significant
decreased ability to interact with wild-type amelogenin; the most
significant was the domain A-deleted construct followed by the
Thr21
Ile point mutation construct. Positive controls
were the tumor suppressor protein p53 cotransformed with the SV40 large
T antigen and H-ras (wild type) cotransformed with the CDC25 protein of Saccharomyces cerevisiae (14). Negative controls involve
each of the amelogenin protein-hybrid constructs cotransformed with either pPC86 (for the pPC97 hybrids) or pPC97 (for the pPC86 hybrids). All negative control combinations had no ascertainable
-galactosidase activity as measured by the liquid culture assay.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table I
Yeast two-hybrid assay results comparing relative interaction strengths
(including standard deviations) between wild-type and mutated
amelogenin proteins
Positive controls were p53 cotransformed with SV40 large T antigen and
H-ras cotransformed with CDC25. Negative controls involve each of the
amelogenin protein-hybrid constructs cotransformed with either pPC86 or
pPC97. The p values for each of the mutated amelogenins
interacting with wild-type amelogenin are given; p values
were determined by comparing each amelogenin combination to the
self-assembly of wild-type amelogenin (line 1).
|
|
Mutations to Amelogenin Interfere with Amelogenin Self-assembly
Using Surface Plasmon Resonance--
The real-time interaction of
wild-type and mutant amelogenins were determined using SPR at
concentrations of 0.25 µM (test molecule) to the rM179
ligand. The first sample tested (rp(H)M180) was tested a second time
following the completion of the experiment and gave consistent data for
both passes. In addition, this experiment in its entirety was repeated
in two different laboratories by different individuals and gave
identical results. A representative overlay of a sensorgram generated
for each interaction is presented (Fig.
2). It is apparent from these data that
the chip surface remains fully active between each sample. It is also
apparent that the greatest disruption to the amelogenin, as measured by response units, is seen for the
A (rp(H)M180
A) test
construct.

View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
A representative overlay of a sensorgram
generated for each recombinant protein at a concentration of 250 nM. The sensor-bound protein was rM179. The greatest
to the least responsive units were recorded for each recombinant
protein in the following order rp(H)M180 (M180),
rp(H)M180T21 I (T21),
rp(H)M180P41 T (P41),
rp(H)M180T21 I,P41 T
(T21P41), rp(H)M180 B ( B), and rp(H)M180 A
( A).
|
|
The real-time interaction of the various test molecules was determined
at concentrations of 0.25 and 0.50 µM to the rM179 ligand. For each analysis at these two concentrations, the sensorgram was calculated at the same selected time points; threshold, response, and final response. Threshold was measured 5 s before the end of
the injection of the sample, the response was measured 10 s after
the end of the injection, and the final response point was measured
after an additional 10 s (an example is illustrated in Fig.
3A). The data for both these
concentrations are presented in Fig. 3B. At a 0.25 and 0.50 µM concentration, rp(H)M180 produced the highest binding
response whereas rp(H)M180
A yielded the smallest binding response
(Fig. 3B).

View larger version (63K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
A, representative diagram showing the
time course of a typical surface plasmon resonance reaction and time
points used to calculate the data graphically presented in Fig.
2B. Threshold, response and final response were
determined for each test interaction. Threshold was measured 5 s
before the end of the injection of the sample, the response was
measured 10 s after the end of the injection, and the final
response point was measured after an additional 10 s
(arrows). The two arrowheads on the x
axis indicate the start and end points for the flow-through of the test
protein. B, graphical representation of the threshold,
response, and final response for all of the test proteins interacting
with the sensor-bound rM179 amelogenin. For each test protein two
concentrations were recorded, 250 and 500 nM. The samples
tested were rp(H)M180 (M180), rp(H)M180T21 I
(T21), rp(H)M180P41 T (P41),
rp(H)M180T21 I,P41 T
(T21P41), rp(H)M180 B ( B), and rp(H)M180 A
( A). For each protein the three measurements are
presented in an identical manner; threshold first, response second, and
final response last.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Amelogenin is an extracellular matrix protein, the amino acid
sequence of which is highly conserved across species. Following the
initial description of amelogenin proteins in the early 1960s, scientists have attempted to gain information about its secondary and
tertiary structure. Amelogenin CD spectrum suggests that the amelogenin
amino terminus contains
-sheet structure, whereas the central region
and carboxyl-terminal region exhibits a random-coil conformation (15).
It has been suggested that that amelogenin protein fails to retain
stable secondary or tertiary structure (16); however, stable
supermolecular structures are observed and take the form of 10-15-nm
diameter "nanospheres" (6). How amelogenin assembly into
nanospheres is achieved is today being addressed using a number of technologies.
The Y2H system was used to define the "A" and "B" domains of
amelogenin (7). Domain A is essential for amelogenin to amelogenin interactions. In isolation, domain A has the capability to direct interactions with another amelogenin protein. In contrast, domain B
cannot be separated as an interacting domain in isolation, suggesting that conformation is of significance. The previous observation that a
truncated amelogenin lacking domain B can no longer interact with
domain A (7) could explain in part matrix disassembly following
proteolytic cleavage at the carboxyl end of M180 amelogenin by a
specific enamel protease (17).
Atomic force microscopy (AFM) and dynamic light scattering
(DLS) have recently been used to study the assembly properties of
recombinant amelogenin proteins that have been engineered with gross
alterations to either domain A or to domain B or point mutations within
domain A (12). By measuring the parameters of nanosphere size and
assembly kinetics, it was concluded that domain A and domain B (of
amelogenin) have significant and different roles to play in the nature
and dynamics of amelogenin self-assembly (12). The study here blends
SPR and Y2H methodologies to investigate amelogenin assembly
characteristics and presents data that help to explain previous AFM and
DLS data in a quantitative manner. For both SPR and Y2H methodologies
we provide relative quantitative data for wild-type amelogenin as well
as for mutated amelogenins to interact with wild-type amelogenin.
Previously AFM and DLS studies gave data related to amelogenin
multimolecular assemblies (i.e. nanospheres), and these data
included assembly dynamics and size distributions (12). The Y2H assay
provides data related to the ability of two molecules to interact and
is both qualitative and quantitative (7). Surface plasmon resonance
provides additional information relating to how proteins react, in real
time, to other proteins or protein complexes. The aqueous environment
chosen to dilute the test protein for the SPR studies is similar to the aqueous environment of the enamel matrix as determined previously, i.e. HBS-EP buffer at pH 7.4 (including150 mM
NaCl) approximates closely these ionic values previously determined for
maturing enamel (pH 7.26, with 140 mM Na+
and 150 mM Cl
) (18). Although the
recombinant proteins prepared for the SPR studies are
non-phosphorylated, a characteristic apparent in some animal species
(19), the use of recombinant proteins to study amelogenin biochemistry
is widely accepted and well documented (4, 11, 12, 17).
To simplify our data, we present the following relationship
among the studied amelogenins. For the Y2H we determined the strength of interaction for wild-type amelogenin (p86-M180) interacting with the
wild-type or altered amelogenins in the pPC97 cassette to be: M180 > (M180T21
I,P41
T
M180
B
M180P41
T
M180T21
I) > M180
A. The ratio of magnitude of
interaction recorded for the two extreme readings (M180:M180
A) is
~10:1. In a similar fashion, we can present that the SPR response
activity for wild-type amelogenin (rM179) interacting with wild-type
and altered amelogenin complexes. In the case of SPR the relationship
of response activity (for the histidine-tagged recombinant proteins)
would be M180 > (M180T21
I
M180P41
T) > (M180T21
I,P41
T
M180
B)
M180
A where the
ratio of response units of the two extreme readings (M180:M180
A) is
~10:1. Thus, data from the Y2H and SPR techniques are largely
concordant. The one anomalous result appears to relate to the
M180T21
I,P41
T protein. The data from
the SPR assay indicate that amelogenin self-assembly is severely
affected with this double mutation whereas the Y2H data suggest that
this double mutation is minor when compared with other combinations.
The double mutation studied in this recombinant protein does not exist
in nature and was created to explore another aspect of amelogenin
assembly, that being if multiple point mutations have an additive
adverse effect on enamel matrix assembly capabilities. We do not know
if teeth created with such a double mutation would exhibit a phenotype.
The study here has demonstrated that the most dramatic mutation, with
respect to interaction and nanosphere assemblies, occurs with the
removal of the A domain (amino-terminal 42 amino acids). This domain is
roughly equivalent to the tyrosine-rich amelogenin peptide
(amino-terminal 45 amino acids of mouse amelogenin). This is not a
surprising result and emphasizes previous DLS data in which we found
that the A domain is required for protein-to-protein interactions
leading to nanosphere self-assembly whereas the absence of the A domain
led to inhibition of the self-assembly process (12). Dynamic light
scattering showed that the A domain-deleted construct (rp(H)M180
A)
in solution produced a very heterogeneous size distribution (12). To
equate this DLS conclusion to our SPR data, it is clear that the A
domain-deleted construct reacted weakly with the sensor-bound wild-type
amelogenin. Presumably this interaction was mediated through the intact
B domain of the sensor-bound protein. Although some self-assembly of
the mutated protein may occur prior to passing over the sensor, there
appears to be a significant population of monomeric (mutated)
amelogenins. This has been determined by generating a series of
sensorgrams for selected protein combinations (wild-type interacting
with serial dilutions of the A domain-deleted construct) for which kinetic data were determined and matched that of the 1:1 Langmuir binding model (data not shown) (13).
Removal of the domain B (p97-M180
B) resulted in a loss of 75%
-galactosidase activity, compared with wild-type amelogenin, as
determined by the yeast assay. Surface plasmon resonance spectroscopy data showed that the interaction of rp(H)M180
B with rM179 produced a
significantly reduced response when compared with the rp(H)M180 to
rM179 amelogenin interaction using identical molar concentrations (Figs. 2 and 3B). The removal of the hydrophilic carboxyl
terminus may promote hydrophobic interaction between amelogenin
molecules. It has previously been postulated that the amelogenin
hydrophilic carboxyl terminus is exposed on the surface of the
amelogenin nanosphere, making the nanosphere soluble in an aqueous
environment and thus preventing the fusion of neighboring nanospheres
(12). It has been shown that disruption of the carboxyl terminus
would then encourage interactions with neighboring molecules and
molecular assemblies. Indeed, DLS data have demonstrated that
amelogenin assemblies lacking domain B are unstable and progressively
fuse with neighboring assembled amelogenin nanospheres (12).
Finally, there is a question of correlating the in vitro
data derived here to in vivo data already available.
Biomaterials inspired by designs of nature comprise the newly emergent
discipline of biomimetics. We anticipate that identifying and
understanding the role for the various domains within amelogenin to
direct its self-assembly into nanospheres will improve our
understanding of the structural hierarchy of the native material and
also provide the knowledge base for an enamel biomimetic. With the goal
of predicting protein-to-protein and protein-to-mineral interactions using in vitro approaches, we can then correlate such
outcomes to the data derived from in vivo experiments using
transgenic animals bearing engineered amelogenin protein constructs.
Ultimately such a correlation will allow the construction of a
biomimetic matrix that can direct the formation of hydroxyapatite into
a highly ordered material mimicking the unique properties of the original enamel composite ceramic and do so at physiologic parameters of temperature and ion concentration.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank Drs. Alan Fincham and Janet
Moradian-Oldak for supplying recombinant mouse amelogenin (rM179)
protein and William D. Hunter for his expert technical help with the
surface plasmon resonance experiments. We would like to thank all our
colleagues at the University of Southern California, especially
Drs. Zoltan Tokes, Robert Stellwagen, and Noriyuki Kasahara for
their support during this study.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by Grants DE13404 and DE13045 from
NIDCR, 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: University of Southern
California, School of Dentistry, Center for Craniofacial Molecular
Biology, 2250 Alcazar St., CSA Room 142, Los Angeles, CA 90033-1004. E-mail: paine@hsc.usc.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, February 27, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M110473200
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
Y2H, yeast
two-hybrid;
AIH1, X-linked amelogenesis imperfecta;
SPR, surface
plasmon resonance;
DLS, dynamic light scattering;
AFM, atomic force
microscopy.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Nielsen, V. H.,
Bendixen, C.,
Arnbjerg, J.,
Sorensen, C. M.,
Jensen, H. E.,
Shukri, N. M.,
and Thomsen, B.
(2000)
Mamm. Genome
11,
1087-1092[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 2.
|
Paine, M. L.,
Zhu, D. H.,
Luo, W.,
Bringas, P. J.,
Goldberg, M.,
White, S. N.,
Lei, Y. P.,
Sarikaya, M.,
Fong, H. K.,
and Snead, M. L.
(2000)
J. Struct. Biol.
132,
191-200[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 3.
|
Kirkham, J.,
Zhang, J.,
Brookes, S. J.,
Shore, R. C.,
Wood, S. R.,
Smith, D. A.,
Wallwork, M. L.,
Ryu, O. H.,
and Robinson, C.
(2000)
J. Dent. Res.
79,
1943-1947[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 4.
|
Wen, H. B.,
Fincham, A. G.,
and Moradian-Oldak, J.
(2001)
Matrix Biol.
20,
387-395[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 5.
|
White, S. N.,
Paine, M. L.,
Sarikaya, M.,
Fong, H., Yu, Z., Li, Z. C.,
and Snead, M. L.
(2000)
J. Am. Ceramic Soc.
83,
238-240
|
| 6.
|
Fincham, A. G.,
Moradian-Oldak, J.,
Diekwisch, T. G. H.,
Lyaruu, D. M.,
Wright, J. T.,
Bringas, P., Jr.,
and Slavkin, H. C.
(1995)
J. Struct. Biol.
115,
50-59[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 7.
|
Paine, M. L.,
and Snead, M. L.
(1997)
J. Bone Miner. Res.
12,
221-227[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 8.
|
Lench, N. J.,
and Winter, G. B.
(1995)
Hum. Mutat.
5,
252-259[CrossRef]
|
| 9.
|
Ravassipour, D. B.,
Hart, P. S.,
Ritter, A. V.,
Yamauchi, M.,
Gibson, C.,
and Wright, J. T.
(2000)
J. Dent. Res.
79,
1476-1481[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 10.
|
Sarikaya, M.
(1999)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
96,
13611-13614[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 11.
|
Simmer, J. P.,
Lau, E. C., Hu, C. C.,
Aoba, T.,
Lacey, M.,
Nelson, D.,
Zeichner-David, M.,
Snead, M. L.,
Slavkin, H. C.,
and Fincham, A. G.
(1994)
Calcif. Tissue Int.
54,
312-319[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 12.
|
Moradian-Oldak, J.,
Paine, M. L.,
Lei, Y. P.,
Fincham, A. G.,
and Snead, M. L.
(2000)
J. Struct. Biol.
131,
27-37[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 13.
|
Korneeva, N. L.,
Lamphear, B. J.,
Hennigan, F. L.,
Merrick, W. C.,
and Rhoads, R. E.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
2872-2879[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 14.
|
Paine, M. L.,
Krebsbach, P. H.,
Chen, L. S.,
Paine, C. T.,
Yamada, Y.,
Deutsch, D.,
and Snead, M. L.
(1998)
J. Dent. Res.
77,
496-502[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 15.
|
Goto, Y.,
Kogure, E.,
Takagi, T.,
Aimoto, S.,
and Aoba, T.
(1993)
J. Biochem. (Tokyo)
113,
55-60[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 16.
|
Termine, J. D.,
and Torchia, D. A.
(1980)
Biopolymers
19,
741-750[CrossRef]
|
| 17.
|
Bartlett, J. D.,
and Simmer, J. P.
(1999)
Crit. Rev. Oral Biol. Med.
10,
425-441[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 18.
|
Aoba, T.,
and Moreno, E. C.
(1987)
Calcif. Tissue Int.
41,
86-94[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 19.
|
Fincham, A. G.,
Moradian-Oldak, J.,
and Sarte, P. E.
(1994)
Calcif. Tissue Int.
55,
398-400[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
Copyright © 2002 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:

|
 |

|
 |
 
W. J. Shaw, K. Ferris, B. Tarasevich, and J. L. Larson
The Structure and Orientation of the C-Terminus of LRAP
Biophys. J.,
April 15, 2008;
94(8):
3247 - 3257.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. Zhu, M. L. Paine, W. Luo, P. Bringas Jr., and M. L. Snead
Altering Biomineralization by Protein Design
J. Biol. Chem.,
July 28, 2006;
281(30):
21173 - 21182.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
Y. Xu, Y. L. Zhou, W. Luo, Q.-S. Zhu, D. Levy, O. A. MacDougald, and M. L. Snead
NF-Y and CCAAT/Enhancer-binding Protein {alpha} Synergistically Activate the Mouse Amelogenin Gene
J. Biol. Chem.,
June 9, 2006;
281(23):
16090 - 16098.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
P. Papagerakis, J.M. Ibarra, N. Inozentseva, P. DenBesten, and M. MacDougall
Mouse Amelogenin Exons 8 and 9: Sequence Analysis and Protein Distribution
J. Dent. Res.,
July 1, 2005;
84(7):
613 - 617.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 2002 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.