![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 25, 23037-23043, June 21, 2002
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From Cancer Research UK, Molecular Oncology Laboratories,
Weatherall Institute of Molecular Medicine, John Radcliffe
Hospital, Headington, Oxford OX3 9DS, United Kingdom
Received for publication, March 14, 2002
RYK is an atypical orphan receptor
tyrosine kinase that lacks detectable kinase activity. Nevertheless,
using a chimeric receptor approach, we previously found that RYK can
signal via the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway.
Recently, it has been shown that murine Ryk can bind to and be
phosphorylated by the ephrin receptors EphB2 and EphB3. In this study,
we show that human RYK associates with EphB2 and EphB3 but is not
phosphorylated by them. This association requires both the
extracellular and cytoplasmic domains of RYK and is not dependent on
activation of the Eph receptors. It was also previously shown that AF-6
(afadin), a PDZ domain-containing protein, associates with murine Ryk.
We show here that AF-6 does not bind to human RYK in vitro
or in vivo. This suggests that there are significant
functional differences between human and murine RYK. Further studies
are required to determine whether RYK modulates the signaling of EphB2
and EphB3.
RYK is an atypical orphan receptor tyrosine kinase that differs
from other members of this family at a number of conserved residues in
the activation and nucleotide-binding domains and lacks detectable
catalytic activity (1-4). The extracellular domain of RYK is quite
short when compared with other
RTKs,1 being only 183 amino acids long. It appears to be largely devoid of features
characteristic of other RTKs, such as immunoglobulin-like domains (5),
fibronectin type III repeats (6), or cysteine-rich domains (7).
However, it contains two leucine-rich motifs that are usually
implicated in highly specific protein/protein interactions (8, 9) as
well as in cell adhesion (10). There is also a tetrabasic protease
cleavage site (KRRK) flanked by two cysteine residues in the
extracellular domain that is predicted to give rise to two fragments.
Another interesting feature in the extracellular domain of RYK is the
presence of a WIF (Wnt inhibitory
factor) module (11), suggesting the possibility that RYK
may bind to one of the members of the Wnt family of proteins.
The ability of RYK to signal downstream was investigated using a
chimeric receptor approach (2). This conclusively demonstrated that the
catalytic domain of RYK is inactive and that the amino acid alterations
in the activation domain contribute to the lack of catalytic function.
However, a tyrosine-phosphorylated 75-kDa protein was
co-immunoprecipitated with the receptor, independently of stimulation,
and activation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway was
observed following stimulation of the receptor. Interestingly, when the
invariant lysine in subdomain II of the catalytic domain was mutated to
alanine (K334A), abolishing any existing kinase activity, the receptor
failed to activate the mitogen-activated protein kinase pathway and to
bind and/or phosphorylate the 75-kDa protein. Further, RYK is
overexpressed in ovarian tumors, and this correlates adversely with
survival (12).
The exact function of RYK is unknown, and its ligand has not been
identified. A mouse model, where Ryk was homozygously deleted by
homologous recombination, revealed an unusual, completely penetrant phenotype (13). The mice were small, compared with wild type, and died
within a week because of cleft palate. Such a phenotype has been found
in other knockout mice, including those lacking members of the Ephrin
receptor family (14). It was recently shown that although Ryk cannot
autophosphorylate, it can associate and be phosphorylated by two
members of the Eph family of receptors: EphB2 and EphB3 (13). The
Ephrin receptor family, which consists of 14 members, has been shown to
mediate contact-dependent cell interactions that regulate
the repulsion and adhesion mechanisms involved in the cell guidance and
assembly of multicellular structures (15, 16). They are important in
the development of a range of vertebrate species, in the formation of
blood vessels, axonal guidance, and metastasis of transformed cells
(15, 17). Yeast two-hybrid analysis, using the cytoplasmic domain of
murine Ryk as a probe, has identified an interaction with AF-6, a PDZ
domain-containing protein (13). This interaction involved the PDZ
domain of AF-6 and the C-terminal region of Ryk, especially the
critical C-terminal valine residue. This valine residue is completely
conserved among RYK homologues from Drosophila to human.
AF-6 is a scaffold protein found at sites of cell-cell contact and a
target of the Ras family of proteins (18, 19). Interestingly, a subset
of activated Eph receptors, including EphB2, EphB3, and EphA7, also
bind to AF-6 (20, 21). The purpose of this study was to investigate further the interactions between RYK and the Eph receptors and between
RYK and AF-6.
Plasmids--
The following plasmids were received as gifts:
Myc-AF-6 from Kozo Kaibuchi (Nara Institute of Science and Technology,
IKOMA, Japan) (19), HA.EphB3 and HA.EphB3K665R from Steven
Stacker (Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Victoria, Australia)
(21), and EphB2 from Tony Pawson (Samuel Lunenfeld Research Institute, Toronto, Canada) (22, 23). The TrkA-RYK chimeric construct has been
described previously (2). The RYK.V5 plasmid was constructed by cloning
RYK (GenBankTM accession number NM002958) in pTracer
(Invitrogen) in frame with the V5 tag. A NotI site was
created at the 3' end of the cDNA, and the TGA stop
codon was mutated to TGG by PCR using the primer TGAGCGGCCGCGAGAGGAGCCAGACGTAGG. The RYKEC construct was made by cloning
an EcoRI-HindIII fragment (nucleotides 1-1201;
GenBankTM accession number NM002958) in frame with GFP in
pEGFP vector (CLONTECH).
Growth Factor and Antibodies--
The recombinant human NGF was
purchased from R & D Systems. The N-terminal TrkA-specific monoclonal
antibody 5C3 was a gift from U. Saragovi, the N-terminal anti-mouse Ryk
antibody RYK3 was a gift from Steven Stacker (Ludwig Institute for
Cancer Research) (24), and the anti-human RYK polyclonal antibody 15.2 was raised against the C-terminal region of RYK (25). The following
antibodies are commercially available: AF-6 (Transduction
Laboratories), EphB2 (Santa Cruz Biotechnology), Trk N-terminal
(Zymed Laboratories Inc.), HA tag (Roche Molecular
Biochemicals), V5 tag (Invitrogen), His tag (Novagen), GFP mouse
monoclonal (CLONTECH), Myc (Santa Cruz
Biotechnology), and anti-phosphotyrosine 4G10 (Upstate Biotechnology, Inc.).
Transfection, Immunoprecipitation, and
Immunoblotting--
HEK293T cells were transfected using
Effectene (Qiagen) according to the manufacturer's instructions. For
double transfections, RYK.V5 and HA.EphB3 or EphB2 were used in the
ratio 4:1. The cells were treated with 1 mM sodium
butyrate, a nonspecific transcriptional inducer, 5 h after
transfection. 24-48 h after transfection, the cells were lysed on ice
for 15 min in lysis buffer (1% Triton X-100, 0.5% Nonidet P-40, 150 mM NaCl, 50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.4, 1 mM EDTA, 0.5 mM EGTA) containing a protease
inhibitor mixture (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) and a phosphatase
inhibitor mixture (Calbiochem). Alternatively, radioimmune
precipitation buffer (1% Nonidet P-40, 1% sodium deoxycholate, 0.1%
SDS, 150 mM NaCl, 50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.4, 1 mM EDTA) was used to lyse cells. Insoluble material was
removed by centrifugation for 20 min at 13,000 rpm at 4 °C. The cell
lysates were incubated with antibodies and protein A- or G-agarose
beads at 4 °C. All of the immunoprecipitations were washed twice in
lysis buffer containing 1 M NaCl and once in unsupplemented
lysis buffer. For immunoblotting, the immunoprecipitates were resolved
by SDS-PAGE according to standard protocols and then transferred
onto nylon membranes. The antibodies were used according to the
manufacturer's conditions. The 15.2 and RYK3 antibodies were used
1:500 in 1% milk and 0.2% Tween 20 for blotting.
For the induction studies with NGF, cells were washed once with
phosphate buffered saline and then incubated for 16 h in
serum-free medium 30 h after transfection. The quiescent cells
were stimulated with recombinant human NGF (100 ng/ml) for different
time intervals (0, 5, 15, 30, or 60 min) before being lysed.
Purification of the His-tagged Catalytic Domain of RYK--
The
catalytic domain of RYK (nucleotides 1019-2138; GenBankTM
accession number NM002958) was generated by PCR using the
following primers: 5'-TTAACTGCAGAGAAGTGTCACTCTTTTGGAG-3' and M13
reverse primer from pBluescript. The cDNA was cloned as a
PstI/EcoRI fragment in a baculovirus vector
(pBlueBacHis2; Invitrogen) in frame with a His tag on the N-terminal
end and expressed in SF9 cells. The cells were infected with a
multiplicity of infection of 10, grown at 27 °C, and lysed after 4 days in 20 mM Tris, pH 8, 0.5 M NaCl, 1%
Triton, 1% Tween 20, 0.5% Nonidet P-40, and protease inhibitors (pepstatin, leupeptin, aprotinin, trypsin inhibitor, and
phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride). After centrifugation at 14,000 rpm for
30 min, the protein was bound on a cobalt-Sepharose column (Talon,
CLONTECH) for 1 h at 4 °C in lysis buffer
containing 10 mM imidazole. The resin was washed thoroughly
with lysis buffer containing 10 mM imidazole, and the
protein was eluted in 20 mM Tris, pH 7.5, 0.5 M
NaCl, 50 mM imidazole. The protein was concentrated using a Centriplus YM-10 (Amicon), dialyzed against a 20 mM Tris,
pH 8, solution, and stored at In Vitro Kinase Assay--
HA.EphB3 was transiently expressed in
HEK 293T cells and immunoprecipitated using an anti-HA antibody. 1 µg
of purified RYK catalytic domain was bound to protein G-agarose beads
using an anti-His antibody. The immunoprecipitates were washed twice in lysis buffer containing 1 M NaCl and twice in kinase buffer
(30 mM Tris, pH 7.5, 20 mM MgCl2,
20 mM MnCl2, 1 mg/ml bovine serum albumin). The
proteins bound to the agarose beads were resuspended in 100 µl of
kinase buffer containing 200 µM ATP and incubated at
30 °C for 45 min. They were washed in kinase buffer and resuspended in sample buffer. The proteins were resolved by SDS-PAGE and blotted, and phosphorylation was detected using the anti-phosphotyrosine antibody 4G10.
For the kinase assay using full-length RYK as a substrate,
HA.EphB3, Myc.AF-6, and RYK.V5 were transiently expressed in
HEK 293T cells and immunoprecipitated using an anti-HA tag, and
anti-AF-6 and anti-V5 antibodies, respectively. The immunoprecipitates
were washed twice in lysis buffer containing 1 M NaCl and
twice in kinase buffer. HA.EphB3 was resuspended with Myc.AF-6 or
RYK.V5 in 100 µl of kinase buffer containing 200 µM ATP
and incubated at 30 °C for 45 min. The immunoprecipitates
were washed in kinase buffer and resuspended in sample buffer. The
proteins were resolved by SDS-PAGE and blotted, and phosphorylation was
detected using the anti-phosphotyrosine antibody 4G10.
Binding Assay--
A Myc-tagged AF-6 construct was transfected
in HEK 293T cells and immunoprecipitated using an anti-Myc antibody.
The cell lysate from untransfected HEK 293T cells was also
immunoprecipitated with the anti-Myc antibody. The protein G-agarose
beads were resuspended in phosphate buffered saline, and 1 µg
of the purified RYK catalytic domain, RYK.cat, was added. After 1 h of incubation at 4 °C, the beads were washed in lysis buffer and
resuspended in sample buffer before being resolved by SDS-PAGE and blotted.
Expression of RYK--
Transfection of HEK 293T cells with a
C-terminal V5-tagged RYK, followed by immunoprecipitation by an anti-V5
antibody and immunoblotting with the same antibody, identified two
major signals: a set of bands at around 80 kDa (comprising three bands
of 70, 75, and 80 kDa) and another at 45 kDa. The 45-kDa band was
detected by the anti-V5 (Fig.
1A) and 15.2 antibodies (a
polyclonal antibody directed against a C-terminal epitope from RYK)
(Fig. 1C). The RYK3 antibody, directed against the
extracellular domain of the receptor (24), only detected the high
molecular mass bands of 70, 75, and 80 kDa (Fig. 1B). The
45-kDa form must therefore lack the part of the extracellular domain
containing the RYK3 epitope. It is probable that the receptor is
cleaved at the tetrabasic protease cleavage site (KRRK), which would
remove the first 192 amino acids, resulting in a predicted protein of
41 kDa. Surprisingly, whereas the anti-V5 antibody detects all of the
isoforms, the 15.2 antibody does not recognize the 75- and 80-kDa
bands.
RYK Is Unable to Autophosphorylate--
RYK has not been shown to
have catalytic activity, in vitro on a peptide substrate,
using the whole protein or the catalytic domain on its own produced in
bacteria (1, 4) or in vivo using a chimeric receptor
approach (2). We undertook to study the ability of RYK to
autophosphorylate using a biochemical approach. We cloned the catalytic
domain in a baculoviral vector, expressed it in SF9 insect cells, and
purified it under nondenaturing conditions. An in vitro
kinase assay using the purified protein showed that the catalytic
domain of RYK is unable to autophosphorylate (Fig. 2). As a positive control, EphB3 was
phosphorylated in the presence of ATP.
RYK Associates with EphB2 and EphB3 but Is Not
Phosphorylated--
We transfected HEK 293T cells with RYK.V5 together
with HA.EphB3 or a kinase-inactive mutant of EphB3 (EphB3K665R) (21). Upon immunoprecipitation of RYK by the anti-V5 antibody, both wild type
EphB3 and EphB3K665R were detected (Fig.
3, A-C). This shows that
EphB3 and RYK interact and that this association is not dependent on
activation and phosphorylation of the Eph receptor. However, although
the binding with RYK was demonstrated under stringent conditions using
radioimmune precipitation buffer (data not shown), there was no
phosphorylation of RYK (Fig. 3D) when it is co-expressed
with EphB3. To further evaluate the ability of EphB3 to phosphorylate
RYK, we performed an in vitro kinase assay on
immunoprecipitated proteins. HEK 293T cells were transfected with
HA.EphB3, RYK.V5, or Myc.AF-6, and these proteins were
immunoprecipitated using the appropriate antibodies. An in
vitro kinase assay was performed using immunoprecipitated EphB3
and RYK or AF-6, and their phosphorylation was detected with 4G10
antibody. EphB3 failed to phosphorylate full-length RYK (Fig.
4, A, B, and
D), whereas the positive control AF-6 was phosphorylated
(Fig. 4, A, C, and D). Furthermore,
EphB3 was unable to phosphorylate the catalytic domain of RYK in an
in vitro kinase assay (data not shown).
A converse experiment where we co-expressed EphB3 and RYK in HEK 293T
cells and immunoprecipitated EphB3 (Fig.
5) showed the same result. Interestingly,
only the 80-kDa form of RYK associated with EphB3, suggesting an
essential role of the extracellular domain of RYK for this
interaction.
We also investigated the interaction between RYK and EphB2 (Fig.
6). When both receptors were expressed
transiently in HEK 293T cells and EphB2 was immunoprecipitated, only
the 80-kDa form of RYK was detected (Fig. 6, A-C), although
it is possible that the 45-kDa band was not detected because of
unspecific bands. A phosphotyrosine blot (Fig. 6D) showed
that EphB2 was activated but did not phosphorylate RYK. This suggests
that, similar to EphB3, the association between RYK and EphB2 is
dependent on the extracellular domain of RYK and does not lead to the
phosphorylation of RYK.
To investigate further the association between RYK and EphB3 and assess
whether the extracellular domain of RYK is required for the interaction
to take place, we co-expressed EphB3 and a TrkA-RYK chimeric receptor
or EphB3 and TrkA as a negative control. The TrkA-RYK chimeric receptor
contains the extracellular domain of TrkA, the NGF receptor, and the
transmembrane and intracellular domains of RYK (2). When expressed,
TrkA is a 120-kDa protein, and TrkA-RYK is 140 or 120 kDa, depending on
its state of glycosylation. The chimeric receptor, lacking the
extracellular domain of RYK, did not associate with EphB3 (Fig.
7).
We then wanted to assess whether the extracellular domain of RYK on its
own was able to bind EphB3. We constructed a GFP-tagged cDNA
(RYKEC) containing the extracellular, transmembrane, and juxtamembrane
domains of RYK and co-expressed it with EphB3 in HEK 293T cells (Fig.
8). The predicted size of RYKEC protein, together with GFP (30 kDa), is 70 kDa. On transfection, the protein migrated at 85 kDa on SDS-PAGE, probably because of glycosylation. When
EphB3 was immunoprecipitated, RYKEC did not associate with it,
suggesting that the whole receptor is required for the interaction between RYK and EphB3.
RYK Does Not Associate with AF-6--
The C-terminal end of RYK
possesses a consensus sequence for the binding of a PDZ domain (Fig.
9). The C-terminal tyrosine and valine
residues are completely conserved. Because RYK is devoid of catalytic
activity and PDZ domains do not bind to phosphorylated amino acids
(26-28), it is possible that RYK may signal via a PDZ domain-containing protein. Of several PDZ domain-containing proteins, only AF-6 has been shown to bind RTKs such as EphB2 and EphB3. In the
light of previous results (13), we wished to evaluate whether AF-6
bound to RYK.
When the TrkA-RYK chimeric receptor, which contains the entire
cytoplasmic domain of RYK, and AF-6 were co-expressed in HEK 293T
cells, they did not associate, whether AF-6 (Fig.
10, A and B) or
the chimeric receptor (Fig. 10, C and D) was
immunoprecipitated. EphB3, which was used as a positive control for the
interaction, was immunoprecipitated with AF-6 (Fig. 10, E
and F). The possibility that AF-6 may bind to RYK when the
latter is stimulated was excluded when no association was observed
after stimulation of TrkA-RYK with NGF (data not shown). Transfection
with full-length untagged RYK could not be used in these experiments
because the 15.2 antibody has a low affinity for
immunoprecipitation.
To further verify whether there is direct interaction between the
proteins, we used the purified His-tagged catalytic domain of RYK. AF-6
was immunoprecipitated from transfected HEK 293T cells and mixed with
RYK.cat under physiological conditions. Subsequently, after washing the
agarose beads, the proteins were resolved by SDS-PAGE and blotted. As
shown (Fig. 11), AF-6 does not bind in the presence of excess amounts of the catalytic domain of RYK.
RYK is a receptor tyrosine kinase that belongs to a small family
of individually distinct receptors that are devoid of catalytic activity (29). The mechanism of signaling by these receptors is best
understood for ErbB3 (30).
We have observed several forms of the RYK protein in transfected cells
with different molecular masses: 45, 70, 75, and 80 kDa. The three high
molecular mass bands are full-length receptors, because they are
recognized by the V5 antibody and the RYK3 antibody specific to the
extracellular domain. The three different sizes could be due to
differences in the glycosylation status of the protein, although
other post-translational modifications could occur because the 75- and
80-kDa bands are not detected by the 15.2 antibody. The epitope against
which this antibody is directed is a 17-mer peptide located at
positions 548-564 of the RYK protein. It contains a cysteine that
could be converted to formylglycine; this modification occurs in
sulfatases at a late stage of co-translational protein translocation
into the endoplasmic reticulum (31). There are also two glutamate
residues in the peptide that could be converted to carboxylglutamate by
a carboxylase (32). If such post-translational modifications occur in
the RYK protein, the modified forms of RYK may not be recognized by the
15.2 antibody. The 45-kDa band is not detected by the RYK3 antibody
directed against the extracellular domain and must be a truncated form
of the receptor, presumably resulting from the cleavage of the
extracellular domain. This cleavage is very likely to take place at the
tetrabasic protease cleavage site (KRRK). Ectodomain cleavage occurs
frequently among cell surface transmembrane proteins, including
receptor tyrosine kinases such as ErbB4 (33), colony-stimulating
factor-1 receptor (34), c-Kit (35, 36), Met (37), or
TrkA (38). It seems to be a general mechanism to modulate receptors by
down-regulating ligand-induced signaling (39, 40). Because only the
full-length RYK and not the 45-kDa form co-immunoprecipitates with
EphB3 and EphB2, it seems likely that, like with other RTKs, the
ectodomain cleavage of RYK regulates the receptor, either by preventing
binding of the unknown ligand or the binding of other receptors.
The heterodimerization of RTKs belonging to two different families is
unusual, but it has been reported. The EGF and PDGF receptors have been
shown to heterodimerize independently of receptor stimulation, and
transactivation of EGFR was observed after stimulation with PDGF. EGFR
transactivation by PDGF did not depend on PDGF receptor kinase
activity, but phosphorylation of one of the receptors, or of a protein
that links the receptors, by a Src kinase was required to maintain
heterodimer formation (41). The interaction between RYK and the Eph
receptors is unusual because RYK does not get phosphorylated and
therefore may have a role different from that of analogous interactions
involving typical RTKs. RYK could act as an inhibitor of EphB2 and
EphB3 by preventing homodimerization of these receptors, but data
provided by knock out mice for these receptors seem to suggest that RYK
and these two Eph receptors may co-operate in vivo. RYK is
required in normal development and morphogenesis of craniofacial
structures and the limbs (13). Neonatal mice doubly deficient in EphB2
and EphB3 phenocopy RYK-deficient mice in terms of cleft palate but
also show commissural axon defects (14) that are reminiscent of the
Drosophila drl phenotype (42-45) (drl is
one of the RYK homologous genes in Drosophila). RYK could co-operate with the Eph receptors in several ways. EphB2 and EphB3 are
able to bind to several ephrin B ligands, and RYK, when heterodimerized with these receptors, could modulate their affinity to a particular ligand. This has been observed in the EGFR family of RTKs where, for
instance, neuregulin- Our results indicate that both the intracellular and extracellular
domains of RYK are required for the interaction with EphB3. It has been
observed in the ErbB family of RTKs that stimulation of the isolated
extracellular domains of the receptors leads to homo-oligomerization
but not hetero-oligomerization (48). This suggests that regions outside
the extracellular domain are required for heteromeric interactions, as
is the case for RYK and the Eph receptors.
We have demonstrated in this study that the association between RYK and
EphB2 or EphB3 does not result in the phosphorylation of RYK. However,
a previous study (13) showed that, when the receptors are co-expressed,
murine Ryk associates with and is phosphorylated by EphB2 and EphB3. In
both studies, co-transfections were performed in HEK 293T cells with
the same EphB3 cDNA construct, but we used a human RYK cDNA,
whereas the authors used the murine homologue, Ryk. The ability of
EphB3 to phosphorylate RYK could not be detected, either in
vivo or in vitro. The identity between the human and
murine cDNAs is very high (93%), but our results indicate that
they do not signal in the same way. The species-dependent phosphorylation of a substrate by a kinase has been observed in the
case of p53 (49). Murine p53 can be phosphorylated by mitogen-activated protein kinase, whereas human p53 is not, suggesting species-specific differences in the modification and therefore possibly the regulation of the protein.
Further, using a murine Ryk homologue, the authors of a previous study
(13) were able to show that AF-6, a PDZ domain-containing protein,
could interact with the receptor via its PDZ domain and that the
C-terminal valine of Ryk was essential for this interaction. AF-6 is a
Ras effector located at sites of cell-cell junction (18, 19) and has
been shown to bind to EphB2 and EphB3 (20, 21). However, we were unable
to show any interaction between the cytoplasmic domain of human RYK and
AF-6. The co-transfection experiments, performed using the TrkA-RYK
chimera to be able to immunoprecipitate RYK, did not correlate with the
data obtained using murine Ryk, although only the extracellular domain
of RYK was missing from the receptor. The observed differences in the data can only be explained as being due to species specificity. The
C-terminal parts of the human and mouse receptors, which is the AF-6
binding peptide, are identical, but another motif, present only in the
mouse homologue, could also be required for the interaction. AF-6 binds
to EphB2 and EphB3 only if these receptors are activated and
phosphorylated (20); the C-terminal motif of the receptors is therefore
not the only feature needed for the interaction with AF-6.
In summary, our results suggest that the human homologue of RYK,
although it binds to EphB2 and EphB3, is not phosphorylated by these
receptors. Further studies exploring the mechanism by which RYK may
modulate signaling by EphB2 and EphB3 are required.
We thank Dr. S. Stacker, Dr. K. Kaibuchi, Dr.
T. Pawson, and Dr. U. Saragovi for kindly providing us with plasmids
and antibodies. We acknowledge the sharing of unpublished data from
Dr. S. Stacker, Dr. M. Halford, and Dr. C. Hovens.
*
This work was supported by Cancer Research UK.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.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, April 15, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M202486200
The abbreviations used are:
RTK, receptor
tyrosine kinase;
NGF, nerve growth factor;
EGFR, epidermal growth
factor receptor;
PDGF, platelet-derived growth factor;
GFP, green
fluorescent protein;
HA, hemagglutinin.
RYK, a Catalytically Inactive Receptor Tyrosine Kinase,
Associates with EphB2 and EphB3 but Does Not Interact with AF-6*
![]()
ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
70 °C in 10% glycerol.
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (22K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Transient expression of RYK. HEK 293T
cells were transfected with a C-terminal V5-tagged RYK (RYK.V5), and
the receptor was immunoprecipitated with an anti-V5 antibody.
A, immunoblotting with the anti-V5 antibody. B,
immunoblotting with the RYK3 antibody raised against the extracellular
domain of RYK. C, immunoblotting with the 15.2 antibody
raised against a C-terminal peptide from RYK. The arrows
indicate the different sizes of RYK protein. IP,
immunoprecipitation; IB, immunoblot.

View larger version (8K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
In vitro kinase assay. EphB3
was immunoprecipitated from transfected HEK 293T cells using an anti-HA
tag antibody. The purified, N-terminally His-tagged catalytic domain of
RYK (RYK.cat) was bound to protein G-coated agarose beads using an
anti-His antibody. An in vitro kinase assay was performed,
as described under "Experimental Procedures." A,
immunoblotting with an anti-phosphotyrosine antibody shows that RYK.cat
is not phosphorylated, whereas EphB3 is detected. B, the
anti-His antibody detects RYK.cat. C, the anti-HA antibody
detects EphB3. IB, immunoblot.

View larger version (22K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Association and phosphorylation of EphB3 and
RYK. HEK 293T cells were transfected with the indicated
constructs, and RYK was immunoprecipitated using an anti-V5 antibody.
A, the anti-HA antibody detects both the wild type and
kinase dead mutant forms of EphB3 (EphB3 and EphB3 K665R, respectively)
when they are co-transfected with RYK. B, the anti-V5
antibody detects RYK. C, the anti-HA antibody detects both
EphB3 constructs in the cell lysate. D, the
anti-phosphotyrosine antibody detects phosphorylation of EphB3WT only
when it is co-expressed with RYK, whereas phosphorylation of RYK is not
detected. IP, immunoprecipitation; IB,
immunoblot.

View larger version (15K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
In vitro kinase assay using
full-length RYK as a substrate. EphB3, RYK.V5, and AF-6 were
immunoprecipitated from transfected HEK 293T cells using anti-HA,
anti-V5, and anti-AF-6 antibodies, respectively. An in vitro
kinase assay was performed using immunoprecipitated EphB3 as a kinase
and RYK.V5 or AF-6 as a substrate, as described under "Experimental
Procedures." A, the anti-phosphotyrosine antibody blot
shows phosphorylation of EphB3 and AF-6 when they are present in the
kinase assay. B, presence of RYK detected by the anti-V5
antibody. C, presence of AF-6 detected by the anti-AF-6
antibody. D, presence of EphB3 detected by the anti-HA
antibody. IB, immunoblot.

View larger version (38K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Association between EphB3 and RYK. HEK
293T cells were transfected with the indicated constructs, and EphB3
was immunoprecipitated using an anti-HA antibody. A, the
anti-V5 antibody detects RYK (shown by arrows) in the cell
lysate of transfected cells but only detects it in the
immunoprecipitates when RYK is expressed with EphB3. B, the
anti-HA antibody shows EphB3 was expressed and immunoprecipitated.
IP, immunoprecipitation; IB, immunoblot.

View larger version (24K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
Association and phosphorylation of EphB2 and
RYK. HEK 293T cells were transfected with the indicated
constructs, and EphB2 was immunoprecipitated, using an anti-EphB2
antibody. A, the anti-V5 antibody detects RYK in the
immunoprecipitates only when it is co-expressed with EphB2.
B, immunoblotting with the anti-EphB2 antibody shows that
EphB2 was immunoprecipitated. C, the cell lysate was
immunoblotted with the anti-V5 antibody to show that RYK is expressed.
D, the anti-phosphotyrosine antibody reveals phosphorylation
of EphB2 but does not detect any phosphorylation of RYK. IP,
immunoprecipitation; IB, immunoblot.

View larger version (19K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 7.
Absence of interaction between EphB3 and
TrkA-RYK. HEK 293T cells were transfected with the indicated
constructs, and EphB3 was immunoprecipitated using an anti-HA antibody.
TrkA was used as a negative control. A, the anti-Trk
antibody detects TrkA and TrkA-RYK in the cell lysate (shown by
arrows) but not in the immunoprecipitates. B, the
anti-HA antibody shows that EphB3 is expressed and immunoprecipitated.
IP, immunoprecipitation; IB, immunoblot.

View larger version (43K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 8.
Absence of interaction between EphB3 and
RYKEC. HEK 293T cells were transfected with the indicated
constructs, and EphB3 was immunoprecipitated using an anti-HA antibody.
A, the anti-GFP antibody does not detect RYKEC in the
immunoprecipitates. B, the anti-GFP antibody shows that
RYKEC was expressed. C, the anti-HA antibody shows that
EphB3 was expressed and immunoprecipitated. IP,
immunoprecipitation; IB, immunoblot.
![]()
View larger version (19K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 9.
Comparison of the C-terminal end of RYK
across species. The C-terminal residues of Drosophila,
human, and mouse RYK (GenBankTM accession numbers
NP477341, S58885, P34925, and Q01887, respectively) were aligned using
Clustal-X and displayed with MacBoxShade. DNT, doughnut.
DRL, derailed.

View larger version (16K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 10.
Absence of interaction between AF-6 and
TrkA-RYK. HEK 293T cells were transfected with the indicated
constructs; EphB3 was used as a positive control. A and
B, AF-6 was immunoprecipitated with an anti-AF-6 antibody,
but TrkA-RYK is not detected in the immunoprecipitates, although it is
present in the cell lysate. In the untransfected lane, the anti-AF-6
antibody detects endogenous AF-6. C and D,
TrkA-RYK was immunoprecipitated, but AF-6 is not detected in the
immunoprecipitates, although it is present in the cell lysate.
E and F, AF-6 was immunoprecipitated using an
anti-Myc antibody, and EphB3 is detected in the immunoprecipitate and
the cell lysate. IP, immunoprecipitation; IB,
immunoblot.

View larger version (32K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 11.
Absence of interaction between AF-6 and the
catalytic domain of RYK. A binding assay was carried out between
AF-6 and the purified catalytic domain of RYK (RYK.cat) as described
under "Experimental Procedures." In the presence of
immunoprecipitated AF-6 (Myc-AF-6) from transfected HEK 293T cells and
purified RYK catalytic domain (RYK.cat) in phosphate buffered
saline, no binding was detected after blotting with the anti-His
antibody (A). B and C show that AF-6
and RYK.cat, respectively, were present in the reaction. IP,
immunoprecipitation; IB, immunoblot.
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
can bind to ErbB3 but does not activate the
receptor when it is co-expressed with EGFR (46, 47). RYK could also
modulate signaling downstream of the Eph receptors by recruiting
specific cytoplasmic proteins.
![]()
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
![]()
FOOTNOTES
To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail:
ganesan@cancer.org.uk.
![]()
ABBREVIATIONS
![]()
REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
1.
Hovens, C. M.,
Stacker, S. A.,
Andres, A. C.,
Harpur, A. G.,
Ziemiecki, A.,
and Wilks, A. F.
(1992)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
89,
11818-11822 2.
Katso, R. M.,
Russell, R. B.,
and Ganesan, T. S.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
6427-6440 3.
Wang, X. C.,
Katso, R.,
Butler, R.,
Hanby, A. M.,
Poulsom, R.,
Jones, T.,
Sheer, D.,
and Ganesan, T. S.
(1996)
Mol. Med.
2,
189-203[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
4.
Tamagnone, L.,
Partanen, J.,
Armstrong, E.,
Lasota, J.,
Ohgami, K.,
Tazunoki, T.,
LaForgia, S.,
Huebner, K.,
and Alitalo, K.
(1993)
Oncogene
8,
2009-2014[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
5.
Williams, A.,
and Barclay, A.
(1988)
Annu. Rev. Immunol.
6,
381-405[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
6.
Petersen, T.,
Thogersen, H.,
Skorstengaard, K.,
Vibe-Pedersen, K.,
Sahl, P.,
Sottrup-Jensen, L.,
and Magnusson, S.
(1983)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
80,
137-141 7.
Ullrich, A.,
Coussens, L.,
Hayflick, J.,
Dull, T.,
Gray, A.,
Tam, A.,
Lee, J.,
Yarden, Y.,
Libermann, T.,
and Schlessinger, J.
(1984)
Nature
309,
418-425[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
8.
Schneider, R.,
Schneider-Scherzer, E.,
Thurnher, M.,
Auer, B.,
and Schweiger, M.
(1988)
EMBO J.
7,
4151-4156[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
9.
Schneider, R.,
and Schweiger, M.
(1991)
Oncogene
6,
1807-1811[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
10.
Rothberg, J.,
Jacobs, J.,
Goodman, C.,
and Artavanis-Tsakonas, S.
(1990)
Genes Dev.
4,
2169-2187 11.
Patthy, L.
(2000)
Trends Biochem. Sci.
25,
12-13[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
12.
Katso, R. M.,
Manek, S.,
Ganjavi, H.,
Biddolph, S.,
Charnock, M. F.,
Bradburn, M.,
Wells, M.,
and Ganesan, T. S.
(2000)
Clin. Cancer Res.
6,
3271-3281 13.
Halford, M. M.,
Armes, J.,
Buchert, M.,
Meskenaite, V.,
Grail, D.,
Hibbs, M. L.,
Wilks, A. F.,
Farlie, P. G.,
Newgreen, D. F.,
Hovens, C. M.,
and Stacker, S. A.
(2000)
Nat. Genet.
25,
414-418[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
14.
Orioli, D.,
Henkemeyer, M.,
Lemke, G.,
Klein, R.,
and Pawson, T.
(1996)
EMBO J.
15,
6035-6049[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
15.
Holder, N.,
and Klein, R.
(1999)
Development
126,
2033-2044[Abstract]
16.
Feng, G. P.,
Laskowski, M. B.,
Feldheim, D. A.,
Wang, H. M.,
Lewis, R.,
Frisen, J.,
Flanagan, J. G.,
and Sanes, J. R.
(2000)
Neuron
25,
295-306[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
17.
Tessier-Lavigne, M.
(1995)
Cell
82,
345-348[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
18.
Linnemann, T.,
Geyer, M.,
Jaitner, B. K.,
Block, C.,
Kalbitzer, H. R.,
Wittinghofer, A.,
and Herrmann, C.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
13556-13562 19.
Kuriyama, M.,
Harada, N.,
Kuroda, S.,
Yamamoto, T.,
Nakafuku, M.,
Iwamatsu, A.,
Yamamoto, D.,
Prasad, R.,
Croce, C.,
Canaani, E.,
and Kaibuchi, K.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
607-610 20.
Hock, B.,
Bohme, B.,
Karn, T.,
Yamamoto, T.,
Kaibuchi, K.,
Holtrich, U.,
Holland, S.,
Pawson, T.,
Rubsamen-Waigmann, H.,
and Strebhardt, K.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
9779-9784 21.
Buchert, M.,
Schneider, S.,
Meskenaite, V.,
Adams, M. T.,
Canaani, E.,
Baechi, T.,
Moelling, K.,
and Hovens, C. M.
(1999)
J. Cell Biol.
144,
361-371 22.
Holland, S. J.,
Gale, N. W.,
Mbamalu, G.,
Yancopoulos, G. D.,
Henkemeyer, M.,
and Pawson, T.
(1996)
Nature
383,
722-725[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
23.
Henkemeyer, M.,
Marengere, L. E.,
McGlade, J.,
Olivier, J. P.,
Conlon, R. A.,
Holmyard, D. P.,
Letwin, K.,
and Pawson, T.
(1994)
Oncogene
9,
1001-1014[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
24.
Halford, M. M.,
Oates, A. C.,
Hibbs, M. L.,
Wilks, A. F.,
and Stacker, S. A.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
7379-7390 25.
Katso, R. M.,
Manek, S.,
Biddolph, S.,
Whittaker, R.,
Charnock, M. F.,
Wells, M.,
and Ganesan, T. S.
(1999)
Cancer Res.
59,
2265-2270 26.
Songyang, Z.,
Fanning, A. S., Fu, C., Xu, J.,
Marfatia, S. M.,
Chishti, A. H.,
Crompton, A.,
Chan, A. C.,
Anderson, J. M.,
and Cantley, L. C.
(1997)
Science
275,
73-77 27.
Kornau, H.,
Schenker, L.,
Kennedy, M.,
and Seeburg, P.
(1995)
Science
269,
1737-1740 28.
Kim, E.,
Niethammer, M.,
Rothschild, A.,
Jan, Y. N.,
and Sheng, M.
(1995)
Nature
378,
85-88[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
29.
Kroiher, M.,
Miller, M. A.,
and Steele, R. E.
(2001)
Bioessays
23,
69-76[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
30.
Alroy, I.,
and Yarden, Y.
(1997)
FEBS Lett.
410,
83-86[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
31.
Dierks, T.,
Lecca, M. R.,
Schmidt, B.,
and von Figura, K.
(1998)
FEBS Lett.
423,
61-65[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
32.
Morris, D. P.,
Stevens, R. D.,
Wright, D. J.,
and Stafford, D. W.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
30491-30498 33.
Vecchi, M.,
Rudolph-Owen, L. A.,
Brown, C. L.,
Dempsey, P. J.,
and Carpenter, G.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
20589-20595 34.
Downing, J. R.,
Roussel, M. F.,
and Sherr, C. J.
(1989)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
9,
2890-2896 35.
Yee, N. S.,
Langen, H.,
and Besmer, P.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
14189-14201 36.
Yee, N. S.,
Hsiau, C. W.,
Serve, H.,
Vosseller, K.,
and Besmer, P.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
31991-31998 37.
Jeffers, M.,
Taylor, G. A.,
Weidner, K. M.,
Omura, S.,
and Van de Woude, G. F.
(1997)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17,
799-808[Abstract]
38.
Cabrera, N.,
Diaz-Rodriguez, E.,
Becker, E.,
Martin-Zanca, D.,
and Pandiella, A.
(1996)
J. Cell Biol.
132,
427-436 39.
McCarthy, M. J.,
Burrows, R.,
Bell, S. C.,
Christie, G.,
Bell, P. R.,
and Brindle, N. P.
(1999)
Lab. Invest.
79,
889-895[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
40.
O'Bryan, J. P.,
Fridell, Y.-W.,
Koski, R.,
Varnum, B.,
and Liu, E. T.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
551-557 41.
Saito, Y.,
Haendeler, J.,
Hojo, Y.,
Yamamoto, K.,
and Berk, B.
(2001)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
21,
6387-6394 42.
Callahan, C. A.,
Bonkovsky, J. L.,
Scully, A. L.,
and Thomas, J. B.
(1996)
Development
122,
2761-2767[Abstract]
43.
Callahan, C. A.,
Muralidhar, M. G.,
Lundgren, S. E.,
Scully, A. L.,
and Thomas, J. B.
(1995)
Nature
376,
171-174[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
44.
Bonkowsky, J. L.,
and Thomas, J. B.
(1999)
Mech. Dev.
82,
181-184[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
45.
Bonkowsky, J. L.,
Yoshikawa, S.,
O'Keefe, D. D.,
Scully, A. L.,
and Thomas, J. B.
(1999)
Nature
402,
540-544[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
46.
Pinkas-Kramarski, R.,
Shelly, M.,
Guarino, B. C.,
Wang, L. M.,
Lyass, L.,
Alroy, I.,
Alimandi, M.,
Kuo, A.,
Moyer, J. D.,
Lavi, S.,
Eisenstein, M.,
Ratzkin, B. J.,
Seger, R.,
Bacus, S. S.,
Pierce, J. H.,
Andrews, G. C.,
Yarden, Y.,
and Alamandi, M.
(1998)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18,
6090-6101 47.
Pinkas-Kramarski, R.,
Soussan, L.,
Waterman, H.,
Levkowitz, G.,
Alroy, I.,
Klapper, L.,
Lavi, S.,
Seger, R.,
Ratzkin, B. J.,
Sela, M.,
and Yarden, Y.
(1996)
EMBO J.
15,
2452-2467[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
48.
Ferguson, K. M.,
Darling, P. J.,
Mohan, M. J.,
Macatee, T. L.,
and Lemmon, M. A.
(2000)
EMBO J.
19,
4632-4643[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
49.
Jardine, L. J.,
Milne, D. M.,
Dumaz, N.,
and Meek, D. W.
(1999)
Oncogene
18,
7602-7607[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:
![]() |
D. Arvanitis and A. Davy Eph/ephrin signaling: networks Genes & Dev., February 15, 2008; 22(4): 416 - 429. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
E. Castells and J. M. Casacuberta Signalling through kinase-defective domains: the prevalence of atypical receptor-like kinases in plants J. Exp. Bot., October 20, 2007; (2007) erm226v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. E. Harris and S. K. Beckendorf Different Wnt signals act through the Frizzled and RYK receptors during Drosophila salivary gland migration Development, June 1, 2007; 134(11): 2017 - 2025. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
P. Bovolenta, J. Rodriguez, and P. Esteve Frizzled/RYK mediated signalling in axon guidance Development, November 15, 2006; 133(22): 4399 - 4408. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Matsuoka, H. Obama, M. L. Kelly, T. Matsui, and M. Nakamoto Biphasic Functions of the Kinase-defective Ephb6 Receptor in Cell Adhesion and Migration J. Biol. Chem., August 12, 2005; 280(32): 29355 - 29363. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Chevalier, M. Batoux, L. Fulton, K. Pfister, R. K. Yadav, M. Schellenberg, and K. Schneitz STRUBBELIG defines a receptor kinase-mediated signaling pathway regulating organ development in Arabidopsis PNAS, June 21, 2005; 102(25): 9074 - 9079. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
B. Llompart, E. Castells, A. Rio, R. Roca, A. Ferrando, V. Stiefel, P. Puigdomenech, and J. M. Casacuberta The Direct Activation of MIK, a Germinal Center Kinase (GCK)-like Kinase, by MARK, a Maize Atypical Receptor Kinase, Suggests a New Mechanism for Signaling through Kinase-dead Receptors J. Biol. Chem., November 28, 2003; 278(48): 48105 - 48111. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. K. Murai and E. B. Pasquale `Eph'ective signaling: forward, reverse and crosstalk J. Cell Sci., July 15, 2003; 116(14): 2823 - 2832. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Y. Takai and H. Nakanishi Nectin and afadin: novel organizers of intercellular junctions J. Cell Sci., January 1, 2003; 116(1): 17 - 27. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||||