![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 35, 32310-32319, August 30, 2002
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
From the Department of Cell and Molecular Biology, Karolinska Institutet, S-171 77 Stockholm, Sweden
Received for publication, April 8, 2002, and in revised form, June 11, 2002
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The dioxin receptor is a
ligand-dependent transcription factor that mediates the
biological effects of dioxin and related environmental pollutants. In
the absence of ligand the receptor is present in the cytoplasmic
compartment of the cell associated with the hsp90-dependent
chaperone complex. This complex regulates several functions of the
receptor such as ligand binding and nuclear import. Furthermore,
intracellular localization of the receptor is modulated by multiple
factors such as the export protein CRM-1 and the hsp90-associated
immunophilin XAP-2. We have identified the mechanism of XAP-2-induced
cytoplasmic localization of the receptor and studied the potential
cross-talk between CRM-1 and XAP-2. We show that XAP-2 anchors the
ligand-free receptor to cytoskeletal structures. This effect is blocked
upon treatment with the actin inhibitor cytochalasin B, whereas the
tubulin inhibitor colchicine had no effect on receptor localization. In
addition, we show that the receptor interacts with CRM-1 both in the
presence and absence of ligand. CRM-1-mediated nuclear export occurs
independently of XAP-2. Our data provide evidence that CRM-1 and XAP-2
act in parallel through different mechanisms and target different
interfaces of the receptor. These results suggest that two pathways
cooperate to localize the non-activated receptor in the cytoplasmic
compartment of the cell.
In mammalian cells, multiple systems such as ligand binding,
dimerization, and post-translational modifications have evolved to
regulate the function of transcription factors. Recently, intracellular compartmentalization has emerged as a major pathway to modulate transcription factor activity. For instance, the dioxin receptor is a
ligand-dependent transcription factor which, in the absence of ligand, is found in the cytoplasmic compartment of the cell or,
depending on cell type, evenly distributed between the cytoplasm and
the nucleus (1, 2). This non-activated form of the receptor interacts
with the
hsp901-dependent
molecular chaperone complex (3) and its associated proteins, such as
the hsp90-associated factor p23 (4, 5) and the dioxin receptor specific
immunophilin XAP-2 (6-8). The interaction between the dioxin receptor
and hsp90 is mediated by two distinct structural determinants, the DNA
binding bHLH domain (9), and the ligand binding region within the PAS-B subdomain of the receptor (10). In the presence of ligand the receptor
accumulates in the nucleus (1, 11) where it interacts with the general
dimerization partner factor ARNT (12). This event induces release of
the hsp90 complex (4, 13). Nuclear accumulation of the receptor is
regulated by a nuclear localization signal present in the bHLH domain
(14) and by the hsp90 complex which regulates the interaction between
the import machinery and the activated form of the receptor (1). In
addition, we have recently shown that the non-activated form of the
receptor is shuttling between the nucleus and the cytoplasm (2). In
this respect, nuclear export of the dioxin receptor is likely to be mediated by the export factor CRM-1. This protein interacts with short
hydrophobic recognition motifs and thereby induces nuclear export of a
large variety of nuclear proteins (15). Treatment with the specific
CRM-1 inhibitor leptomycin B induces nuclear accumulation of the
receptor suggesting a functional role for CRM-1 in inducing nuclear
export of the receptor (2). Subsequent studies have shown that the
interaction between CRM-1 and the dioxin receptor is dependent on two
NES motifs present in the bHLH and PAS domains of the receptor. These
two NES sequences are differentially employed depending on the
activation status of the receptor. Nuclear export of the non-activated
dioxin receptor is mediated via the NES present in the PAS domain,
whereas export of the ligand-activated receptor is mediated by the NES
located within the bHLH domain (2).
Additional proteins that influence the intracellular localization of
the receptor include the immunophilin-like protein XAP-2. XAP-2 is a
hsp90-associated factor that shares a high degree of sequence
similarity to classical immunophilins such as FKBP52 (12).
Immunophilins interact with hsp90-associated steroid hormone receptors,
most notably the glucocorticoid receptor, and regulate ligand-induced
nuclear accumulation. In contrast to FKBP52, XAP-2 induces cytoplasmic
redistribution of the dioxin receptor by an unknown mechanism (16-18).
In addition, XAP-2 binds to the non-activated dioxin receptor-hsp90
complex and enhances receptor transactivation (19, 20) by protecting
the ligand-free form against ubiquitination and subsequent degradation
(1). The interaction with XAP-2 requires the intact PAS B domain of the
receptor (16, 20). These observations suggest that multiple regulatory
proteins including CRM-1 and XAP-2 act on the receptor to uphold
cytoplasmic localization of the non-activated dioxin receptor and that
several receptor interfaces are targeted by different mechanisms. The
potential interplay between these different mechanism(s) remains to be elucidated.
In our studies we aimed to characterize the molecular mechanisms that
regulate cytoplasmic localization of the receptor. We show that
CRM-1-mediated nuclear export of the dioxin receptor occurs
independently of the cytoplasmic retention activity mediated by XAP-2.
Reciprocally, the ability of XAP-2 to induce cytoplasmic localization
of the receptor does not require CRM-1. In addition, our results
demonstrate that XAP-2-induced cytoplasmic localization of the dioxin
receptor involves anchoring of the receptor to certain cytoskeletal
structures, namely actin filaments. Treatment of cells with compounds
that disrupt these structures inhibits XAP-2-mediated cytoplasmic
localization of the dioxin receptor.
Recombinant Plasmids--
The vectors pCMX/mDR-GFP,
pCMX/mDR- Determination of Intracellular Localization of
GFP-tagged Proteins in Living Cells--
HeLa cells were propagated in
Dulbecco's minimum essential medium supplemented with 8% fetal calf
serum, L-glutamine (2 mM), penicillin (100 units/ml), and streptomycin (100 units/ml) at 37 °C at 9%
CO2. Cells were grown on 20 × 20-mm glass coverslips in 6-well culture dishes. Transfection was performed by introducing 0.5 µg of DNA into cells using LipofectAMINE (Invitrogen) according to
the manufacturer's instructions. Following transfection, cells were
grown in Dulbecco's minimum essential medium for 24-30 h before
treatment with TCDD (10 nM), leptomycin B (10 nM), colchicine (30 nM), cytochalasin B (30 nM), or a combination thereof, as detailed in the figure
legends. The intracellular localization of the GFP fusion proteins was
monitored using a Nikon LABOPHOT microscope equipped with a fluorescein
isothiocyanate filter and camera. Cells were classified into four
categories as described previously (21) according to their
intracellular localization pattern: N for exclusively nuclear, N > C for predominantly nuclear, N = C for equally distributed both
in the cytosol and the nucleus, N < C for predominantly
cytosolic, and C for exclusively cytosolic. On average 250 cells were
evaluated on each coverslip.
In Vitro Translation and Co-immunoprecipitation
Assay--
In vitro translation of mDR- Cell Extracts and Immunoblot Assay--
For
immunoprecipitation, COS7 cells were grown on 10-cm dishes. GST-tagged
dioxin receptor, FLAG-tagged dioxin receptor, and FLAG-tagged XAP2 were
transiently transfected in the absence or presence of 10 nM
TCDD, cytochalasin B, and colchicine as indicated in figure legends.
For cell harvest and preparation of whole cell extracts, cells where
washed twice with cold PBS, collected by centrifugation, and suspended
in buffer (20 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.4), 50 nM NaCl,
0.5% Tween 20, 10% Glycerol) supplemented with a protease inhibitor
(Complete-Mini; Roche Molecular Biochemicals). The cell suspensions
were sonicated by two 4-s bursts. Lysates were cleared by
centrifugation at 14,000 × g at 4 °C for 30 min.
250 µg of cellular protein was incubated with Characterization of the Molecular Mechanisms That Regulate
Cytoplasmic Localization of the Receptor--
Intracellular
localization of the dioxin receptor is regulated via multiple pathways
which include the immunophilin XAP-2 and the hsp90 complex, the
CRM-1-dependent nuclear export pathway, and
importin-dependent nuclear import. Interestingly, both
XAP-2 and CRM-1 mediate cytoplasmic localization of the receptor.
Therefore, we decided to investigate whether these two pathways
cooperate or if they act independently of each other. For this purpose
we co-transfected HeLa cells with expression vectors of a GFP-dioxin receptor fusion protein (mDR-GFP) and XAP-2 as indicated. For comparison the mDR-GFP was introduced into HeLa cells in the absence of
XAP-2. Following transfection the cells were treated with vehicle only,
10 nM leptomycin B, 10 nM TCDD, or a
combination of TCDD and leptomycin B. As shown previously (1, 2) the
mDR-GFP fusion protein was equally distributed both in the cytoplasmic and nuclear compartments of the cell (Fig.
1A, upper panel).
Treatment with 10 nM TCDD induced nuclear localization of
the receptor (data not shown). Incubation with 10 nM
leptomycin B resulted in ligand-independent nuclear accumulation of the
receptor (Fig. 1A, lower panel). Co-expression of
the receptor-specific immunophilin XAP-2 together with the mDR-GFP
fusion protein resulted in marked redistribution of the receptor toward
the cytoplasm (Fig. 1B, upper left panel) as
expected (16). In the presence of XAP-2, addition of ligand leads only to partial nuclear accumulation of the receptor (Fig.
1B, upper right panel) with considerable
cytoplasmic retention of the ligand-activated receptor. Interestingly,
it was not possible to induce complete nuclear accumulation of mDR-GFP
with leptomycin B in cells co-transfected with XAP-2 (Fig.
1B, lower left panel). Instead, the combined action of both ligand and leptomycin B was required to induce full
nuclear localization of the receptor in the presence of XAP-2 (Fig.
1B, lower right panel). These experiments suggest
that two parallel mechanisms cooperate to mediate cytoplasmic
localization of the dioxin receptor, because inhibition of CRM-1 by
leptomycin B or addition of ligand alone is not sufficient to induce
nuclear localization of the receptor in the presence of XAP-2.
The Dioxin Receptor Interacts with the Export Protein CRM-1 Both in
the Presence and Absence of Ligand--
Our observation that TCDD
alone is not sufficient to induce nuclear accumulation of the receptor
in cells overexpressing XAP-2 prompted us to investigate if the
activated receptor still maintained its ability to interact with CRM-1.
We have shown previously (2) that following ligand withdrawal the
receptor is exported out of the nucleus by a leptomycin B-sensitive
mechanism, suggesting the involvement of CRM-1. In addition, nuclear
export of the receptor following ligand withdrawal was inhibited by
deletion of the NES present in the bHLH domain (2). However, the
possibility remains that the ligand-bound form of the receptor still
interacts with CRM-1. To clarify this issue we co-transfected HeLa
cells with expression vectors for the export protein CRM-1 and the
mDR-GFP fusion protein, and we studied the effect on intracellular
localization of the receptor. In the presence of CRM-1, the
intracellular localization of the ligand-free receptor was markedly
shifted toward the cytoplasmic compartment of the cell (Fig.
2A, upper left
panel). However, we also observed a significant amount of the
receptor in the nuclear compartment, suggesting that the shuttling of
the receptor between cytoplasm and nucleus was intact and that the
increase in cytoplasmic localization of the receptor was a result of
the elevated CRM-1 levels in the cell. Consistent with this notion,
addition of leptomycin B even in the presence of overexpressed CRM-1
induced nuclear localization of the receptor (Fig. 2A,
lower left panel). Interestingly, however, addition of ligand to
cells where the mDR-GFP fusion protein was co-expressed together with
CRM-1 leads only to a minor increase of nuclear localized receptor
(Fig. 2A, upper right panel). These results
suggest that CRM-1 can interact with the receptor regardless of its
activation state and induce nuclear export. In addition, these results
show that ligand binding does not affect the ability of the receptor to
interact with CRM-1.
To verify that the interaction between the receptor and CRM-1 occurs
both in the absence and presence of ligand, we performed co-immunoprecipitation experiments. We transiently expressed
a GST-tagged dioxin receptor expression vector (GST-mDR) in HeLa cells
and used The Ligand-activated Dioxin Receptor Interacts with the Export
Protein CRM-1 through the bHLH Domain--
The results presented above
suggest that regardless of its activation state, the receptor maintains
its ability to interact with CRM-1. Earlier studies have
identified two NES sequences in the receptor, one located in the bHLH
(14) domain and one in the PAS A (2) domain. We decided to study if
export of the latent or active forms of the receptor is mediated by
different receptor domains. We used the GRDBD-mDR-GFP fusion construct
where the bHLH domain has been replaced with the N-terminal region of the glucocorticoid receptor. This protein does not interact with CRM-1
(23). We introduced this construct into HeLa cells by means of
transient transfections together with expression plasmid for CRM-1.
Following transfection the cells were treated with TCDD, leptomycin B,
or a combination of both, and the intracellular localization pattern of
the GRDBD-mDR-GFP fusion protein was determined. In control cells this
fusion protein was present both in the nucleus and in the cytoplasm
(Fig. 3, upper left panel).
Interestingly, as observed with the full-length receptor, co-expression
of the GRDBD-mDR-GFP fusion protein together with CRM-1 resulted in a increase of cytoplasmic localization (Fig. 3, lower left
panel). In sharp contrast to the full-length receptor, addition of
TCDD to cells expressing the GRDBD-mDR-GFP fusion protein and CRM-1 resulted in a significant increase in nuclear localization (Fig. 3,
lower right panel). This result shows that replacement of
the NES in the bHLH domain of the receptor hampers nuclear export by
inhibiting interaction of the ligand-activated form of the receptor
with CRM-1. However, in the absence of ligand export of the receptor is
efficiently mediated by the NES sequence located in the PAS domain.
The Dioxin Receptor Interacts with the CRM-1-mediated Export
Machinery in the Absence of XAP-2--
The data presented above show
that the receptor interacts with CRM-1 both in the presence and absence
of ligand. Interestingly, addition of XAP-2 resulted in a clear
increase in the amount of co-precipitated CRM-1. However, because XAP-2
has been shown to stabilize dioxin receptor protein levels by
inhibiting receptor ubiquitination (16), this may be an effect of
higher receptor levels in the XAP-2 expressing cells. We decided to
investigate whether the apparent increase in receptor-CRM-1 interaction
noted in co-immunoprecipitation assays was a result of higher
intracellular receptor levels or whether the interaction between CRM-1
and the receptor is stabilized in the presence of XAP-2. For this
purpose we transiently transfected HeLa cells with an mDR- The hsp90-associated Protein XAP-2 Utilizes Cytoskeletal Structures
to Redistribute the Dioxin Receptor to the Cytoplasm--
The results
described above strongly suggest that the CRM-1-dependent
export machinery regulates nuclear export both of the latent and active
forms of the dioxin receptor. This cellular shuttling occurs both in
the presence and absence of ligand, and the hsp90 molecular chaperone
complex does not appear to be involved in these events. However, these
results do not shed any light on how XAP-2 induces cytoplasmic
localization of the receptor. Clearly, this is not dependent on the
CRM-1 export complex because leptomycin B treatment only induced a
minor shift toward the cell nucleus when the receptor is co-transfected
with XAP-2 (Fig. 1). However, the fact that co-treatment of cells with
both leptomycin B and TCDD induces complete nuclear localization of the
receptor in the presence of XAP-2 suggests that ligand-sensitive
mechanisms regulate cytoplasmic localization of the receptor. Earlier
studies have shown that FKBP52, a steroid receptor binding immunophilin which displays high degree of sequence similarity with XAP-2 (6), interacts with tubulin cytoskeletal networks (24). Based on sequence
similarity between XAP-2 and FKBP52 we speculated that actin or tubulin
filaments could be involved in the XAP-2-mediated regulation of
cytoplasmic localization of the receptor. To test this hypothesis we
used compounds known to specifically disrupt actin or tubulin
structures in order to examine whether intracellular localization of
the receptor was affected. We expressed mDR-GFP by transient
transfection and subsequently treated the cells with colchicine or
cytochalasin B. Colchicine has been shown to inhibit polymerization of
tubulin networks (25-27), whereas cytochalasin B negatively affects
actin polymerization (28).
In cells treated with cytochalasin B the intracellular localization of
the receptor displayed an even localization pattern within the nucleus
and the cytoplasm (Fig.
5A, upper left
panel) with a slight increase in nuclear localization. Addition of
TCDD to the cells in the presence of cytochalasin B resulted in partial nuclear accumulation of the receptor (Fig. 5A, upper
right panel) when compared with untreated cells. In a similar
manner, treatment of cells with colchicine led to minimal changes in
the intracellular localization pattern of the non-activated dioxin
receptor (Fig. 5A, lower left panel). Addition of
ligand to colchicine-treated cells led to a clear inhibition of nuclear
accumulation of the receptor (Fig. 5A, lower right
panel). In contrast, in cells co-transfected with XAP-2 and the
receptor, addition of cytochalasin B resulted in considerable changes
in intracellular localization of the receptor. Whereas treatment of
cells with cytochalasin B resulted in clear inhibition of the
cytoplasmic retention activity induced by XAP-2 (compare Fig.
5B, upper left panel, with Fig.
1B, upper left panel). In addition, we observed
minimal or no nuclear accumulation of the receptor upon addition of
ligand, suggesting that ligand-induced accumulation of the receptor is
dependent on intact cytoskeletal structures. In a similar fashion,
nuclear import of either the glucocorticoid receptor or the tumor
suppressor protein p53 requires intact cytoskeletal structures (29).
These results suggest that XAP-2-dependent cytoplasmic
relocalization of the receptor involves anchoring of the hsp90-receptor
complex to actin structures. This mechanism appears to be mediated by
the receptor immunophilin XAP-2. Treatment of cells with cytochalasin
B, an agent known to repress polymerization of actin filaments,
inhibits XAP-2-mediated anchoring of the receptor to actin and inhibits
XAP-2-mediated cytoplasmic localization of the receptor.
XAP-2 Induces Interaction between the Dioxin Receptor
and Actin--
The presented experiments suggest that the receptor
immunophilin XAP-2 mediates cytoplasmic retention of the dioxin
receptor in the absence of ligand. To test whether the effect of XAP-2 involved direct binding to actin, we decided to perform
co-immunoprecipitation experiments. We transfected COS cells and
precipitated receptor-associated proteins as described in Fig. 2 using
a GST-tagged dioxin receptor fusion protein (GST-mDR) and XAP-2-mediated Protection of the Dioxin Receptor Is Not Affected by
Disruption of Cytoskeletal Structures--
Given the fact that
cytochalasin B is able to inhibit cytoplasmic retention of the dioxin
receptor, we tested whether other functions of XAP-2 were impaired
under these conditions. XAP-2 has been shown to protect the dioxin
receptor against ubiquitination and thereby increase the intracellular
levels of the dioxin receptor (16). To test whether XAP-2-mediated
protection of the receptor was influenced by cytochalasin B, we
transfected COS7 cells with expression vectors for the dioxin receptor
and FLAG-tagged XAP-2 and treated the cells as described in Fig. 5.
After transfection the cells were harvested, and whole cell extract was
prepared and fractionated by SDS-PAGE. Following electrophoresis,
proteins were transferred to a nitrocellulose membrane, and Western
blotting was performed using
These results indicate that disruption of cytoskeletal networks by
cytochalasin B inhibits XAP-2-mediated cytoplasmic retention of the
dioxin receptor. However, cytochalasin B does not inhibit stabilization
of receptor protein levels by XAP-2. Because it is possible that
stabilization of the receptor by XAP-2 might not necessarily involve
direct interaction between the receptor and XAP-2, we investigated
whether the interaction between the receptor and XAP-2 was disrupted in
the presence of colchicine or cytochalasin B. For this purpose, COS7
cells were transiently transfected with expression vectors encoding the
mDR-GST and FLAG-tagged XAP-2. Following transfection, cells were
treated with colchicine, cytochalasin B, or TCDD. We prepared whole
cell extracts from the transfected cells, and we performed GST
immunoprecipitation experiments to analyze if the receptor retained its
ability to bind XAP-2 in the presence of colchicine or cytochalasin B. Following precipitation the beads were extensively washed and
fractionated by SDS-PAGE. The precipitated proteins were then
transferred to a nitrocellulose membrane, and Western blotting
experiments were performed using FLAG antibodies. As shown in Fig.
7B the GST-tagged receptor interacted with FLAG-tagged XAP-2
in the presence of both with colchicine or cytochalasin B. In fact, the
experiments suggest that the interaction between the receptor and XAP-2
is stabilized upon treatment of cells with colchicine or cytochalasin B
(Fig. 7B, compare lanes 4-6).
The Inhibitory Effects of Cytochalasin B on Cytoplasmic
Redistribution Are Mediated by the PAS B Domain of the Dioxin
Receptor--
Next we studied if the inhibitory effects of colchicine
were mediated by the PAS B domain of the receptor or, alternatively, if
CRM-1-mediated export was affected by this treatment. For this purpose
we expressed in HeLa cells the mDR- Activation of the bHLH-PAS dioxin receptor represents a complex
process where several regulatory mechanisms act in a sequential manner
(12). These mechanisms include ligand binding, nuclear translocation,
and specific binding to DNA enhancer elements located in the vicinity
of dioxin-inducible genes (12). Cellular compartmentalization appears
to play a critical role in regulation of dioxin receptor activity. We
have shown that two NES motifs located in the PAS (2) and bHLH domains
(14) of the receptor mediate interaction between the receptor and
CRM-1. CRM-1 has been shown to interact with a number of transcription
factors and mediate nuclear export (30, 31). CRM-1-mediated nuclear
export can be inhibited upon addition of the fungal metabolite
leptomycin B (22). We have shown previously that incubation of cells
with leptomycin B results in nuclear localization of the dioxin
receptor both in the absence or presence of ligand, suggesting an
important role for CRM-1 in nuclear export of the dioxin receptor (2).
Interestingly, the dioxin receptor utilizes the two different NES in a
differential manner depending on the activation state of the receptor.
In the absence of ligand the receptor is exported from the nucleus via the NES located in the PAS domain, whereas the NES situated in the bHLH
domain is utilized for nuclear export of the ligand-activated form of
the receptor (2, 32). Furthermore, additional pathways are involved in
anchoring the receptor in the cytoplasm. We and others (16-18) have
shown that the receptor-specific immunophilin XAP-2 induces cytoplasmic
localization of the receptor. In the current study we show that the
CRM-1 and the XAP-2-dependent pathways function
independently from each other and regulate intracellular localization
of the receptor via different mechanisms.
In the absence of ligand the receptor is found bound with the
hsp90-chaperone complex (3). The receptor interacts with the hsp90
complex via two distinct domains, the DNA binding bHLH and the PAS B
domains. Interaction with the hsp90 complex regulates different
functional activities of the dioxin receptor. The interaction between
the PAS B domain of the receptor and hsp90 is required to maintain the
ligand binding activity of the receptor intact (33). In addition, we
and others (1, 34, 38) have shown that the hsp90 complex is involved in
nuclear accumulation of the receptor. This is accomplished by
regulating the interaction between the nuclear localization sequence
present in the bHLH domain of the receptor and the nuclear import machinery.
Interestingly, the interaction between the PAS domain and the hsp90
chaperone complex results in recruitment of the dioxin receptor-specific immunophilin XAP-2. XAP-2 interaction is specifically mediated by the PAS B ligand binding domain of the receptor, whereas the bHLH domain does not support binding of XAP-2. Several studies (16-18) have shown that this interaction is responsible for
cytoplasmic redistribution of the receptor, although the precise
mechanism is presently unclear.
In the absence of XAP-2, the receptor is found evenly distributed in
the nuclear and cytoplasmic compartment of the cell (1, 16, 32, 35,
36). Co-expression of XAP-2 induces a dramatic shift in receptor
localization toward the cytoplasm (1, 17, 18). Furthermore, XAP-2
expression severely delays nuclear accumulation of the receptor in the
presence of ligand or, alternatively, in the presence of the
CRM-1-specific inhibitor leptomycin B (22). However, combined treatment
of both leptomycin B and ligand induces full nuclear translocation of
the receptor even in the presence of XAP-2. These results suggest that
two different pathways are responsible for nuclear export and for
anchoring the receptor in the cytoplasm. These two different pathways
function independently and target different domains of the receptor.
Indeed, nuclear export occurs both in the presence and absence of
ligand. Co-immunoprecipitation analysis revealed that the receptor
interacts with CRM-1 both in the presence and absence of ligand. This
interaction is not dependent on the PAS B domain of the receptor and
thus not subject to regulation by XAP-2. This observation indicates
that the CRM-1-dependent pathway constitutively mediates
nuclear export of the receptor and therefore is not likely to be
critical to inhibit dioxin receptor transcriptional activation. In
contrast, XAP-2-dependent cytoplasmic anchoring of the
receptor occurs only in the absence of ligand. We speculate that the
difference may represent an important regulatory event in the
activation process of the dioxin receptor that may prevent
ligand-independent transcriptional activation of the receptor.
XAP-2-mediated cytoplasmic anchoring of the receptor involves a
different mechanism. In earlier studies (37), the immunophilin FKBP52
has been shown to interact with several different members of the
steroid receptor superfamily, most notably the glucocorticoid receptor.
This immunophilin regulates the intracellular localization pattern of
the glucocorticoid receptor by facilitating interaction with tubulin
filaments (24). This interaction is important to mediate nuclear
accumulation of the glucocorticoid receptor. Interestingly, the
integrity of tubulin filaments is also important for nuclear accumulation of the tumor suppressor protein p53 (29).
In contrast, little is known regarding the potential involvement of
cytoskeletal structures in anchoring transcription factors like the
dioxin receptor in the cytoplasmic compartment of the cell. In this
study we present evidence for the involvement of actin structures in
anchoring the dioxin receptor in the cytoplasm. This activity is
mediated by the PAS B domain of the receptor and is inhibited upon
treatment of cells with cytochalasin B, a known inhibitor of actin
polymerization. Interestingly, XAP-2-induced cytoplasmic redistribution
of the receptor was inhibited by cytochalasin B and because XAP-2
interacts via the PAS B domain of the receptor, deletion of this domain
should result in a protein that is not affected by cytochalasin B. Indeed this situation was observed. In experiments where we utilized
the PAS B deletion constructs these mutants were shown to be refractory
to cytochalasin B. These results suggest that the immunophilins XAP-2
and FKBP52 are functionally very different and mediate alternative
tasks in regulation of intracellular localization, despite a high
degree of sequence homology.
Interestingly, we did not observe any inhibition of the
XAP-2-dependent stabilization of the receptor by
cytochalasin B or colchicine. In addition, in co-immunoprecipitation
experiments we clearly observed that the interaction between the dioxin
receptor and XAP-2 was not affected, showing that inhibition of
XAP-2-dependent cytoplasmic localization by cytochalasin B
did not involve disruption of the dioxin receptor-XAP-2 complex.
However, it is interesting to notice that these two mechanisms act on
the receptor independently of one another. Nuclear export of the
receptor is not dependent on XAP-2 because the mDR- In addition, leptomycin B-sensitive nuclear export of the receptor was
not inhibited in the presence of ligand. Coupled to earlier results
(32) demonstrating that addition of leptomycin B inhibited the
transcriptional activity of the receptor, these results suggest that
nuclear export may be required for full transcriptional activity. We
speculate that post-transcriptional modifications occur in the
cytoplasm and are required to generate a receptor with full
transcriptional activation potential. In this respect, cytoplasmic
localization of the receptor does not automatically result in a
transcriptionally inactive conformation. Clearly, additional
experiments are required to clarify this and remaining questions. For
example, it will be important to clarify what steps following ligand
activation occur in the nucleus or in the cytoplasm. In addition,
determination of the potential role for the hsp90 complex in any of
these steps will be required.
In conclusion, we have shown that two non-overlapping mechanisms
regulate cytoplasmic localization of the bHLH-PAS dioxin receptor. The
CRM-1-dependent export complex mediates export of the
receptor both in the absence and presence of ligand. In addition, the
hsp90 chaperone complex serves as a platform for the immunophilin-like protein XAP-2 and possibly additional auxiliary factors to anchor the
non-activated form of the receptor in the cytoplasm by locking the
receptor complex to actin filaments.
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
MATERIALS AND METHODS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
PASB-GFP, pCMX/mDR-
PASB-GFP C216S, pGEM7m/DR-
PASB,
pCMX/mDR-
PASB C216S, pCMV2/FLAG-mDR, pCMV2/FLAG-XAP2,
pBC mDR, and pSG5/XAP-2 have been described previously. Plasmids
pCMX/GRDBD-mDR-GFP and pCMX/CRM-1 were constructed by standard
subcloning techniques. Details regarding construction of the different
plasmids are available from the authors upon request.
PASB, mDR-
PASB
C216S, and CRM-1 was performed using coupled transcription-translation
reactions in rabbit reticulocyte lysate (Promega Biotech) according to
the manufacturer's recommendations. Immunoprecipitation of
35S-labeled in vitro translated proteins using
anti-DR antibodies has been described elsewhere (1). The proteins were
separated on a 7.5% SDS-polyacrylamide gel.
-GST (Amersham
Biosciences) or
-FLAG antibodies at 4 °C for 1.5 h.
Immunocomplexes were precipitated by adding 40 µl of a 50% slurry of
protein A-Sepharose (Amersham Biosciences) followed by incubation at
4 °C under slow rotation for 1.5 h. After centrifugation the
resulting pellets were washed four times with 500 µl of PBS.
Precipitated proteins and whole cell extracts were analyzed by 7.5 or
12% SDS-PAGE and transferred to nitrocellulose membranes. Immobilized
proteins were blocked with 5% non-fat milk in PBS at 4 °C overnight
followed by incubation with primary antibodies. The antibodies used
were rabbit
-dioxin receptor (Biomol; dilution 1:500) or murine
-FLAG (Sigma; dilution 1:1000), primary goat
-CRM (Santa Cruz
Biotechnology; dilution 1:1000), and
-actin (Santa Cruz 1:500) in
blocking solution (5% non fat milk in PBS). Horseradish
peroxidase-conjugated anti-mouse (Amersham Biosciences) or anti-goat
(Santa Cruz Biotechnology) immunoglobulins were used as secondary
antibody diluted 1:1000 in blocking solution. Immunocomplexes were
visualized after extensive washing in PBS, 0.1% Tween 20 using
enhanced chemiluminescence reagents (Amersham Biosciences) according to
the manufacturer's recommendations.
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (30K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Cytoplasmic localization of the
receptor by XAP-2 does not involve CRM-1. A, HeLa cells
were transiently transfected with 500 ng of an mDR-GFP expression
plasmid and treated with 10 nM leptomycin B
(LMB) as indicated for 1 h. Following this treatment
intracellular localization of the mDR-GFP fusion protein was determined
by fluorescent microscopy, and statistical evaluation of 200-300 cells
is shown below. B, HeLa cells were co-transfected with 500 ng of expression vectors for the mDR-GFP fusion protein and XAP-2.
Cells were treated with 10 nM TCDD, 10 nM
leptomycin B, or a combination of both for 1 h, and the
intracellular localization pattern of the mDR-GFP proteins was
determined as in A.

View larger version (24K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
The dioxin receptor interacts with CRM-1 both
in the presence and absence of ligand. A, HeLa cells
were co-transfected with the mDR-GFP construct as in Fig. 1 together
with 500 ng of expression vector for CRM-1. Following transfection,
cells were treated with 10 nM TCDD, and the intracellular
localization of the mDR was determined. B, HeLa cells were
transfected with the GST-mDR expression plasmid and XAP-2 expression
vectors as indicated. Following transfection cells were allowed to grow
for 48 h and were subsequently treated with 10 nM TCDD
as indicated for 2 h. After this treatment, whole cell extracts
were prepared, and co-immunoprecipitation experiments were performed
using
-GST antibodies. Precipitated material was fractionated on a
7.5% SDS-PAGE and transferred to nitrocellulose membrane. The membrane
was subjected to Western blot analysis using
-CRM-1 antibodies.
LMB, leptomycin B.
-GST antibodies to precipitate down different receptor-associated proteins. The precipitated material was extensively washed and separated using SDS-PAGE. The fractionated proteins were
transferred to a nitrocellulose membrane, and CRM-1 antibodies were
added to visualize the presence of CRM-1 in the precipitated material.
This experiment shows that the dioxin receptor efficiently interacts
with CRM-1 both in the absence and presence of ligand (Fig.
2B, compare lanes 2 and 3).
Co-expression of XAP-2 together with the receptor did not perturb this
interaction (Fig. 2B, compare lanes 4 and
5); rather, we observed increased levels of CRM-1 interacting with the receptor. However, it is important to note that
that XAP-2 stabilizes the dioxin receptor by inhibiting receptor ubiquitination (16). The seemingly higher interaction between the
receptor and CRM-1 may simply reflect increased receptor levels. In
conclusion, these results show that the dioxin receptor interacts efficiently with the CRM-1-mediated nuclear export machinery both in
the presence or absence of ligand. These experiments further suggest
that nuclear localization of the receptor may depend on increased
nuclear retention, possibly via ligand-induced recruitment of nuclear
factors such as co-activators. Interaction with these proteins may
inhibit binding between the ligand-activated form of the receptor and
CRM-1 and result in stable nuclear localization.

View larger version (31K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
CRM-1 mediates export of the ligand-activated
dioxin receptor through the bHLH domain. HeLa cells we
co-transfected with GRDBD-mDR-GFP and CRM-1 expression plasmid are
depicted. Following transfection cells were treated with 10 nM TCDD, and the intracellular localization pattern of the
GRDBD-mDR-GFP fusion protein was determined.
PASB-GFP
receptor construct where the PAS B domain has been deleted. This
construct lacks the hsp90 binding PAS B domain and does not interact
with XAP-2. In previous studies (2, 16) we have shown that this mutant
receptor is localized constitutively in the nuclear compartment of the
cell due to failure to interact with XAP-2. In addition, we have
identified previously a critical CYS residue in the NES present in the
PAS domain of the receptor, which upon mutation to SER induces a
prominent shift toward the cytoplasm, possibly due to the formation of
a NES with increased activity (2). We now examined whether the
mDR-
PASB receptor form maintained its ability to interact with
CRM-1. For this purpose, we transfected HeLa cells with expression
vectors for mDR-
PASB-GFP in the presence or absence of CRM-1. In the
absence of CRM-1 the mDR-
PASB-GFP fusion protein displayed a
constitutively nuclear localization pattern (Fig.
4A, left top
panel). In the presence of CRM-1, however, the intracellular
localization shifted dramatically toward the cytoplasmic compartment
(Fig. 4A, top right panel). These experiments show that, despite its seemingly nuclear appearance, the mDR-
PASB protein apparently retains its ability to interact with the export protein CRM-1. In control experiments we used mDR-
PASB-GFP C216S, where a point mutation was introduced into the PAS domain of the receptor. This C216S mutated form of the receptor displays drastically amplified cytoplasmic appearance, due to increased nuclear export activity of the NES motif present in the PAS A domain (2). In transient
transfection experiments we observed a clear shift from the nucleus to
the cytoplasm for the mDR-
PASB-GFP C216S (Fig. 4A,
lower left panel). When co-expressed with CRM-1, intracellular redistribution of mDR-
PASB-GFP C216S to the cytoplasm was further intensified, resulting in very low levels of nuclear localization (Fig.
4A, lower right panel). This observation suggests
that the ability of this construct to be exported out of the nucleus
was not dependent on interaction with XAP-2. To corroborate this
observation, we performed co-immunoprecipitation experiments where the
association between CRM-1 and the mDR-
PASB constructs was
investigated. The mDR-
PASB constructs and CRM-1 were in
vitro translated using rabbit reticulocyte lysate. To visualize
the interaction between CRM-1 and the receptor, CRM-1 was labeled with
[35S]methionine. Following translation the proteins were
mixed and precipitated using
-dioxin receptor polyclonal antibodies.
As shown in Fig. 4B, CRM-1 interacted with the mDR-
PASB
receptor construct (Fig. 4B, compare lanes 1 and
3). Interestingly, when the C216S form of this receptor was
used, we observed a clear increase in the ability of the receptor to
bind CRM-1 (Fig. 4B, compare lanes 1 and
2). We conclude that the dioxin receptor interacts with the
CRM-1-mediated export machinery even when the hsp90-XAP-2 interacting
domain is deleted.

View larger version (22K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Interaction between CRM-1 and the dioxin
receptor is not dependent on the PAS B domain. A, HeLa
cells were transfected with the mDR-
PASB-GFP or mDR-
PASB-GFP
C216S construct as depicted in the absence (left panels) or
presence of CRM-1 expression vector. Following transfection the
intracellular localization of the GFP fusion proteins was determined as
shown in Fig. 1. Statistical evaluation is shown below. B,
the mDR-
PASB deletion mutant and CRM-1 were in vitro
translated using TNT-coupled rabbit reticulocyte lysate as
described under "Materials and Methods." The interaction between
the mDR-
PASB-GFP and CRM-1 was monitored by co-immunoprecipitation
experiments as described under "Materials and Methods."

View larger version (30K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
XAP-2-induced cytoplasmic localization
activity is inhibited by cytochalasin B but not by colchicine.
HeLa cells were transiently transfected with 500 ng of the mDR-GFP
expression vector in the absence (A) or presence of 500 ng
of mammalian expression vector for XAP-2. Following transfection the
cells were treated with cytochalasin B (Cyto B) or
colchicine (Colchi) as depicted in the figure in the
presence or absence of 10 nM TCDD. Intracellular
localization of the mDR-GFP fusion protein was determined, and
statistical evaluation is shown below.
-GST
antibodies. Precipitated material was extensively rinsed, and the
proteins were fractionated through SDS-PAGE. Following electrophoresis,
proteins were transferred to a nitrocellulose membrane that was probed
with
-actin antibodies. In cells transfected with empty
GST-expressing plasmid, only background levels of actin
immunoreactivity were detected (Fig. 6,
lane 1). In addition, similar results were obtained when the
GST-tagged receptor plasmid or XAP-2 were expressed in COS cells
individually (Fig. 6, lanes 2-4). However, co-expression of
both XAP-2 and the GST-tagged receptor in COS cells induced a
considerable increase in co-precipitated actin (Fig. 6, lanes
4 and 5). Interestingly, addition of TCDD to cells
co-transfected with XAP-2 and GST-tagged receptor induced a substantial
decrease in the amount of precipitated actin (Fig. 6, compare
lanes 5 and 6). This experiment shows that the
non-activated dioxin receptor interacts with actin filaments in the
absence of TCDD and that this interaction is mediated by the
receptor-associated immunophilin XAP-2. Furthermore, incubation with
ligand induces release of the receptor complex from actin and probably
subsequent nuclear accumulation.

View larger version (18K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
XAP-2 induces binding of the non-activated
receptor to actin. COS7 cells were transfected with expression
vectors for the GST-mDR fusion protein and XAP-2 as indicated.
Following transfection cells were treated with or without TCDD for
1 h, and whole cell extracts were prepared. Extracts were
subsequently incubated with
-GST antibodies, and immunoprecipitation
experiments were performed. Precipitated material was fractionated
through a 12.5% SDS-PAGE gel and transferred to a nitrocellulose
membrane. Western experiments were performed using
-actin
antibodies.
-dioxin receptor or
-FLAG
antibodies. As shown in Fig.
7A, addition of XAP-2
stabilized the cellular levels of the receptor (Fig. 7A,
compare lanes 2 and 3). Interestingly, addition
of colchicine or cytochalasin B did not inhibit the stabilizing effect
of XAP-2 on the dioxin receptor. This result was not due to altered or
lowered intracellular levels of XAP-2, because Western analysis showed
that XAP-2 protein levels remained constant throughout our experimental
conditions (Fig. 7A, lower panel). Thus,
destabilization of cytoskeletal networks does not interfere with the
stabilizing effects of XAP-2 on the dioxin receptor.

View larger version (13K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 7.
The interaction between the dioxin receptor
and XAP-2 is not affected by cytochalasin B or colchicine.
A, COS7 cells were transfected with expression vector for
the mDR and FLAG-tagged XAP-2. Following transfection the cells were
grown for 48 h prior to treatment with colchicine
(Colchi), cytochalasin B (Cyto B), and 10 nM TCDD for 2 h. The cells were subsequently
harvested, and whole cell extract was prepared. The extract was
fractionated through a 10% SDS-PAGE, and the proteins were transferred
to nitrocellulose filters. The filters were then analyzed by Western
blotting experiments using dioxin receptor antibodies. Following this
analysis the membrane was stripped, and FLAG antibodies were used to
assess the levels of XAP-2. B, COS7 cells were transfected
and extracts were prepared as in A. Immunoprecipitation
experiments were performed using dioxin receptor antibodies, and the
presence of FLAG-tagged XAP-2 was examined by Western analysis.
PASB-GFP or mDR-
PASB-GFP C216S
fusion proteins. Following transfection, the cells were treated with
colchicine or cytochalasin B, and the intracellular localization
pattern of the GFP fusion proteins was determined. Interestingly,
treatment with cytochalasin B did not affect the overall intracellular
localization pattern of mDR-
PASB (Fig. 8, upper left panel). These
results suggest that the inhibitory effects of cytochalasin B are
mediated by the XAP-2-hsp90 interacting PAS B domain of the receptor.
In contrast, addition of colchicine to the cells decreased the levels
of nuclear localized mDR-
PASB protein. This effect is probably due
to inhibition of nuclear import (Fig. 8, lower left panel),
suggesting that, in analogy to transcription factors like p53, the
dioxin receptor may require intact tubulin filaments to accumulate in
the nucleus. In control experiments we expressed in HeLa cells
mDR-
PASB C216S which displays increased cytoplasmic localization due
to enhanced nuclear export (2). As observed with the mDR-
PASB
construct, treatment with colchicine lowered the amount of cells with
nuclear staining. On the other hand, cytochalasin B treatment had no
effect on the enhanced cytoplasmic localization pattern of this
construct, consistent with our model that the effects of cytochalasin B
are mediated by XAP-2 and the PAS B domain of the dioxin receptor.

View larger version (28K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 8.
The inhibitory effects on cytoplasmic
localization by cytochalasin B are mediated by the PAS B domain.
HeLa cells were transiently transfected with expression vectors for the
mDR-
PASB-GFP or the mDR-
PASB-GFP C216S fusion proteins. Following
transfection cells were allowed to recover for 24 h and
subsequently treated with cytochalasin B (Cyto B) or
colchicine (Colchi) as presented in Fig. 4. The
intracellular localization of the different receptor-GFP fusion
proteins was determined. and statistical analysis is shown below.
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
PASB construct
was able to interact with CRM-1. In addition, the nuclear
dominant appearance of this construct was dramatically shifted toward
the cytoplasmic compartment in cells co-transfected with CRM-1
demonstrating that this form of the receptor can be efficiently
exported out of the nucleus.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
We thank Drs. Minoru Yoshida (University of Tokyo) for providing the leptomycin B reagent, Maarten Förneröd for the hCRM cDNA, and Edward Seto for the XAP-2 cDNA. We also thank Lorenz Poellinger, Arunas Kazlauskas, Murray L. Whitelaw, and Katarina Pettersson for critically reading the manuscript.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* This work was supported in part by the Swedish Cancer Foundation, the Swedish Fund for Research without Laboratory Animals, and the Magnus Bergvall Foundation.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.
Supported by a fellowship from the Swedish Medical Research
Council. To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Biosciences at Novum, Karolinska Institute, S-14157 Huddinge, Sweden.
Tel.: 46-8-6089113; Fax: 46-8-7745538; E-mail:
ingemar.pongratz@biosci.ki.se.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, June 13, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M203351200
| |
ABBREVIATIONS |
|---|
The abbreviations used are: hsp90, heat shock protein 90; bHLH, basic helix-loop-helix; CRM-1, chromatin region maintenance; GST, glutathione S-transferase; PAS, Per-ARNT-Sim; NES, nuclear export sequence; GFP, green fluorescent protein; PBS, phosphate-buffered saline; TCDD, 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenso-p-dioxin.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. |
Kazlauskas, A.,
Sundstrom, S.,
Poellinger, L.,
and Pongratz, I.
(2001)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
21,
2594-2607 |
| 2. |
Berg, P.,
and Pongratz, I.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
43231-43238 |
| 3. | Wilhelmsson, A., Cuthill, S., Denis, M., Wikstrom, A. C., Gustafsson, J. A., and Poellinger, L. (1990) EMBO J. 9, 69-76[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 4. |
Kazlauskas, A.,
Poellinger, L.,
and Pongratz, I.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
13519-13524 |
| 5. | Nair, S. C., Toran, E. J., Rimerman, R. A., Hjermstad, S., Smithgall, T. E., and Smith, D. F. (1996) Cell Stress Chaperones 1, 237-250[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 6. |
Carver, L. A.,
and Bradfield, C. A.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
11452-11456 |
| 7. |
Ma, Q.,
and Whitlock, J. P.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
8878-8884 |
| 8. |
Meyer, B. K.,
Praygrant, M. G.,
Vandenheuvel, J. P.,
and Perdew, G. H.
(1998)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18,
978-988 |
| 9. | Antonsson, C., Whitelaw, M. L., Mcguire, J., Gustafsson, J. A., and Poellinger, L. (1995) Mol. Cell. Biol. 15, 756-765[Abstract] |
| 10. |
Coumailleau, P.,
Poellinger, L.,
Gustafsson, J. A.,
and Whitelaw, M. L.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
25291-25300 |
| 11. | Pollenz, R. S., Sattler, C. A., and Poland, A. (1994) Mol. Pharmacol. 45, 428-438[Abstract] |
| 12. | Gu, Y.-Z., Hogenesch, J. B., and Bradfield, C. A. (2000) Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 40, 519-561[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 13. |
McGuire, J.,
Whitelaw, M. L.,
Pongratz, I.,
Gustafsson, J. A.,
and Poellinger, L.
(1994)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14,
2438-2446 |
| 14. |
Ikuta, T.,
Eguchi, H.,
Tachibana, T.,
Yoneda, Y.,
and Kawajiri, K.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
2895-2904 |
| 15. | Fornerod, M., Ohno, M., Yoshida, M., and Mattaj, I. W. (1997) Cell 90, 1051-1060[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 16. |
Kazlauskas, A.,
Poellinger, L.,
and Pongratz, I.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
41317-41324 |
| 17. |
LaPres, J. J.,
Glover, E.,
Dunham, E. E.,
Bunger, M. K.,
and Bradfield, C. A.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
6153-6159 |
| 18. |
Petrulis, J. R.,
Hord, N. G.,
and Perdew, G. H.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
37448-37453 |
| 19. |
Carver, L. A.,
LaPres, J. J.,
Jain, S.,
Dunham, E. E.,
and Bradfield, C. A.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
33580-33587 |
| 20. | Meyer, B. K., and Perdew, G. H. (1999) Biochemistry 38, 8907-8917[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 21. | Ylikomi, T., Bocquel, M. T., Berry, M., Gronmeyer, H., and Chambon, P. (1992) EMBO J. 11, 3681-3694[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 22. |
Kudo, N.,
Matsumori, N.,
Taoka, H.,
Fujiwara, D.,
Schreiner, E. P.,
Wolff, B.,
Yoshida, M.,
and Horinouchi, S.
(1999)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
96,
9112-9117 |
| 23. | Liu, J., and DeFranco, D. B. (1999) Mol. Endocrinol. 14, 40-51 |
| 24. |
Galigniana, M. D.,
Scruggs, J. L.,
Herrington, J.,
Welsh, M. J.,
Carter-Su, C.,
Housley, P. R.,
and Pratt, W. B.
(1998)
Mol. Endocrinol.
12,
1903-1913 |
| 25. |
Welch, W. J.,
and Feramisco, J. R.
(1985)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
5,
1571-1581 |
| 26. |
Schliwa, M.
(1982)
J. Cell Biol.
92,
79-91 |
| 27. |
Perrot-Applanat, M.,
Lescop, P.,
and Milgrom, E.
(1992)
J. Cell Biol.
119,
337-348 |
| 28. | Deinum, J., and Lincoln, P. (1986) Biochim. Biophys. Acta 870, 226-233[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 29. | Giannakakou, P., Sackett, D., Ward, Y., Webster, K., Blagosklonny, M. V., and Fojo, T. (2000) Nat. Cell Biol. 2, 709-717[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 30. | Turpin, P., Ossareh-Nazari, B., and Dargemont, C. (1999) FEBS Lett. 452, 82-86[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 31. | Gorlich, D., and Mattaj, I. W. (1996) Science 271, 1513-1518[Abstract] |
| 32. |
Pollenz, R. S.,
and Barbour, E. R.
(2000)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
20,
6095-6104 |
| 33. |
Pongratz, I.,
Mason, G. F.,
and Poellinger, L.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
13728-13734 |
| 34. | Heid, S. E., Pollenz, R. S., and Swanson, H. I. (1999) Mol. Pharmacol. 57, 82-92 |
| 35. |
Roberts, B. J.,
and Whitelaw, M. L.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
36351-36356 |
| 36. | Kadesch, T. (1993) Cell Growth Differ. 4, 49-55[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 37. |
Pratt, W. B.,
and Toft, D. O.
(1997)
Endocr. Rev.
18,
306-360 |
| 38. |
Lees, M. J.,
and Whitelaw, M. L.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
5811-5822 |
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
P. Penttinen, J. Jaehrling, A. E. Damdimopoulos, J. Inzunza, J. G. Lemmen, P. van der Saag, K. Pettersson, G. Gauglitz, S. Makela, and I. Pongratz Diet-Derived Polyphenol Metabolite Enterolactone Is a Tissue-Specific Estrogen Receptor Activator Endocrinology, October 1, 2007; 148(10): 4875 - 4886. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. S. Pollenz, S. E. Wilson, and E. J. Dougherty Role of Endogenous XAP2 Protein on the Localization and Nucleocytoplasmic Shuttling of the Endogenous Mouse Ahb-1 Receptor in the Presence and Absence of Ligand Mol. Pharmacol., October 1, 2006; 70(4): 1369 - 1379. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. S. Pollenz and E. J. Dougherty Redefining the Role of the Endogenous XAP2 and C-terminal hsp70-interacting Protein on the Endogenous Ah Receptors Expressed in Mouse and Rat Cell Lines J. Biol. Chem., September 30, 2005; 280(39): 33346 - 33356. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |