Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M202745200 on August 27, 2002
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 43, 40789-40798, October 25, 2002
Serum Response Factor Activation by Muscarinic Receptors via
RhoA
NOVEL PATHWAY SPECIFIC TO M1 SUBTYPE INVOLVING CALMODULIN,
CALCINEURIN, AND Pyk2*
Kedan
Lin
§,
Danxin
Wang§, and
Wolfgang
Sadée¶
From the Departments of Biopharmaceutical Sciences and
Pharmaceutical Chemistry, University of California, San Francisco,
California 94143-0446 and Department of Pharmacology, College of
Medicine and Public Health, Ohio State University,
Columbus, Ohio 43210-1239
Received for publication, March 21, 2002, and in revised form, August 14, 2002
 |
ABSTRACT |
The muscarinic cholinergic receptor (mAChR)
subtypes share high sequence similarity except in their third
intracellular loop and COOH terminus, domains thought to be
involved in signal transduction. Subtypes M1, M3, and M5 couple mainly
through G
q/11, and M2 and M4 couple mainly through
G
i/o. Whether subtypes within each of these two groups
differ in their signaling pathways remains to be resolved. This study
focused on nuclear signaling pathways leading to activation of the
transcription factor, serum response factor (SRF). Genes encoding M1,
M2, and M3 were co-expressed in Jurkat T lymphocytes with a reporter
gene driven by a mutant serum response element, SRE.L, which responds
to SRF activation. We show that only M1 mAChR activated SRF through a
pathway involving the small GTPase RhoA, with no response observed for
M2 and M3. Transfection of GTPase-deficient G
subunits (G
QL;
constitutively active form) demonstrated that SRF was activated by
G
13QL but only marginally by G
qQL and
G
12QL in Jurkat cells. Yet transfection of regulator of
G protein-signaling protein, RGS2 and RGS4, which inhibit
G
q/11 activity, indicated that G
q/11 and
Ca2+ mobilization were required for SRF activation by M1.
Calmodulin inhibitors suppressed the M1 and the G
13QL
pathways, acting both upstream and downstream of RhoA. However,
calcineurin inhibitors and the tyrosine kinase inhibitor genistein
selectively suppressed SRF activation by M1, but not by
G
13QL, indicating the presence of separate pathways. The
calmodulin-dependent tyrosine kinase Pyk2 was also
activated by M1 but not M3, and Pyk2 appears also to play a role in
M1-SRF activation, as judged by experiments with two dominant-negative
Pyk2 mutants. These results reveal a novel
calmodulin-dependent RhoA-SRF signaling pathway unique to
the M1 mAChR subtype.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Activation of G protein-coupled receptors
(GPCRs)1 leads to
rapid changes in second messengers such as cAMP, Ca2+,
inositol phosphates, or diacylglycerol. Long term GPCR effects on the
other hand depend on changes in gene expression (1) via multiple
pathways involving the Ras (2) and Rho families of small GTPases (3).
Several mechanisms by which GPCRs and heterotrimeric G proteins couple
to these pathways have been proposed (4), including
calmodulin-dependent transactivation of tyrosine kinase
receptors (5-7). Moreover, receptor activation of G
12 and G
13 was shown to activate Rho via Rho-GEF
(guanine-nucleotide exchange factor) proteins, which enhance both the
GTPase activity of G
proteins and the GDP/GTP exchange rate of Rho
(8), or via tyrosine kinases such as Pyk2 (9). Nuclear signaling
pathways may vary for each GPCR and in each tissue and, therefore,
often remain unresolved.
Muscarinic cholinergic receptors (mAChR) also affect gene expression
such as transcription of the immediate early genes (IEG), c-fos and c-jun in neuronal cells (10-14).
Multiple mechanisms appear to contribute to nuclear signaling pathways
of mAChR (10, 12, 15). The mAChR subtypes M1-5 share high sequence
similarity with each other except in their large third intracellular
(i3) loop and the COOH terminus. Subtypes M1, M3, and M5 form a group of receptors mainly coupled through G
q/11, whereas M2
and M4 couple mainly through G
i/o (16). However, each
GPCR subtype typically interacts with multiple G proteins (17).
Patterns of signaling pathways for the M1, M3, M5, and the M2, M4
subtypes are thought to be similar within each group even though the i3 loops and COOH termini of each receptor subtype, the main domains involved in receptor signaling, differ substantially (16). Moreover, i3
loops and COOH termini are highly conserved for each mAChR subtype
across species, suggesting distinct conserved functions for each
subtype. Recent results with M1 receptor knock-out mice suggest
differences in signaling between M1 and other mAChR subtypes coupled to
G
q/11 (18). Whereas mAChR-dependent
G
q/11 coupling in brain tissue was reduced by only
~50% in the M1 knock-out mice compared with the wild type,
suggesting the presence of residual activity by M3 and M5, activation
of the mitogen-activated protein kinase/extracellular signal-regulated
kinase pathway was abolished (18). Because M1 receptors represent a
major target for Alzheimer's therapy (19), it is important to identify
signaling pathways unique to the M1 subtype.
The present work focuses on the transcriptional regulation of IEGs
mediated by mAChRs in an attempt to identify novel pathways that differ
among mAChR subtypes. IEGs regulate the expression of a variety of
proteins involved in mitogenesis and neuronal differentiation (20, 21).
Serum response factor (SRF), a key regulator of IEG transcription
acting at serum response elements (SRE) (22), is a ubiquitous
transcription factor that mediates serum- and growth factor-induced
activation of IEGs via mitogen-activated protein kinases Ras and Raf
(23). Another SRF activation pathway involves GTPases of the Rho family
(24), which also affects cytoskeletal dynamics and converges on Ras/Raf
(25). Recent evidence indicates that heterotrimeric G proteins
(G
q/11, G
12, G
13) can
mediate SRF activation through RhoA (7, 9, 26, 27). mAChRs were also
found to activate RhoA via several mechanisms (4, 9).
In this study, lymphocyte Jurkat T cells were transfected with genes
encoding M1, M2, and M3 mAChR to dissect the signaling pathways from
receptor to SRF using a luciferase reporter assay. We show that in this
cell line only M1 mAChR, but not M2 and M3, activates SRF-mediated gene
transcription via a novel Rho pathway involving calmodulin and
calcineurin and the calmodulin-dependent tyrosine kinase
Pyk2. These findings demonstrate significant signaling differences
between the closely related M1 and M3 receptor subtypes and, moreover,
the M2 subtype in a pathway known to affect cytoskeleton dynamics and
cell survival.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Cell Culture and Transfection--
Jurkat leukemic T cells were
maintained in RPMI 1640 medium containing 10% fetal bovine serum, 50 units/ml penicillin, and 50 µg/ml streptomycin in 5% CO2
incubator at 37 °C. Transfections were performed using LipofectAMINE
Plus (Invitrogen) according to manufacturer's instructions. Jurkat T
cells (1 × 107) were co-transfected with 0.5 µg of
SRE.L-luciferase reporter gene plasmid and 2 µg of either empty pSG5
vector or mAChRs cDNA in pSG5 vector. The transfection was stopped
after 4 h by adding medium containing 5% fetal bovine serum.
DNA Constructs--
G
q and G
12
cDNA constructs (in pCDNAI vector) and G
13
constructs (in pCEV29 vector) were kindly provided by Drs. Ethan Burstein and Mark Brann (Acadia Pharmaceuticals, San Diego, CA). Other
human G
protein constructs, G
11, G
14,
G
15, and their QL mutants as well as human RGS2, RGS4,
and RhoA constructs (all in pCDNA3 vector) were from Guthrie
cDNA Resource Center (Guthrie Research Institute, Sayre,
PA). Rat RGS12 cDNA in pCMV5 vector was from Dr. Canhe
Chen (National University of Singapore, Singapore). Rat calcineurin
inhibitor (Cain) (28) COOH-terminal fragment (CainC, Cain2078-2173) in
pRK5 vector was from Dr. Michael Lai (John Hopkins University,
Baltimore, Maryland). SRE.L-luciferase reporter plasmid (29) and
Clostridium botulinum C3 ADP-ribotransferase (C3 toxin) were
provided by Dr. Songzhu An, University of California, San Francisco,
California. Myc-tagged rat Pyk2 cDNA in pcDNA3 vector was
kindly provided by Dr. H. S. Earp (University of North Carolina)
(30). The dominant negative mutants of Pyk2, K457A-Pyk2 and Y402F-Pyk2
(31), were constructed by using the QuikChange XL site-directed
mutagenesis kit (Stratagene, La Holla, CA) and sequenced. Rho binding
domain of mouse rhotekin (amino acids
8 to 89) (32) in pGEX-3X
vector was generously provided by Dr. S. Narumiya (Kyoto University,
Kyoto, Japan).
The genes encoding the human mAChR subtypes (M1, M2, and M3) in pSG5
vector were obtained from a human placental genomic library as
previously described (33, 34). The gene encoding G
i/q chimera (G
iq5) was constructed by exchanging of the COOH
termini between G
i and G
q, which switches
the specificity of G
i-coupled receptor to
G
q (35) (obtained from Dr. Bruce Conklin, University of
California, San Francisco, California).
Reporter Gene Assay--
Eighteen hours after transfection,
cells were replated in 96-well plates and stimulated with or without
the mAChR agonist carbachol at 37 °C for 4 h as indicated.
Cells were then lysed by reporter lysis buffer (Promega, Madison, WI),
and luciferase activities were measured with a luminometer
(EG&G). For inhibitor experiments, cells were preincubated with
inhibitors for 30 min before adding carbachol.
The Dual-Luciferase® reporter assay system (Promega) was used to
normalize the transfection efficiency where indicated. pRL-CMV vector
yielding constitutive expression of Renilla luciferase was
co-transfected with the SRE.L reporter gene vector, and dual luciferase
activities were measured according to the manufacturer's protocol.
Receptor Binding Assay--
Expression of M1, M2, and M3 mAChR
receptors was determined by measuring the binding of
N-[3H]methylscopolamine on the surface of
intact cells as previously described (36). Briefly, transfected cells
were incubated with 1.5-2.0 nM
N-[3H]methylscopolamine in phosphate-buffered
saline at 12 °C for 90 min. Nonspecific binding was determined in
the presence of 10 µM atropine. After labeling, cells
were placed on ice, filtered, and rinsed with ice-cold
phosphate-buffered saline three times (S&S No. 32 glass fiber filter).
The radioactivity on the filters was determined by liquid scintillation counting.
Intracellular Ca2+ Measurement--
Measurement of
free intracellular calcium was determined as described (37). Briefly,
18 h after transfection, cells were washed with Krebs-HEPES buffer
and loaded with 3 µM Oregon Green 488 fluorescent dye at
room temperature for 30 min. After loading, cells were washed 3 times
with Krebs-HEPES buffer containing 0.5% bovine serum albumin, diluted
to ~2 × 106 cells/ml, and distributed evenly
(3 × 105 cells/well) into an opaque white 96-well
plate (Corning Costar, Cambridge, MA). Buffer control (4 samples/data
point) or buffer containing test compounds (4 samples/data point
measured immediately before the 4 control samples) was injected
sequentially into separate wells, and the fluorescence intensity was
monitored at 1-s intervals using an excitation wavelength of 485 nm and
emission of 538 nm.
Pull-down Assay for GTP-Rho--
The pull-down assay for GTP-Rho
was performed as previously reported (38). Bacterially expressed
GST-rhotekin Rho binding domain (GST-RBD)was purified from
isopropyl-1-thio-
-D-galactopyranoside (0.5 mM)-induced BL21 cells previously transformed with mouse rhotekin (amino acids
8 to 89 in pGEX-3x vector) according to the instruction manual provided by the supplier of the pGEX vector (Amersham Biosciences). GST-RBD bound to glutathione-Sepharose 4B beads
was used immediately after preparation. 2 × 107
Jurkat cells were transfected with 4 µg of hM1-pSG5 or hM3-pSG5 plasmids or 2 µg of G
13QL or Pyk2 plasmids. 24 h
after transfection, cells were collected and resuspended in 0.3 ml of
Hanks' solution (0.4 g/liter KCl, 0.06 g/liter
KH2PO4, 8 g/liter NaCl, 0.09 g/liter Na2HPO4·7H2O, 0.35 g/liter
NaHCO3, and 1 g/liter glucose). After incubation at
37 °C for 30 min, cells were treated as indicated and then lysed
with 0.3 ml 2× lysis buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.4, 2%
Nonidet P-40, 1% sodium deoxycholate, 1 M NaCl, 10 mM MgCl2, 2 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl
fluoride, and 20 µg/ml each leupeptin and aprotinin). Cell lysates
were clarified by centrifugation at 13,000 × g at
4 °C for 10 min, and equal amounts of proteins (500 µg) were
incubated with GST-RBD (~30 µg) beads at 4 °C for 90 min. Then
the beads were washed 4 times with washing buffer containing 50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.4, 1% Nonidet P-40, 150 mM
NaCl, 10 mM MgCl2, 10 µg/ml each leupeptin
and aprotinin, and 0.1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride.
Bound Rho protein was detected by Western blotting using a monoclonal
antibody against RhoA (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, California).
Immunoprecipitation and Immunoblotting of Phosphorylated
Pyk2--
107 Jurkat cells were transfected with 2 µg of
hM1-pGS5 or hM3-pSG5 together with 0.5 µg of Pyk2 plasmid. 24 h
after transfection, cells were washed with serum-free medium then
resuspended in 0.3 ml of Hanks' solution and incubated at 37 °C for
30 min. After treatment with different reagents, cells were placed on
ice, and 0.3 ml of 2× lysis buffer was added (50 mM
Tris-HCl, pH 7.4, 150 mM NaCl, 2 mM EDTA, 0.5%
sodium deoxycholate, 2 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, 2 mM NaF, 2% Nonidet P-40, 10 mM
NaVO3, 20 µg/ml each of leupeptin and aprotinin). After
incubation on ice for 10 min, cell lysates were centrifuged at
13,000 × g for 10 min at 4 °C. A suspension of 60 µl of 50% protein G-Sepharose beads was added to the supernatants
(Amersham Biosciences) and incubated at 4 °C for 30 min with
rotation. The beads were centrifuged at 13,000 × g for
2 min. The precleared lysates were incubated with anti-Pyk2 monoclonal
antibody (Upstate Biotechnology, Lake Placid, NY) at 4 °C for
24 h. Then 60 µl of 50% protein G beads was added and incubated
for another 2 h at 4 °C with rotation. The beads were washed 3 times with 1× lysis buffer, and bound proteins were eluted with 30 µl of sample loading buffer. Proteins were resolved by SDS-PAGE and
transferred to polyvinylidene difluoride membranes, and phosphorylated
Pyk2 was detected by anti-phosphotyrosine monoclonal antibody (4G10)
(Upstate, Lake Placid, NY).
Data Analysis--
Statistical analyses were performed using
GraphPad Prism, version 2.0 (GraphPad Software, Inc., San Diego, CA).
 |
RESULTS |
Activation of SRF by mAChR Receptors--
We tested the ability of
transfected M1, M2, and M3 mAChRs to regulate SRF-mediated gene
transcription using a luciferase reporter gene. The reporter construct
used, SRE.L, is a derivative of c-Fos SRE, which is activated by SRF
acting alone and does not require formation of tertiary complex (29).
The plasmids expressing different mAChRs were co-transfected with the
SRE.L-luciferase reporter gene into Jurkat cells. Treatment with the
mAChR agonist carbachol (1 mM) increased SRF activity only
in M1 mAChR-transfected cells (Fig.
1a) even though all three
transfected cell lines expressed comparable levels of receptor on the
surface, measured with the membrane-impermeable tracer
N-[3H]methylscopolamine (300-400 fmol
receptor/mg of protein). SRF activation induced by M1 mAChR was
antagonized by 1 µM atropine (Fig. 1a),
indicating that activation was a mAChR-mediated process.

View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Panel a, SRF-mediated gene
transcription by muscarinic receptor subtypes in Jurkat cells. Jurkat
cells were transfected with 0.5 µg of SRE.L-luciferase reporter
plasmid together with 2 µg of pSG5 vector, cDNA encoding M1, M2,
M3 receptors, or M2 receptor plus G iq5 in pSG5 vector as
indicated. After 18 h, cells were treated with media control, 1 mM carbachol, or 1 mM carbachol plus 1 µM atropine as indicated. Cells were lysed 4 h
later, and luciferase activity was measured. Panel b, effect
of pertussis toxin (PTX). Jurkat cell were co-transfected
with 0.5 µg of SRE.L-luciferase plasmid and 2 µg of M1 receptor
plasmid. After 18 h, cells were pretreated with pertussis toxin
(300 ng, 3 h) before carbachol stimulation as above. Each point is
the mean of triplicate measurements. Error bars represent
S.D. The experiment was replicated once with similar results.
|
|
SRF-mediated gene transcription was activated in M1-transfected cells
within 1 h and reached a maximum after 4 h of carbachol treatment. Thus, 4 h of treatment was used in all follow-up
experiments. SRF was activated in a dose-dependent manner,
with a carbachol EC50 of 10 µM, which is
comparable with the EC50 values obtained for inositol
1,4,5-trisphosphate production and Ca2+ release by M1.
Role of G
q/11-mediated Ca2+ Increase in
SRF Activation by M1 mAChR--
M1 mAChR has been shown to activate
SRF in several cell lines via multiple heterotrimeric G proteins,
including G
q/11 and G
12/13 (4, 39). In
contrast to the results with M1, the closely related
G
q/11-coupled M3 failed to activate SRF upon stimulation
with carbachol in Jurkat T cells. To determine whether M1 and M3 mAChR
couple efficiently to G proteins in Jurkat cells, intracellular
Ca2+ release by carbachol was measured. Both receptors
independently elicited Ca2+ mobilization (Fig.
2, a and b) with
similar intensity and duration, indicating effective coupling to
G
q/11 in this system. To test whether differences in
receptor expression could have contributed to the discrepancy in SRF
activation between M1 and M3 mAChR, experiments were carried out with
different amounts of DNA (ranging from 1 to 10 µg of DNA) used for
transfection. This did not affect SRF activation by M1, whereas M3
mAChR was inactive under all conditions tested (data not shown).

View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
M1, M2, and M3 mAChRs activated calcium
release in Jurkat cells. Jurkat cells were co-transfected with
reporter gene and cDNA encoding M1 (panel a), M3
(panel b), and M2 or M2 plus G iq5
(panel c) as described in Fig. 1. The same pools of cells
used for luciferase assay were also used in Ca2+ assay.
Cells were loaded with 3 µM Oregon Green 488, 100 µM carbachol was injected at time 0, and fluorescence
intensity was monitored by in 1-s intervals. Each point represents the
mean of four measurements. Each condition was replicated at least once,
with similar results.
|
|
To test whether G
i/o proteins are involved in
M1-mediated SRF activation, we treated Jurkat cells with pertussis
toxin to inactivate G
i/o. Shown in Fig. 1b,
pertussis toxin had no significant effect on M1-mediated SRF
activation. The G
i/o-coupled M2 receptor alone also did
not mobilize Ca2+ nor SRF activation in Jurkat T cells
(Fig. 1a and 2c). To further test the involvement
of G
q/11 signaling in SRF activation, a G
i/G
q chimeric construct
(G
iq5) was transfected together with M2 receptor.
Substituting the COOH terminus of G
q with that of G
i, G
iq5 confers
G
q/11-coupling specificity to G
i-coupled receptors (35). After co-transfection of M2 receptor with
G
iq5, carbachol stimulated a robust Ca2+
release in M2 mAChR-expressing cells comparable with M1-transfected cells (Fig. 2c). However, the same pool of cells failed to
stimulate SRF activation (Fig. 1a). This result suggests the
hypothesis that G
q/11 itself is either not required or
insufficient for SRF activation by M1 in Jurkat T cells.
G
iq5 transfection alone had no detectable effect on SRF activation.
The ability of various G
protein subunits to regulate SRF gene
transcription was determined by co-transfecting Jurkat cells with the
reporter gene plasmid and cDNA encoding various G
subunits and
their constitutively active mutants, G
qQ209L,
G
11Q209L, G
12Q231L,
G
13Q226L, G
14Q205L, and
G
15Q212L. To account for differences in expression
efficiency, we normalized the data using a dual luciferase plasmid
strategy (Promega). Our results showed a similar pattern with or
without normalization. Cells overexpressing normal G
subunits
(G
q, G
11, G
12,
G
13, G
14, and G
15) did not
activate SRF nor did co-transfection of these G
subunits enable M3
to activate SRF or enhance M1-mediated SRF activation (data not shown).
This result suggests that the inability of M3 to activate SRF does not
appear to result from a lack of these G
subunits. Of the
constitutively active G
subunit tested, only G
13QL
strongly activated SRF (Fig.
3a), whereas
G
qQL and G
12QL were less effective and in
some experiments did not exceed 10-20% of the level achieved with
G
13QL. Other constructs had no significant effects on
SRF activation (Fig. 3a).

View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Panel a, regulation of SRF-mediated gene
transcription by GTPase-deficient G protein subunits. Jurkat T cells
were co-transfected with 0.5 µg of SRE.L-luciferase reporter plasmid,
0.5 µg of empty vector (Empty Vec), or 0.5 µg plasmid
encoding the activated forms of G protein subunits. 18 h
later, cells were lysed, and luciferase activities were determined.
Panel b, effects of RGS2, RGS4, and RGS12 co-transfection on
M1-mediated SRF activation. Jurkat cells were co-transfected with 0.5 µg of SRE.L-luciferase reporter plasmid, 2 µg of M1 mAChR
expression plasmid, and 0.5 µg of pCDNA3 empty vector or cDNA
encoding RGS2, RGS4, or RGS12 in pCDNA3 vector. 18 h later,
cells were incubated with carbachol for 4 h, and luciferase
activities were determined. Panel c, involvement of RhoA in
M1-mediated SRF activation. Jurkat cells were co-transfected with 0.5 µg of SRE.L-luciferase reporter plasmid, 2 µg of M1 plasmid, and
0.4 µg of C3 toxin-expressing vector (or 0.4 µg empty vector) or 1 µg of T19N-RhoA vector (or 1 µg empty vector). 18 h later,
cells were incubated with carbachol for 4 h, and luciferase
activities were determined. Data are the mean of three measurements,
and error bars represent S.D. values. The experiment was
replicated twice with similar results.
|
|
Regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) are GTPase-activating proteins
capable of attenuating heterotrimeric G protein signaling. RGS2 and
RGS4 proteins function as GTPase-activating proteins for
G
q/11 (40), and RGS4 functions additionally for
G
i/o (41) but not for G
12/13 (4). In
contrast, RGS12 is a selective inhibitor of G
12/13
signaling (4, 40). To test the involvement of G
q/11 and
G
12/13 in M1-mediated SRF activation, we co-transfected cells with cDNAs encoding M1, the reporter gene, and RGS2, RGS4, or
RGS12. Shown in Fig. 3b, RGS2 and RGS4 proteins blocked
M1-mediated SRF activation. This result suggests that
G
q/11 does play a role in M1-mediated SRF activation. In
contrast, RGS12 had little effect on M1-stimulated SRF activation (Fig.
3b). This result is in contrast to a previous report that
RGS12 inhibited M1-mediated SRF activation in NIH 3T3 cells (4), and it
suggests that M1-mediated SRF activation does not depend on
G
12/13 activation in Jurkat cells.
Involvement of Rho in SRF Activation by M1 mAChR--
Small
GTPases such as RhoA and Cdc42 are involved in SRF activation. In the
present study, two different approaches were utilized to test the
involvement RhoA in SRF activation. First, C3 toxin (C. botulinum C3 transferase), which specifically inhibits RhoA by
ADP-ribosylation (42), was expressed along with M1 mAChR. Second, the
dominant negative RhoA construct T19N-RhoA, which acts to block the
upstream activation of endogenous Rho, was used. In this transfection
system, both C3 and dominant negative Rho (Fig. 3c) blocked
SRF activation.
Effects of Different Inhibitors on M1-mediated SRF
Activation--
Multiple signaling proteins can regulate the SRF
pathway. To test the involvement of kinases and phosphatases in SRF
activation, a panel of inhibitors was used in M1-transfected Jurkat
cells. Inhibitors of mitogen-activated protein kinase (PD98059),
protein kinase C (K252a), calmodulin kinase (KN62), and protein kinase A (H89) had no effect on SRF activation by M1 at concentrations selected for activity against the respective target enzymes (Fig. 4a). In contrast, the
calmodulin (CaM) inhibitor W7 and the calcineurin inhibitor cyclosporin
A dose-dependently inhibited SRF-dependent gene
transcription mediated by M1 (Fig. 4, a and b).
Higher concentrations of W7 additionally lowered basal SRF activity,
observed in the absence of carbachol. The calcineurin inhibitor failed
to fully inhibit M1-mediated SRF activation in numerous experiments,
suggesting the presence of a minor, calcineurin-independent pathway.
M1-mediated SRF activation was also inhibited by the intracellular
calcium chelator BAPTA/AM (Fig. 4a), consistent with a
Ca2+-dependent pathway. Moreover, M1-mediated
SRF activation was inhibited by the general tyrosine kinase inhibitor,
genistein, but not by the epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor
AG1478 (Fig. 4a).

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Effects of inhibitors on M1-mediated SRF
activation. Jurkat cells were co-transfected with 2 µg of M1
mAChR plasmid and the SRF reporter gene. Panel a, 18 h
after transfection, cells were pretreated with W7 (20 µM), cyclosporin A (400 nM), BAPTA/AM (50 µM), genistein (50 µM), PD98059 (20 µM), K252a (20 nM), KN62 (10 µM), H89 (10 µM), and AG 1478 (500 nM) for 30 min and then stimulated with control medium or 1 mM carbachol. Luciferase activities were determined after
4 h. Panel b, as in panel a, cells were
pretreated with different concentrations of W7 (0, 5, 10, 20, and 40 µM), ophiobolin A (0, 2.5, 5, 10, and 20 µM), or cyclosporin A (0, 50, 100, 200, and 400 nM) for 30 min before carbachol stimulation. Panel
c, Jurkat cells were co-transfected with 2 µg of M1 mAChR, 0.5 µg of reporter gene, and 0.5 µg of plasmid encoding calcineurin
inhibitor (CainC, Cain2078-2173). 18 h later, cells were
incubated with 1 mM carbachol for 4 h, and luciferase
activities were determined. Experiments were carried out in triplicate
(mean ± S.D.) and repeated three times with similar results.
Representative experiments are shown.
|
|
To further test the involvement of CaM and calcineurin in SRF
activation mediated by M1, we used another potent CaM inhibitor, ophiobolin A, and a plasmid encoding endogenous calcineurin inhibitor (CainC; Cain 2078-2173), which contains a calcineurin binding domain
(28). Shown in Fig. 4, b and c, ophiobolin A and
CainC inhibited carbachol-induced SRF activation in M1-transfected
cells. These results further support the involvement of
Ca2+/CaM/calcineurin in M1-mediated SRF activation.
Effect of Inhibitors on SRF Activation by Constitutively Active
GTPase-deficient G
13QL and
G14V-RhoA--
G
13QL- mediated SRF activation was
also insensitive to inhibitors of mitogen-activated protein kinase,
protein kinase A, protein kinase C, and calmodulin kinases (data not
shown) but was inhibited by the CaM inhibitor W7 and by BAPTA/AM (Fig.
5a). However, in contrast to
carbachol/M1-induced SRF activation, G
13QL-mediated SRF
activation was not inhibited by cyclosporin A and genistein (Fig.
5a). This result suggests the presence of a distinct pathway involving Ca2+/CaM/calcineurin and a tyrosine kinase in
M1-mediated SRF activation, independent of G
13QL. The
inhibition of G
13QL-mediated SRF activation by
dominant-negative RhoA (T19N-RhoA) and C3 toxin (Fig. 5a)
indicates the involvement of RhoA in SRF activation. Similar to
G
13QL-mediated SRF activation, SRF activation mediated
by constitutively active RhoA, G14V-RhoA, was also inhibited by W7 and
BAPTA/AM but not by cyclosporin A and genistein (Fig. 5b).
This result indicates that Ca2+/CaM acts downstream of
RhoA, but it leaves the possibility open that Ca2+/CaM also
acts upstream of RhoA.

View larger version (35K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Panel a, b, and c,
effects of inhibitors on G 13QL-, G14V-RhoA-, and
Pyk2-mediated SRF activation. Jurkat cells were co-transfected with 0.5 µg of SRE.L-luciferase reporter plasmid, 0.5 µg of pCDNA3 empty
vector or constitutively active G 13QL (panel
a), G14V-RhoA (panel b), or Pyk2 (panel c)
with or without 0.4 µg of C3 toxin or 1 µg of T19N-RhoA. 18 h
after transfection, cells were incubated without or with W7 (20 µM), cyclosporin A (400 nM) BAPTA/AM (50 µM), or genistein (50 or 100 µM).
Luciferase activities were determined after 4 h. Experiments were
carried out in triplicate (mean ± S.D.) and repeated three times
with similar results. Panel d, phosphorylation of Pyk2 by M1
stimulation. Jurkat cells were transfected with M1 or M3
mAChR-expressing vector. 24 h after transfection, cells were
stimulated with 1 mM carbachol (Carb.) for 10 min (or pretreated with 50 µM genistein (Gen.)
for 30 min before carbachol stimulation). Phosphorylated Pyk2 was
measured by immunoprecipitation (Pyk2 monoclonal antibody) and
immunoblotting (phosphotyrosine monoclonal antibody 4G10). The band
intensity was determined by Scion Image Program. Data are the mean ± S.D., n = 4. Panel e, effect of Pyk2
dominant-negative mutants on M1-mediated SRF activation. Jurkat cells
were co-transfected with M1 mAChR, SRF reporter gene, and different
concentration of K457A-Pyk2 or Y402F-Pyk2 cDNA plus pcDNA3
vector for a total of 2 µg of cDNA-vector constructs.
Carbachol-stimulated SRF activation was observed 24 h after
transfection as described above. Experiments were carried out in
triplicate (mean ± S.D.) and repeated three times with similar
results.
|
|
We also tested the effects of inhibitors on G
qQL-induced
SRF activation. Similar to G
13QL,
G
qQL-induced SRF activation was inhibited by W7 but not
by cyclosporin A and genistein (data not shown).
Role of Pyk2 in SRF Activation--
Pyk2 is a
Ca2+/CaM- dependent tyrosine kinase that can be
activated by stimulation of several G protein-coupled receptors (43, 44) including M1 mAChR (45). Moreover, Pyk2 is involved in G
13-mediated serum response
element-dependent transcription (9). Because M1-induced SRF
activation is genistein-sensitive (Fig. 4a), indicating the
involvement of a tyrosine kinase, we tested whether Pyk2 is involved in
M1-mediated SRF activation. Shown in Fig. 5d, Pyk2 was
phosphorylated upon M1 but not M3 stimulation, and genistein abolished
both basal and M1-activated phosphorylation of Pyk2. Moreover,
transfection of Pyk2 activated SRF (Fig. 5c). This effect
was inhibited by W7, BAPTA/AM, T19N-RhoA, and C3 toxin, indicating the
involvement of Ca2+/CaM- and RhoA-dependent
pathways. However, Pyk2-mediated SRF activation was not inhibited by
genistein, suggesting that yet another tyrosine kinase sensitive to
genistein could be involved in M1-mediated SRF activation and
specifically in Pyk2 phosphorylation.
To test whether Pyk2 contributes to M1-mediated SRF activation, we used
two distinct Pyk2 dominant-negative mutants, K457A-Pyk2 and Y402F-Pyk2
(31). These constructs inhibited the Pyk2-mediated activation of SRF by
~80% when cotransfected with the Pyk2 wild type (not shown). Shown
in Fig. 5e, both Pyk2 mutants dose dependently inhibited
M1-mediated SRF activation, indicating that this pathway involves Pyk2
phosphorylation and kinase activity in Jurkat cells. The only partial
inhibition seen in these experiments could have resulted from gene
dosage effects or from the presence of alternative parallel pathways.
Sensitivity of M1-mediated SRF activation to CaM/calcineurin inhibitors
suggested the presence of a distinct pathway from that activated by
G
13QL. When M1 mAChR was co-transfected with G
13QL, SRF-mediated luciferase expression was
considerably greater than for either M1 or G
13QL alone
(Fig. 6), suggesting the presence of two
pathways possibly exhibiting synergism. Co-transfection of either Pyk2
or constitutively active RhoA with M1 displayed much less additive
effects (considering the elevated basal levels in the absence of
carbachol) (Fig. 6). This suggests that Pyk2 and RhoA participate in
the same pathway. Co-transfection of G
13QL, constitutive
active RhoA, and Pyk2 did not enable M3 to further activate SRF (Fig.
6).

View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Effects of co-transfection of
G 13QL-, G14V-RhoA-, and Pyk2 on
M1-mediated SRF activation. Jurkat cells were co-transfected with
2 µg of M1 or M3 mAChR-expressing vector, 0.5 µg of empty pcDNA
vector or G 13QL, G14V-RhoA, or Pyk2, and 0.5 µg of
SRE.L reporter gene plasmid. 18 h after transfection, cells were
treated with 1 mM carbachol. Cells were lysed 4 h
later, and luciferase activity was measured. Experiments were carried
out in triplicate (mean ± S.D.) and repeated three times with
similar results.
|
|
We also performed experiments with cotransfection of M1 and
G
12QL. Because the response to G
12QL was
considerably less than that with G
13QL both with and
without M1 stimulation (data not shown), G
12QL was not
considered to play a major role in SRF signaling in Jurkat T cells.
RhoA Activity Assay--
Stimulation of M1 receptors led to a
rapid RhoA activation (Fig.
7a), which was detectable as
early as 1 min. Surprisingly, stimulation of M3 receptors also caused
RhoA activation (Fig. 7a), although M3 stimulation did not
activate SRF. This indicates that RhoA activation alone was
insufficient or that there are critical differences in the time course
of RhoA activation between M1 and M3. M1-mediated RhoA activation was
inhibited by W7, cyclosporin A, BAPTA/AM, dominant-negative RhoA, and
partially by genistein (Fig. 7b). This is
consistent with the pattern seen for M1-mediated SRF activation.
Transfection of G
13QL and Pyk2 also increased RhoA
activity (Fig. 7, c and d). Similar to
G
13QL and Pyk2-mediated SRF activation, RhoA activation
by G
13QL and Pyk2 was also sensitive to W7 and BAPTA/AM
but not to cyclosporin A and genistein. Taken together, these results
indicate that cabarchol/M1 activated SRF through RhoA by a unique
pathway involving CaM, calcineurin, Pyk2, and a genistein-sensitive
tyrosine kinase, which is separate from the RhoA-SRF pathway activated
by G
13QL.

View larger version (42K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
RhoA activity assays. Panel
a, M1 and M3 activated RhoA. Jurkat cells were transfected with 4 µg of M1- or M3-expressing vector. 24 h after transfection,
cells were treated with 1 mM carbachol (Carb.)
where indicated for 10 min before lysis. Cell lysates were incubated
with GST beads or GST-RBD beads, and RBD-bound GTP-RhoA was detected by
immunoblotting. C, control. Panel b,
effects of inhibitors on M1-mediated RhoA activation. Jurkat cells were
transfected with 4 µg of M1 with or without 1 µg of T19N-RhoA
(TN). 24 h after transfection, cell were pretreated
with W7 (20 µM), cyclosporin A (Cys; 400 nM), genistein (Gen; 50 or 100 µM), or BAPTA/AM (50 µM) for 30 min before
carbachol stimulation (10 min). The dominant-negative T19N-RhoA
abolished carbachol activation of RhoA. Panels c and
d, effects of inhibitors on G 13QL and
Pyk2-induced RhoA activation. Jurkat cells were transfected with 2 µg
of empty vector or G 13QL- or Pyk2-expressing vector.
24 h later, cells were treated with W7, cyclosporin A, genistein,
or BAPTA/AM (concentrations are as in panel b) for 30 min
before lysis. GTP-RhoA was detected by immunoblotting as in
panels a and b. Band intensity was determined by
Scion Image program. Experiments were repeated once with similar
results.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
The ability of mAChR to activate SRF-mediated gene transcription
and the involvement of G protein subunits in SRF activation were
investigated in Jurkat T cells. The finding that
G
q-coupled M1 mAChR, but not G
i/o-coupled
M2 mAChR, activated SRF through a RhoA-mediated pathway is consistent
with previous reports (4, 46, 47). In contrast, failure of M3 mAChR to
activate SRF was unexpected because M1 and M3 are thought to have
similar signaling pathways primarily involving G
q/11.
Yet G
q coupling of both M1 and M3 was intact as seen by
a robust calcium response in Jurkat T cells. Moreover, use of the
chimeric G
protein construct G
iq5, which conferred
the ability of the M2 receptor to signal along G
q/11-mediated pathways, restored the Ca2+
response for M2 but not SRF activation. These results suggested that M1
activation of SRF involves a G
q/11-independent pathway or that G
q/11 is insufficient in Jurkat T cells.
Inhibition of M1-SRF signaling by co-transfection of RGS2 and RGS4
(which suppress G
q/11 activity) indicated that
G
q/11 did play a role in M1-SRF activation, but it
appeared to be insufficient per se. Moreover, the
suppression of M1-SRF signaling by the calcium chelator BAPTA suggested
a role for intracellular calcium, which is released by
G
q/11 activation.
The discrepancy between the present results and those of Mao et
al. (4) showing that SRF signaling depends upon G
q
can be accounted for by the differences among cell lines used. Rho pathways involve numerous protein factors, and different cell lines
express different complements of G proteins and other regulatory proteins. Signaling by a single subfamily of G proteins can be regulated distinctly in different cell systems (48-50). Use of the
Jurkat T cell line thus revealed a pathway of SRF activation that
distinguishes the closely related M1 and M3 receptors.
Fromm et al. (46) propose a
G
12/13-dependent pathway in a similar cell
system. Constitutively active G
subunits were used to determine the
involvement of G
subunits in Jurkat cells. Only constitutively
active G
13QL activated SRF strongly, whereas
G
12QL and G
qQL were poorly effective, and
G
14QL and G
15QL were inactive. A
differential role of G
proteins of the G
12/13 family
has been demonstrated in stress fiber and focal adhesion formation
(51). Our results show that G
13QL and M1 receptors
additively or synergistically activated SRF in Jurkat cells, which
suggests that alternative pathways exist in this signaling event (52).
Co-transfection with RGS12 (to suppress G
12/13QL
signaling) failed to affect M1-SRF signaling, supporting the notion
that G
12/13 proteins are not involved.
Protein kinase C and mitogen-activated protein kinase can activate
SRE-mediated transcription through ternary complex factor (TCF)
pathways (53). To delineate alternative signaling pathways leading to
transcriptional activation, we tested the effect of a panel of kinase
and phosphatase inhibitors on M1 mAChR-mediated SRF activation. Protein
kinase C and protein kinase A inhibitors (K252a and H89), the
mitogen-activated protein kinase inhibitor PD98059, and the calmodulin
kinase II/IV inhibitor KN62 failed to block carbachol-M1 induced
activation of SRF. In addition, carbachol did not stimulate
mitogen-activated protein kinase activity measured by an extracellular
signal-regulated kinase reporter gene assay in M1-transfected Jurkat
cells (data not shown).
Although SRF activation was insensitive to the calmodulin kinase
inhibitor KN62, calmodulin inhibitors reduced SRF activation by M1
stimulation. This suggests a role for CaM in mediating SRF activation
by M1 mAChR. We have recently found that activation of M1 causes
significant transfer of CaM from plasma membranes to the cytosol in
M1-transfected HEK293 cells.2
Moreover, CaM directly interacts with the µ opioid receptor at a
sequence motif in the i3 loop (54) and appears to serve as a signaling
factor for opioid receptors (55). Because muscarinic receptors have a
similar sequence motif in their i3 loop, it is possible that CaM
interacts directly with M1, thereby serving as a second messenger
per se. The use of constitutively active RhoA revealed that
CaM is also required for the RhoA-SRF downstream pathway. Thus, CaM
plays a pervasive role in M1-SRF signaling. A role for direct CaM-M1
interactions in these pathways is under investigation.
SRF activation by M1, but not by G
13QL, was also
sensitive to cyclosporin A and CainC, inhibitors of the
calcium/CaM-regulated phosphatase 2B, calcineurin.
Calcineurin-dependent SRF activation had not been reported
previously, whereas reporter gene expression driven by multiple AP-1
sites had been shown to be selectively sensitive to cyclosporin A and
FK506 in Jurkat T cells (56, 57). Whether this new M1-RhoA-SRF pathway
is specific to Jurkat T cells or more broadly distributed remains to be
established. Calcineurin could either interact directly with RhoA or,
more likely, activate any of the numerous RhoA GDP/GTP exchange
factors, inactivate inhibitors of GDP/GTP exchange, or last, inactivate RhoA GTPase activating proteins. Direct assay of RhoA activation by
measuring GTP loading onto RhoA in a pull-down assay revealed that
calcineurin appears to work upstream of RhoA. In agreement, SRF
activation by constitutively active RhoAG14V was insensitive to
cyclosporin, indicating that this calcineurin inhibitor acted only
upstream of RhoA. The parallel G
13QL-RhoA pathway was
also suppressed by a CaM inhibitor but not the calcineurin inhibitor, indicating distinct pathways.
Further separation between SRF activation pathways mediated by M1 and
G
13QL emerged with the use of the tyrosine kinase
inhibitor genistein. Only the M1 pathway to RhoA was sensitive to
genistein, suggesting the involvement of a tyrosine kinase upstream of
RhoA. Stimulation of RhoA and SRF by G
13QL-RhoA was
unaffected by genistein. Because the tyrosine kinase Pyk2 is activated
by GPCRs and requires CaM, we tested its role in M1 and
G
13QL signaling. Transfection of Pyk2 also enhanced SRF
activation in a Ca2+/CaM-dependent fashion, but
this was insensitive to the kinase inhibitor genistein. Yet the Pyk2
dominant-negative mutants K457A-Pyk2 and Y402F-Pyk2 partially inhibited
carbachol-induced SRF activation, suggesting that Pyk2 activation does
contribute to M1-RhoA-SRF signaling. Moreover, carbachol-stimulation of
M1, but not M3, activated Pyk2 phosphorylation, measured with
phosphotyrosine antiserum, which parallels the selective activation of
SRF by M1 but not M3. These results indicate that Pyk2 alone cannot
account for the observed genistein-mediated inhibition of M1-RhoA-SRF signaling but, rather, that another genistein-sensitive kinase is
(additionally) involved. Specifically, Pyk2 phosphorylation by M1
activation was inhibited by genistein, indicating that a Src-like
tyrosine kinase is involved upstream of Pyk2. Recent studies show that
Pyk2 forms physical complexes with Src-like tyrosine kinases (45). It
is possible that Pyk2 activation involves such complex formation,
triggered by M1 activation.
In conclusion, RhoA and SRF activation by M1 involves a unique pathway
requiring calcium, CaM, calcineurin, and the tyrosine kinase Pyk2 (Fig.
8). These studies demonstrate that
multiple independent pathways are involved in the signaling of mAChRs
but more importantly reveal an M1 pathway not shared by other
muscarinic receptors tested, even the very closely related M3 subtype.
The physiological significance of this new CaM-dependent
pathway from M1 to RhoA and SRF activation remains to be established,
particularly in the central nervous system where the M1 subtype is
thought to play a key role in memory functions and the pathophysiology of Alzheimer's disease.

View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
Pathway of M1-mediated SRF activation in
Jurkat cells. According to this model, SRF activation by M1
involves Ca2+/CaM, calcineurin, Pyk2, and a
genistein-sensitive tyrosine kinase.
|
|
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank Drs. Ethan Burstein, Mark Brann,
Canhe Chen, Michael Cai, Marc Symons, H. Shelton Earp, and Shuh
Narumiya for the generous supply of cDNAs. We also thank
Songzhu An for assistance and comments on this manuscript.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This study was supported by National Institutes of Health
Research Grants GM43102 and DA04166.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.
Present address: Exelixis Inc. South San Francisco, CA 94083.
§
These authors contributed equally to this work.
¶
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of
Pharmacology, Director, Program in Pharmacogenomics, College of
Medicine and Public Health, Ohio State University, 5072 Graves Hall,
333 West 10th Ave., Columbus OH 43210-1239. Tel.: 614-292-5593; Fax: 614-292-7232; E-mail: sadee.1@osu.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, August 27, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M202745200
2
D. Wang and W. Sadée, unpublished information.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
GPCR, G
protein-coupled receptor;
SRF, serum response factor;
SRE, serum
response element;
mAChR, muscarinic cholinergic receptor;
CaM, calmodulin;
RGS, regulator of G protein signaling;
Pyk2, Ca2+/CaM-dependent tyrosine kinase;
RBD, Rho
binding domain;
i3 loop, third intracellular loop;
IEG, immediate early
gene;
Cain, calcineurin inhibitor;
C3 toxin, C. botulinum C3
ADP-ribotransferase;
GST, glutathione S-transferase.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Marinissen, M. J.,
Chiariello, M.,
Pallante, M.,
and Gutkind, J. S.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
4289-4301[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 2.
|
DellaRocca, G. J.,
vanBiesen, T.,
Daaka, Y.,
Luttrell, D. K.,
Luttrell, L. M.,
and Lefkowitz, R. J.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
19125-19132[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 3.
|
Post, G. R.,
and Brown, J. H.
(1996)
FASEB J.
10,
741-749[Abstract]
|
| 4.
|
Mao, J. H.,
Yuan, H. D.,
Xie, W.,
Simon, M. I.,
and Wu, D. Q.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
27118-27123[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 5.
|
Murasawa, S.,
Mori, Y.,
Nozawa, Y.,
Gotoh, N.,
Shibuya, M.,
Masaki, H.,
Maruyama, K.,
Tsutsumi, Y.,
Moriguchi, Y.,
Shibazaki, Y.,
Tanaka, Y.,
Iwasaka, T.,
Inada, M.,
and Matsubara, H.
(1998)
Circ. Res.
82,
1338-1348[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 6.
|
Belcheva, M. M.,
Szucs, M.,
Wang, D.,
Sadee, W.,
and Coscia, C. J.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
33847-33853[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 7.
|
Gohla, A.,
Harhammer, R.,
and Schultz, G.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
4653-4659[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 8.
|
Hall, A.
(1998)
Science
280,
2074-2075[Free Full Text]
|
| 9.
|
Shi, C. S.,
Sinnarajah, S.,
Cho, H.,
Kozasa, T.,
and Kehrl, J. H.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
24470-24476[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 10.
|
Larsson, C.,
Gustavsson, L.,
Simonsson, P.,
Bergman, O.,
and Alling, C.
(1994)
Eur. J. Pharmacol. Mol. Pharmacol. Sec.
268,
19-28[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 11.
|
Chou, H.,
Ogawa, N.,
Asanuma, M.,
Hirata, H.,
and Mori, A.
(1992)
J. Neural Transm.
90,
171-181[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 12.
|
Ding, W. Q.,
Larsson, C.,
and Alling, C.
(1998)
J. Neurochem.
70,
1722-1729[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 13.
|
Cohen, R. I.,
MolinaHolgado, E.,
and Almazan, G.
(1996)
Mol. Brain Res.
43,
193-201[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 14.
|
Tsiokas, L.,
and Watson, M.
(1995)
Mol. Pharmacol.
42,
272-282
|
| 15.
|
Guo, F. F.,
Kumahara, E.,
and Saffen, D.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
25568-25581[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 16.
|
Wess, J.
(1996)
Crit. Rev. Neurobiol.
10,
69-99[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 17.
|
Burford, N. T.,
Wang, D.,
and Sadee, W.
(2000)
Biochem. J.
348,
531-537[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 18.
|
Hamilton, S. E.,
and Nathanson, N. M.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
15850-15853[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 19.
|
Fisher, A.,
Brandeis, R.,
Chapman, S.,
Pittel, Z.,
and Michaelson, D. M.
(1998)
J. Neurochem.
70,
1991-1997[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 20.
|
Burstein, E. S.,
Hesterberg, D. J.,
Gutkind, J. S.,
Brann, M. R.,
Currier, E. A.,
and Messier, T. L.
(1998)
Oncogene
17,
1617-1623[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 21.
|
Hill, C. S.,
Marais, R.,
John, S.,
Wynne, J.,
Dalton, S.,
and Treisman, R.
(1993)
Cell
73,
395-406[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 22.
|
Spencer, J. A.,
and Misra, R. P.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
16535-16543[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 23.
|
Treisman, R.
(1994)
Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev.
4,
96-101[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 24.
|
Gineitis, D.,
and Treisman, R.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
24531-24539[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 25.
|
Treisman, R.,
Alberts, A. S.,
and Sahai, E.
(1998)
Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol.
63,
643-651[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 26.
|
Gutkind, J. S.
(1998)
Oncogene
17,
1331-1342[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 27.
|
Yamauchi, J.,
Tsujimoto, G.,
Kaziro, Y.,
and Itoh, H.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
23362-23372[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 28.
|
Lai, M. M.,
Burnett, P. E.,
Wolosker, H.,
Blackshaw, S.,
and Snyder, S. H.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
18325-18331[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 29.
|
Hill, C. S.,
Wynne, J.,
and Treisman, R.
(1994)
EMBO J.
13,
5421-5432[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 30.
|
Yu, H., Li, X.,
Marchetto, G. S., Dy, R.,
Hunter, D.,
Calvo, B.,
Dawson, T. L.,
Wilm, M.,
Anderegg, R. J.,
Graves, L. M.,
and Earp, H. S.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
29993-29998[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 31.
|
Frank, G. D.,
Saito, S.,
Motley, E. D.,
Sasaki, T.,
Ohba, M.,
Kuroki, T.,
Inagami, T.,
and Eguchi, S.
(2002)
Mol. Endocrinol.
16,
367-377[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 32.
|
Reid, T.,
Furayashiki, T.,
Ishizaki, T.,
Watanabe, G.,
Watanabe, N.,
Fujisawa, K.,
Morii, N.,
Madaule, P.,
and Narumiya, S.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
13556-13560[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 33.
|
Maeda, S.,
Lameh, J.,
Mallet, W. G.,
Philip, M.,
Ramachandran, J.,
and Sadee, W.
(1990)
FEBS Lett.
269,
386-388[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 34.
|
Moro, O.,
Lameh, J.,
and Sadee, W.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
6862-6865[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 35.
|
Kostenis, E.,
Zeng, F. Y.,
and Wess, J.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
17886-17892[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 36.
|
Lameh, J.,
Philip, M.,
Sharma, Y. K.,
Moro, O.,
Ramachandran, J.,
and Sadee, W.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
13406-13412[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 37.
|
Lin, K. D.,
Sadee, W.,
and Quillan, J. M.
(1999)
Biotechniques
26,
318-320[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve], 322, 324-326
|
| 38.
|
Kimura, K.,
Tsuji, T.,
Takada, Y.,
Miki, T.,
and Narumiya, S.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
17233-17236[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 39.
|
Gutkind, J. S.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
1839-1842[Free Full Text]
|
| 40.
|
Xu, X.,
Zeng, W. H.,
Popov, S.,
Berman, D. M.,
Davignon, I., Yu, K.,
Yowe, D.,
Offermanns, S.,
Muallem, S.,
and Wilkie, T. M.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
3549-3556[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 41.
|
Huang, C. F.,
Hepler, J. R.,
Gilman, A. G.,
and Mumby, S. M.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
6159-6163[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 42.
|
Quilliam, L. A.,
Lacal, J. C.,
and Bokoch, G. M.
(1989)
FEBS Lett.
247,
221-226[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 43.
|
Dikic, I.,
and Schlessinger, J.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
14301-14308 |