Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M206187200 on September 16, 2002
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 47, 44623-44630, November 22, 2002
Lipopolysaccharide-induced Methylation of HuR, an
mRNA-stabilizing Protein, by CARM1*
Hongwei
Li
,
Sungmin
Park§¶,
Britta
Kilburn
,
Mary
Anne
Jelinek
,
Agnes
Henschen-Edman**,
Dana W.
Aswad**,
Michael
R.
Stallcup
§
, and
Ite A.
Laird-Offringa§¶
§§
From the Departments of
Pathology and
§ Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, ¶ Norris Cancer
Center, University of Southern California, Keck School of Medicine,
Los Angeles, California 90089-9176,
Upstate Biotechnology,
Inc., Lake Placid, New York 12946, and the ** Department of
Molecular Biology and Biochemistry, University of California,
Irvine, California 92697-3900
Received for publication, June 21, 2002, and in revised form, September 11, 2002
 |
ABSTRACT |
The RNA-binding protein HuR stabilizes labile
mRNAs carrying AU-rich instability elements. This mRNA
stabilization can be induced by hypoxia, lipopolysaccharide, and
UV light. The mechanism by which these stimuli activate HuR is unclear
and might be related to post-translational modification of this
protein. Here we show that HuR can be methylated on arginine. However,
HuR is not a substrate for PRMT1, the most prominent
protein-arginine methyltransferase in mammalian cells, which
methylates a number of heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins.
Instead, HuR is specifically methylated by coactivator-associated
arginine methyltransferase 1 (CARM1), a protein-arginine
methyltransferase previously shown to serve as a transcriptional
coactivator. By analyzing methylation of specific HuR
arginine-to-lysine mutants and by sequencing radioactively methylated
HuR peptides, Arg217 was identified as the major HuR
methylation site. Arg217 is located in the hinge region
between the second and third of the three HuR RNA recognition motif
domains. Antibodies against a methylated HuR peptide were used to
demonstrate in vivo methylation of HuR. HuR methylation
increased in cells that overexpressed CARM1. Importantly,
lipopolysaccharide stimulation of macrophages, which leads to
HuR-mediated stabilization of tumor necrosis factor
mRNA in
these cells, caused increased methylation of endogenous HuR. Thus,
CARM1, which plays a role in transcriptional activation through histone
H3 methylation, may also play a role in post-transcriptional gene
regulation by methylating HuR.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Mammalian Hu proteins are a family of highly conserved RNA-binding
proteins with homology to the Drosophila protein ELAV
(embryonic lethal/altered
visual system) (1, 2). The four Hu protein family members
are HuR (also called HuA), HuB (previously called Hel-N1), HuC, and HuD
(3-6). The last three are neuronal proteins, whereas HuR is
ubiquitously expressed (2, 3, 7). Structurally, HuR has two closely
spaced N-terminal RNA recognition motif domains (RRMs),1 followed by a hinge
region of about 50 residues and a C-terminal RRM (3). Immunostaining
shows HuR to be predominantly nuclear; however, the protein has been
shown to shuttle between nucleus and cytoplasm (8-11). HuR can bind to
AU-rich elements (AREs) in the 3'-untranslated region of unstable
mRNAs (3, 12-22). Overexpression of HuR in transiently transfected
mammalian cells stabilizes such short lived ARE-containing mRNAs,
suggesting its involvement in the regulation of mRNA stability (8,
10, 11, 13, 15-18, 20, 23, 24). Stabilization of specific mRNAs by
HuR has been observed in cancer cells (14, 17) and following certain
extracellular stimuli. For example, HuR mediates the stabilization of
p21 mRNA upon exposure of cells to UV light (19), of vascular endothelial growth factor mRNA by hypoxia (15), of nitric-oxide synthase II mRNA upon cytokine stimulation (13), and of tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-
mRNA upon stimulation with
lipopolysaccharide (LPS) (18). At present, it is unclear how such
inducible stabilization of mRNAs by HuR is controlled.
Heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoproteins (hnRNPs) are among the most
commonly methylated proteins in mammalian cells, but other RNA-binding
proteins are also substrates for methylation in vitro and
in vivo (25-35). Protein arginine methyltransferases (PRMTs) transfer the methyl group from S-adenosylmethionine
(AdoMet) to specific arginines in substrate proteins (26, 36). Thus far, cDNA clones encoding six genetically distinct but related mammalian PRMTs have been isolated. PRMT1 is the major arginine methyltransferase in mammals (37) and is essential for early development of mouse embryos (38). Besides methylating hnRNPs, PRMT1
can methylate other nucleic acid-binding proteins, such as
poly(A)-binding protein 2, fibrillarin, nucleolin, and histone H4
in vivo (26-28, 37, 39-41). Coactivator-associated
arginine methyltransferase 1 (CARM1/PRMT4), which was originally
discovered by its interaction with glucocorticoid receptor-interacting
protein 1 in a yeast two-hybrid screen (42), methylates histone H3
(42-44) and p300/CBP (45) in vivo. Specific protein
substrates have also been identified for PRMT3, JBP1 (PRMT5), and
PRMT6, but no substrates have been reported yet for PRMT2 (see Refs. 46
and 47 and references therein). Thus far, arginine methylation of proteins has been implicated in the regulation of gene transcription, signal transduction, and nuclear-cytoplasmic protein transport (36,
47). Recent studies have revealed changes in cellular levels of protein
arginine methylation after a variety of stimuli. For example, the
increased methylation of STAT1 parallels its enhanced transcription
activation function in response to interferon
/
(48).
CARM1-directed arginine methylation of histone H3 in the promoters of
steroid hormone-responsive genes is induced by steroid hormone
treatment of cells (43). CARM1 methylation also appears to inhibit
cAMP-mediated gene expression, preventing the association between
transcription factor CREB and cofactor CBP/p300 by methylation of the
p300 domain required for CREB binding (45). Thus, it appears that, like
phosphorylation and acetylation, methylation may play an important role
in the transduction of extracellular signals to the transcription machinery.
Here, we present evidence that CARM1-directed methylation may also be
involved in gene regulation at the post-transcriptional level. We show
that HuR associates with and is specifically methylated in
vitro by CARM1. Using antibodies that specifically recognize the
methylated form of HuR, we demonstrate that HuR is methylated in
vivo. The level of HuR methylation is altered by overexpression of
CARM1 or by stimulation of macrophages with LPS, which is known to
cause HuR-mediated mRNA stabilization (18). Our data suggest that
methylation by CARM1 plays a role in mRNA stabilization by HuR.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Cell Culture--
COS-7 and RAW 264.7 cells were maintained in
Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium, and Jurkat cells were maintained
in RPMI 1640, each supplemented with 1% penicillin and streptomycin
and 10% fetal bovine serum. LPS (Sigma) was added into the medium at
10 µg/ml for 1 h to stimulate RAW 264.7 cells.
Plasmids, Peptides, and Antibody Production--
Construction of
plasmids pSG5-HA-CARM1 and pGEX-4T1-CARM1 has been previously reported
(42). To construct plasmid pET3d-HuR for the expression of full-length
recombinant human HuR protein, the coding region was amplified from
pGST-HuR (3) by high fidelity PCR using oligonucleotides to engineer an
NcoI-compatible BspHI site at the ATG and an
NotI site immediately following the last codon of the HuR
cDNA. The BspHI-NotI HuR cDNA fragment
was inserted into an NcoI-NotI-digested
derivative of the pET3d vector (Novagen) encoding a C-terminal
hexahistidine and c-myc epitope tag (49), yielding
pET3d-HuR. The HuR hinge region mutants were made by first creating a
BssHII site (GCG/CGC at alanine
204/arginine 205) and an ApaI site (GGG/CCC at
glycine 209/proline 210) with silent mutations, resulting in plasmid
H918. Bold indicates which nucleotide was mutated to generate the
restriction site. The HuR hinge deletion mutant was then made by
digestion of H918 with BssHII and NcoI (at
methionine 223), blunting, and religation, resulting in deletion of
amino acids Arg206-Pro222. The individual
arginine-to-lysine hinge region mutants were made by digestion of H918
at preexisting sites PvuII (at glutamine 198/leucine 199) or
NcoI (at methionine 223) or the engineered BssHII
or ApaI sites (see above), and replacing the intervening sequences with double-stranded oligonucleotides encoding the desired mutation. This approach yielded HuR arginine-to-lysine mutants R205K,
R206K, R217K, and R219K in the pET3d derivative. The eukaryotic HuR
expression plasmids were created from the pET3d constructs by
excising the coding region using an EcoRI site just upstream of the ATG and the NotI site just downstream of the last
codon and inserting this HuR fragment into a modified vector derived from pSG5-HA (42), so that an N-terminal hemagglutinin tag and a
C-terminal hexahistidine tag were fused on either end. The resulting HA-HuR protein carried the following additional amino acids: N-terminal to HuR methionine 1, MGYPYDVPDYAEF; C-terminal to HuR
Lys326, AAAHHHHHH-stop. GST-PRMT1 (41), GST-PRMT3
(50), GST-GAR (41), and GST-hnRNP K (51) expression vectors have been
previously described. GST-PRMT2 was kindly provided by Dr. Steven
Clarke (UCLA). Peptide P1 (HYHSPARRFGGPVHHQAQRFRFSPMGV-NH2)
(AnaSpec Inc.) encoding the HuR hinge domain was generated for in
vitro methylation and radiosequencing analysis. To raise an
antibody that could specifically recognize methylated HuR
(anti-me(R217)HuR antibody), methylated peptide HHQAQ(DMA)FRFSPGC
(where DMA represents asymmetric dimethylarginine) was synthesized and
conjugated to keyhole limpet hemocyanin before injection into
rabbits. Specificity of the antiserum was confirmed by enzyme-linked
immunosorbent assays with the DMA-containing peptide and a
corresponding unmethylated peptide.
Transfection--
Approximately 20 h prior to transfection,
1.0 × 106 COS-7 cells were seeded onto 100-mm dishes.
Cells were transiently transfected with methyltransferase expression
vectors and/or HuR expression vectors by transfection reagent F-2
(Targeting Systems) according to the manufacturer's protocol.
Approximately 48 h after transfection, cell extracts were prepared
by scraping cells into RIPA (50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.0, 150 mM NaCl, 1% (v/v) Nonidet P-40, 0.1% (w/v) SDS, and
protease inhibitor mixture tablets (Roche Molecular Biochemicals)), followed by centrifugation at 12,000 rpm for 30 min.
Immunoprecipitation and Immunoblot--
Cell lysates, prepared
as described above (one 100-mm dish of cells/immunoprecipitation
sample), were cleared with protein A/G beads (Santa Cruz Biotechnology,
Inc.) for 1 h at 4 °C. 2 µg of anti-met(R217)HuR or
anti-mono/dimethyl arginine (Ab412; Abcam Ltd.) were added to the cell
lysates and incubated overnight at 4 °C on a rotator. Protein A/G
beads were added and incubated for another 3 h. Beads were washed
three times with radioimmune precipitation buffer and subjected to
SDS-PAGE. Blots were probed with mouse monoclonal anti-HuR (Santa Cruz
Biotechnology) at 1 µg/20 ml of blocking buffer (5% (w/v) nonfat
milk in TBST: 150 mM NaCl, 10 mM Tris-HCl, pH
8.0, and 0.1% (v/v) Tween 20). Horseradish peroxidase-conjugated
secondary antibodies (Santa Cruz Biotechnology) were used at 1 µg/10
ml of blocking buffer and ECL reagents (Amersham Biosciences) were used
for detection.
In Vitro Protein-Protein Interaction--
GST fusion proteins
were produced in Escherichia coli BL21 as described
previously (52). Hexahistidine fusion proteins were purified with
His-Bind Buffer Kit (Novagen) according to the manufacturer's protocol. Pull-down assays were conducted as described previously (53).
CARM1 protein was translated in vitro in the presence of
[35S]methionine using the TNT-T7-coupled reticulocyte
lysate system (Promega). The binding assay was conducted by incubating
beads containing 2 µg of His-HuR with slow rotation overnight at
4 °C with 10 µl of the translation reaction in a 500-µl total
volume of NETN-0.01% (100 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA,
20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.0, and 0.01% (v/v) Nonidet P-40).
Beads were washed four times with NETN-0.01% and analyzed by SDS-PAGE
and autofluorography.
Methylation Assay--
Methyltransferases were prepared as
recombinant GST fusion proteins and eluted from glutathione-agarose
beads (Sigma) with 20 mM glutathione. 0.5-3 µg of
commercially obtained histone H3 (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) or
recombinant proteins were incubated with 1 µg of methyltransferase in
the presence of 6 µM
S-adenosyl-[methyl-3H]methionine
([3H]AdoMet; 14.7 Ci/mmol; PerkinElmer Life Sciences) in
reaction buffer (20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.0, 200 mM
NaCl, and 0.4 mM EDTA) at 30 °C for 1 h in 35-µl
reactions (42). SDS-loading buffer or radioimmune precipitation buffer
was used to stop the reaction. Labeled proteins were identified by
SDS-PAGE and autofluorography for 12 h. To prepare the in
vitro methylated samples for immunoprecipitation, nonradiolabeled
AdoMet was used instead at 0.1 mM.
Radiosequencing--
Approximately 5 µg (1.6 nmol) of
[3H]methyl-HuR hinge peptide P1 was purified from a
CARM1-catalyzed methylation reaction by reversed phase high performance
liquid chromatography on a 2.1 × 30-mm RP-300 (C8) column
(Brownlee Laboratories). Elution was carried out at 1.0 ml/min using a
linear gradient of 5-40% (v/v) acetonitrile in 0.1% (v/v)
trifluoroacetic acid, and the peptide was detected by monitoring
absorbance at 214 nm. The purified [3H]methyl peptide was
found to contain ~0.07 mol of [3H]methyl/mol of
peptide. Two samples (650 pmol each) of the purified peptide were
sequenced for 22 cycles by automated Edman degradation on a
Hewlett-Packard G1105A sequenator. The first sample was sequenced by
standard procedures to verify the correct amino acid sequence and to
establish the repetitive yield. For the second sample, the
phenylthiohydantoin-derivatized amino acids from each cycle were
collected for measurement of 3H by liquid scintillation counting.
 |
RESULTS |
HuR Is Specifically Methylated by CARM1 in Vitro--
Because it
is unclear how extracellular signals mediate HuR-induced stabilization
of labile ARE-containing mRNAs, we sought to establish whether
post-translational modification of HuR might play a role. No
modifications of HuR (including phosphorylation) have been found as
yet. Because arginine methylation is a common modification of
RNA-binding proteins, we tested whether HuR could be methylated by one
of the PRMTs. Various recombinant PRMTs were incubated with recombinant
hexahistidine-tagged HuR (His-HuR) in the presence of
[3H]AdoMet, and the products were examined by SDS-PAGE
and autofluorography. His-HuR was methylated by CARM1 but not by PRMT1,
PRMT2, or PRMT3 (Fig. 1A,
lanes 4-7). Staining of the gel demonstrated
that His-HuR and PRMT proteins were present in the appropriate
reactions (Fig. 1B, lanes 4-7), and
methylation of known substrates for PRMT1, PRMT3, and CARM1 (hnRNPK,
GAR, and histone H3, respectively) verified the specificity and
activity of these PRMTs (Fig. 1A, lane
1-3). (No known substrate for PRMT2 is currently available
as a control.) Methylation of degradation products of GST-hnRNP K and
His-HuR and an aggregation product of histone H3 was also observed
(Fig. 1A, lanes 1, 2, and
7).

View larger version (45K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Specific methylation of HuR by CARM1 in
vitro. A, in vitro methylation
assay of various protein substrates by GST-PRMTs. 5 µg of GST-hnRNP K
(lane 1), histone H3 (lane
2), GST-GAR (lane 3), and His-HuR
(lanes 4-7) were incubated with 0.5-2 µg of
GST-PRMTs as indicated. Reactions were resolved by SDS-PAGE and
subjected to autofluorography. B, Coomassie staining of a
gel run in parallel containing the identical reaction mix used for
A (except for the absence of AdoMet) to show the presence of
protein substrates (stars) and PRMTs (black
arrows). Methylation of contaminants or dimers in Histone H3
and degradation products of GST-hnRNP K and His-HuR are indicated by
black dots.
|
|
CARM1 and HuR Associate in Vitro--
To further test the
substrate specificity of CARM1 for HuR, we investigated whether CARM1
could bind HuR directly in vitro. Either CARM1 or PRMT1 was
translated in vitro in the presence of
[35S]methionine (Fig. 2,
lane 1) and incubated with protein-free Ni2+ beads, Ni2+ beads to which His-HuR had
been bound, glutathione-agarose beads with bound GST, or
glutathione-agarose beads to which GST-hnRNP K had been bound (Fig. 2,
lanes 2-5). Strong interactions between CARM1
and His-HuR (lane 3) and between PRMT1 and hnRNP
K (lane 5) were observed, whereas no association
between the other combinations was detected. Thus, the substrate
specificity observed in the in vitro methylation assay is
supported by the selective association between the two PRMTs and their
respective substrates.

View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Specific binding of HuR to CARM1. CARM1
(upper panel) and PRMT1 (lower
panel) were translated in vitro in the presence
of [35S]methionine and incubated with Ni2+
beads (lane 2), Ni2+ beads containing
5 µg of His-HuR (lane 3), GST-agarose beads
(lane 4), or agarose beads containing 5 µg of
GST-hnRNP K (lane 5). Bound proteins were
analyzed by SDS-PAGE and autofluorography for 12 h. 10% of
translation products used for binding were loaded on the gel for
comparison (lane 1, input).
|
|
The HuR Hinge Region Harbors the Methylation Site(s)--
Whereas
PRMT1 methylation sites are frequently located in Arg-Gly-Gly (RGG)
repeats (26), neither histone H3, the first identified in
vivo substrate for CARM1 (42), nor HuR contains RGG repeats. Based
upon two CARM1 methylation sites in histone H3, a potential consensus
motif, KAXRK, has been proposed (44). Whereas HuR does not
contain KAXRK sequences, we noted that two arginines in the
hinge region were preceded by alanine at the
2 position
(PARRF and QAQRF) (Fig.
3A). We therefore tested
whether an HuR mutant from which a 16-amino acid tract containing the two possible methylation sites had been deleted (Fig. 3A)
could still be methylated. In contrast to intact HuR, which was
strongly methylated (Fig. 3B, left
panel, lane 1), no in vitro
methylation of this deletion mutant by CARM1 was seen (Fig.
3B, left panel, lane
2), although similar quantities of mutant and wild type HuR proteins were used as substrates (Fig. 3B, right
panel). This result suggests that the hinge region of HuR
contains the methylation site(s) or is important for substrate
recognition by CARM1.

View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Identification of the HuR methylation
site. A, schematic diagram of HuR protein. The sequence
of a portion of the HuR hinge region is shown between the
dashed lines. The arginines in the hinge region
are numbered. Amino acids deleted in the HuR( hinge)
mutant are indicated in boldface type. HuR amino acids
included in the synthetic peptide P1 are marked. B, 2-3
µg of His-HuR (lane 1) or His-HuR( hinge)
(lane 2) were incubated with GST-CARM1 for an
in vitro methylation assay. Samples were analyzed on two
SDS-PAGE gels, one for autofluorography (left) and one for
Coomassie staining (right). C, 2-3 µg of
recombinant HuR point mutant proteins (lanes
1-4) and wild type HuR (lane 5) were
subjected to an in vitro methylation assay with GST-CARM1.
Autofluorography (upper panel) and Coomassie
staining (lower panel) of the HuR proteins are
shown. The positions of the point mutations are indicated in
A.
|
|
To determine which of the four arginines located in hinge region (Fig.
3A) might be methylated, we generated four point mutants in
the context of full-length HuR, each one containing a single arginine-to-lysine substitution. Mutation of arginine 217 to lysine (R217K) completely abolished in vitro methylation of HuR by
CARM1, whereas each of the other three HuR mutants (R205K, R206K, and R219K) was methylated to a level comparable with that of wild type HuR
(Fig. 3C). This suggests an essential role of
Arg217 as the methylation site and/or as a residue that is
important for recognition of HuR by CARM1.
We next synthesized a HuR hinge peptide, P1, containing all four
arginines (Fig. 3A). CARM1 efficiently methylated the P1 peptide in vitro, whereas PRMT1 did not (Fig.
4A). Thus, the determinants that mark HuR as a CARM1 substrate are retained in the 27-amino acid P1
sequence. In order to establish directly the location of the
methylation site(s), a sample of the peptide,
[3H]methyl-labeled by CARM1, was subjected to
radiosequencing by automated Edman degradation. Approximately 25% of
the 3H was recovered in cycles 7-9, whereas the remaining
75% was recovered in cycles 18-22 (Fig. 4B). The first
peak indicates selective methylation of Arg206.
3H recovery in cycles 18-22 includes both
Arg217 and Arg219; however, the drop in
3H content from cycle 19 (Phe218) to cycle 20 (Arg219) was slightly greater than the drop in the
preceding cycle, although the chemical yield of Arg219 was
slightly greater than that of Arg217 as determined in a
parallel sequencing run (data not shown). This indicates that nearly
all of the 3H recovered in cycles 18-22 results from
selective methylation of Arg217 with little or no
contribution by Arg219. When the sequencing results in Fig.
4B are corrected for repetitive yield and lag (Fig.
4C), Arg217 and Arg206 account for
83 and 17% of the [3H]methyl incorporation,
respectively. Thus, Arg217 is the major methylation site in
the HuR hinge peptide when modified by CARM1 in vitro.

View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Mapping of the major HuR methylation site to
Arg217. A, 5 µg of synthetic peptide P1
(Fig. 3A) or recombinant GST-hnRNP K were tested for
in vitro methylation by either GST-CARM1 or GST-PRMT1 and
analyzed by autofluorography (left panel) and
Coomassie staining (right panel). Minor
contaminants in P1 or degradation products of GST-hnRNP K were
methylated as well. B, radiosequencing of in
vitro methylated P1 was carried out as described under
"Experimental Procedures." C, a refinement of data from
B in which corrections were made for the ragged N terminus,
for sequencing lag, and for a measured repetitive yield of 95%.
Numbers above the bars refer to amino
acid residue numbers in HuR.
|
|
HuR Is Methylated by CARM1 in Vivo--
To test whether HuR is
methylated in vivo, we developed antibodies directed against
HuR methylated at Arg217 (anti-me(R217)HuR). We also used
an antibody that generally recognizes proteins containing
mono- or dimethylarginine (anti-M/DMA), which has been used
successfully to demonstrate the in vivo methylation of STAT1
(48) and hepatitis C virus NS3 protein (55). Both antibodies were
characterized for discrimination between HuR methylated in
vitro by CARM1 (using unlabeled AdoMet) and unmethylated HuR (Fig.
5). (The in vitro methylation
was confirmed in a parallel reaction with [3H]AdoMet
(data not shown).) Following immunoprecipitation by anti-me(R217)HuR or
anti-M/DMA antibodies, the precipitated HuR protein was detected by
immunoblot using antiserum raised against unmodified HuR protein. Both
the anti-me(R217)HuR and anti-M/DMA antibodies specifically immunoprecipitated methylated HuR (Fig. 5). Although no HuR was detected in immunoprecipitates obtained with appropriate isotype control antibodies (data not shown), a small amount of HuR was precipitated from the unmethylated reaction with anti-me(R217)HuR antiserum (Fig. 5B, lane 1). This weak
signal might be due to low levels of antibodies directed against parts
of the peptide flanking the methylation site. Nevertheless, both
anti-me(R217)HuR and anti-M/DMA antibodies were highly specific for
methylated versus unmethylated HuR. Neither antibody could
detect the in vitro methylated HuR on immunoblots (data not
shown).

View larger version (65K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Characterization of anti-me(R217)HuR
antiserum. GST-CARM1 and GST-HuR were incubated with either 0.1 mM AdoMet (lane 2) or buffer
(lane 1). A, 5 µg of the proteins
used for immunoprecipitation were analyzed directly by immunoblot with
anti-HuR antibodies. Approximately 100 ng of HuR from each reaction was
subjected to immunoprecipitation with 1 µg of either anti-me(R217)HuR
(B) or anti-M/DMA (C) antibody.
Immunoprecipitates were resolved by SDS-PAGE and probed with anti-HuR
to detect the precipitated HuR.
|
|
In order to determine whether HuR can be methylated by
CARM1 in vivo, we co-transfected COS-7 cells with expression
vectors encoding HA-tagged CARM1 and either HA-HuR (Fig.
6A, lane
2) or HA-HuR(R217K) (lane 4). COS-7
cells transfected with HA-HuR alone (lane 1) or
HA-HuR(R217K) alone (lane 3) were used as
controls. Cell lysates were then subjected to immunoprecipitation with
either anti-M/DMA antibody or anti-me(R217)HuR antibody, and
immunoprecipitated HA-HuR was detected by immunoblotting using an
anti-HA antibody. Whereas the expression level of HA-HuR was similar in
all four samples (Fig. 6A), expression of HA-CARM1
substantially increased the amount of HA-HuR immunoprecipitated by both
methyl-directed antibodies (Fig. 6, B and C,
compare lanes 1 and 2) but had no effect on the amount of HA-HuR(R217K) immunoprecipitated (compare lanes 3 and 4). These results
demonstrate that HuR can be methylated in vivo by CARM1
and support the notion that Arg217 is the major
methylation site in vivo as well as in
vitro.

View larger version (47K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Detection of HuR methylation in
vivo. COS-7 cells were transiently transfected with 5 µg each of expression vectors for HA-HuR, HA-HuR(R217K), and HA-CARM1
in the combinations indicated, and cell extracts were prepared.
A, 5% of each cell extract was loaded for comparison. The
extracts were subjected to immunoprecipitations with either
anti-me(R217)HuR antibody (B) or anti-M/DMA (C).
All three blots were probed with anti-HA.
|
|
HuR Methylation Is Enhanced in RAW 264.7 Cells Treated with
LPS--
Having demonstrated that HuR methylation occurs in
vivo, we next asked whether this post-translational modification
could play any role in the regulation of gene expression by HuR. HuR can bind to AREs present in a large variety of mRNAs, including those encoding mediators of inflammation (13, 17, 18, 23). This binding
of HuR has been linked to stabilization of mRNAs encoding
interleukin-3, nitric-oxide synthase II, and TNF-
, which are induced
by ionophores, 12-O-tetradecanoylphorbol 13-acetate, cytokines, or LPS, depending on the cell type (13, 17, 18, 23).
Recently, interferon (IFN) signaling, another component of the
inflammatory response, was shown to be mediated at least in part
through increased methylation of STAT1, an IFN-activated transcription
factor (48). A role for arginine methylation in IFN signaling was
supported by the observation that the IFN-
receptor interacts with
PRMT1 and that antisense PRMT1 oligonucleotides mitigated the IFN
response (56). Whereas CARM1 appears to play a role in steroid hormone
and cAMP-mediated signaling, there has as yet been no evidence for its
involvement in the inflammatory response. However, its ability to
methylate HuR, combined with the observed role of HuR in the mRNA
stabilization following inflammatory stimuli in a variety of cells,
suggested that CARM1 methylation might play a role in the inflammatory
response as well. We therefore tested whether the in vivo
methylation status of HuR might change in LPS-stimulated RAW 264.7 cells (a murine macrophage-like cell line). RAW 264.7 cells respond to
LPS by strongly inducing TNF-
expression, mediated in part through
TNF-
mRNA stabilization by HuR binding (18).
We first determined by immunoblot that RAW 264.7 cells contain CARM1
protein (data not shown). Then cell lysates from either untreated or
LPS-treated RAW 264.7 cells were analyzed by immunoprecipitation with
anti-me(R217)HuR antibody (Fig.
7A) followed by immunoblotting with anti-HuR. The total level of HuR protein in the cells was not
increased by LPS treatment (Fig. 7A, input samples). Whereas HuR was barely detectable when lysates from unstimulated RAW 264.7 cells were used for immunoprecipitation, a strong HuR band became visible upon LPS stimulation (Fig. 7A, lanes
3-5). These observations suggest that methylation of HuR
occurs in response to LPS stimulation. A similar observation was made
when Jurkat cells, a human T cell leukemia cell line that responds to a
wide variety of agents, including LPS (57), was examined for induction
of HuR methylation (Fig. 7B). Since the anti-me(R217)HuR
antibodies specifically recognize methylated HuR and CARM1 is the only
one of the four PRMTs tested that can utilize HuR as a substrate, our
results strongly suggest that CARM1 methylates HuR in response to LPS and indicate that CARM1 might play a role in LPS-mediated mRNA stabilization.

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
Regulation of HuR methylation in
vivo by LPS. A, RAW 264.7 cells received no
LPS (lanes 1 and 4) or were treated
with LPS at 10 µg/ml in cell culture medium for 1 h
(lanes 2, 3, and 5). Cell
extracts were incubated overnight at 4 °C with 1 µg of either
normal mouse IgG or anti-me(R217)HuR antibodies as indicated, resolved
by SDS-PAGE, and probed with anti-HuR. 5% of each cell extract used
for immunoprecipitation was loaded for comparison (input
lanes; a shorter exposure confirms that signal in both input
lanes is very similar). B, Jurkat cells were untreated or
treated with LPS at 10 µg/ml in cell culture medium for 1 h.
Cell extracts were incubated overnight at 4 °C with 1 µg of
anti-me(R217)HuR antibodies, resolved by SDS-PAGE, and probed with
anti-HuR. 5% of each cell extract used for immunoprecipitation was
loaded for comparison (input lanes).
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
We have identified a new target for arginine methylation by CARM1:
the RNA-binding protein HuR. HuR is methylated by CARM1 in
vitro but not by PRMT1, -2, or -3 (Fig. 1). Analysis of
arginine-to-lysine mutants of HuR indicated that Arg217 is
the major methylation target site (Fig. 3). Radiosequencing of a HuR
hinge peptide methylated in vitro supported this conclusion but also identified Arg206 as a possible minor methylation
site (Fig. 4). However, since Arg206 was not methylated in
full-length HuR carrying the R217K mutation (Fig. 3), methylation at
Arg206 is either dependent on the presence of
Arg217 (in the methylated or unmethylated form) or does not
happen in the context of the full-length protein, perhaps because it is not accessible. Major and minor methylation sites have been observed in
other CARM1 substrates (44, 45, 58), but their significance is
presently unclear.
Whereas PRMT1 methylates many RNA-binding proteins at arginine residues
in so-called RGG repeats (26, 47), the sequence specificity of CARM1 is
not clear at present. However, a sequence or structural context that
affects specificity must exist, because Arg205 and
Arg219 in the same peptide are not methylated (Fig. 4), and
CARM1 methylated only a few proteins in a large membrane-bound array of
polypeptides (58). Recently, CBP/p300 and poly(A)-binding protein 1 (PABP1) were also identified as CARM1 substrates (45, 58). Comparison of all known major CARM1 target sites with those of HuR does not yield
any obvious consensus, apart from the alanine at position
2, which is
present in four of six previously identified major CARM1 methylation
sites (Table I) and the fact that two
major methylation sites are found in each protein, separated by 23 amino acids or fewer.
Since antibodies against a HuR peptide methylated at Arg217
(Fig. 5) immunoprecipitated increased amounts of HuR, but not
HuR(R217K) from COS-7 cells overexpressing CARM1 (Fig. 6), we conclude
that Arg217 is the major CARM1 methylation site in HuR,
both in vitro and in vivo. To determine whether
HuR methylation levels might be modulated in response to certain
signals, we studied HuR methylation in RAW 264.7 cells stimulated with
LPS. HuR has been shown to mediate stabilization of TNF-
mRNA in
macrophages following LPS stimulation. The mechanism by which this
occurs appears to be competition of HuR with the destabilizing protein
tristetraproline for binding to the TNF-
mRNA ARE (18, 23, 59).
Using our anti-methyl-HuR antibody, we showed that HuR methylation was
increased in RAW 264.7 cells following LPS treatment (Fig. 7). This
observation suggests that methylation by CARM1 might play a role in
post-transcriptional gene regulation following inflammatory stimuli.
What could the effect of HuR methylation be, and how could this lead to
mRNA stabilization? Immunostaining experiments had previously
suggested that HuR was mainly nuclear, but heterokaryon analyses and
cell fractionation experiments have demonstrated that the protein
shuttles between the nucleus and cytoplasm (8-11). Only cytoplasmic
HuR would be able to stabilize mRNA. Thus, one possible function of
HuR methylation might be to raise its cytoplasmic concentration by
increasing HuR export from the nucleus. Changes in intracellular
localization caused by methylation have been observed for hnRNP A2 in
mammalian cells and the yeast protein Np13p, which are substrates of
mammalian PRMT1 and its yeast homologue RMT1, respectively.
Intriguingly, methylation can have opposite effects on the
intracellular location of these proteins, promoting a nuclear
localization for hnRNPA2 (60) but stimulating a cytoplasmic location
for Np13p (61). Methylation does not affect the charge of arginine
residues but could cause steric changes and prevent hydrogen bond
formation. Thus, it is assumed that changes in intracellular location
caused by methylation result from altered protein/protein interactions.
Shuttling of HuR is mediated by sequences in the hinge region between
RRMs 2 and 3 (amino acids 205-237 (Fig. 3), referred to as the
HuR nucleocytoplasmic shuttling
sequence, or HNS (8)). Interestingly, Arg206 and
Arg217 are located within the HNS. Shuttling of HuR is
thought to be influenced by proteins that interact with the HNS (such
as pp32 and APRIL), thereby linking HuR to one or more nuclear export pathways (16, 62, 63). Methylation of the hinge domain could modify the
interaction between HuR and the export machinery. In this respect, it
is of great interest that the HuR export pathway appears to change
following exposure of cells to stress, which increases export of HuR by
the CRM1 pathway (62-64). The molecular mechanism for this switch has
not yet been identified and may be related to methylation.
Whereas it is attractive to propose that methylation might increase
nuclear export, an increase in cytoplasmic RNA-bound HuR could also be
explained by alternative mechanisms. For example, methylation could
prevent reimport of cytoplasmic HuR into the nucleus, lead to
stabilization of cytoplasmic HuR protein, or alter HuR RNA-binding
properties to favor binding to AU-rich sequences, thereby indirectly
contributing to cytoplasmic accumulation of HuR. Whether methylation
and shuttling are directly linked may be difficult to determine;
distinguishing methylation effects from shuttling effects will be
challenging, because the Arg217 methylation site is located
in the shuttling sequence.
Whether methylation of proteins can affect their nucleic acid-binding
properties remains unclear. Methylation of hnRNP A1 appears to have a
moderate effect on its ability to bind to homopolymers (65). The RGG
domains methylated in many RNA-binding proteins can participate in RNA
binding, and their methylation may therefore influence the RNA/protein
interaction (66). In the case of HuR, Arg217 lies outside
the three RNA-binding domains, and a prominent role for the hinge
region in RNA binding seems unlikely. Nevertheless, methylation could
indirectly influence RNA binding, by affecting the interaction with
hinge-binding proteins, which could in turn modulate RNA binding,
perhaps by controlling the access of RRM2 and/or RRM3 to RNA (67).
One of the most intriguing questions that remains unanswered is whether
methylation is dynamic. To date, no demethylase has been
identified, and if such an enzyme does not exist, a signal achieved
through increased methylation must be silenced by protein degradation
or sequestration of the methylated protein. It has also been suggested
that methylation could be an incremental signal, accumulating slowly on
proteins that carry multiple methylation sites (36). This is not likely
to be the case for HuR, since the response to LPS is rapid (within
1 h) and there appears to be only one or two methylation sites.
In conclusion, CARM1, which was previously identified as a
transcriptional coactivator for nuclear receptors (42, 43), now appears
to extend its role into the post-transcriptional domain of gene
regulation. The potential for CARM1 involvement in post-transcriptional regulation of genes in response to a variety of stimuli is
considerable, since one of its targets (HuR) not only mediates the
stabilization of TNF-
mRNA upon stimulation with LPS (18) but
also the stabilization of p21 mRNA upon exposure of cells to UV
light (19), of vascular endothelial growth factor mRNA by hypoxia
(15), and of nitric-oxide synthase II mRNA upon cytokine
stimulation (13). How broad the regulatory network modulated by CARM1
might be will depend on how many target proteins it methylates in
vivo. Thus far, CARM1 appears to have markedly fewer substrates
than PRMT1 (36, 47, 58), but its recently demonstrated ability to
methylate poly(A)-binding protein 1 (58) further supports its potential
role in post-transcriptional gene regulation. Our results suggest that
methylation by CARM1 might create a link between transcriptional and
post-transcriptional events, affecting RNA synthesis as well as RNA
transport and/or stability, and that methylation of the shuttling
RNA-binding protein HuR may be one way in which nuclear and cytoplasmic
regulation is coupled.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank Dr. Michael M. Lai (University of
Southern California) for kindly providing the pGEX4T1-hnRNP K plasmids
and Dr. Henry Furneaux (Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New
York) for the GST-HuR plasmid. We thank Dr. Harvey R. Herschman (UCLA) for kindly providing the pGEX4T1-PRMT1, pGEX4T1-PRMT2, pGEX4T1-PRMT3, and pGEX4T1-GAR plasmids. We also thank Daniel Gerke for
technical assistance and members of the Laird-Offringa laboratory for
critical comments on the manuscript.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by United States Public Health
Service Grants DK55274 (to M. R. S.) and NS17269 (to D. W. A.) from the National Institutes of Health and by American Cancer Society Institutional Research Grant IRG-21-37, a grant from the American Lung
Association, and National Institutes of Health Grant R29CA78407 (to
I. A. L-O.).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.

These authors contributed equally to this work.
§§
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Norris Cancer Center,
University of Southern California, Keck School of Medicine, Los
Angeles, CA 90089-9176. Tel.: 323-865-0655; Fax: 323-865-0158; E-mail: ilaird@usc.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, September 16, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M206187200
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
RRM, RNA recognition
motif;
AdoMet, S-adenosylmethionine;
ARE, AU-rich element;
CARM1, coactivator-associated arginine methyltransferase;
CREB, cAMP-response element-binding protein;
CBP, CREB-binding protein;
DMA, asymmetric dimethylarginine;
GAR, glycine-arginine rich peptide;
GST, glutathione S-transferase;
HA, hemagglutinin;
hnRNPs, heterogeneous nuclear ribonucleoprotein particles;
HNS, HuR
nucleocytoplasmic shuttling sequence;
IFN, interferon;
LPS, lipopolysaccharide;
PRMT, protein-arginine methyltransferase;
TNF, tumor necrosis factor.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Antic, D.,
and Keene, J. D.
(1997)
Am. J. Hum. Genet.
61,
273-278[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 2.
|
Keene, J. D.
(1999)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
96,
5-7[Free Full Text]
|
| 3.
|
Ma, W. J.,
Cheng, S.,
Campbell, C.,
Wright, A.,
and Furneaux, H.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
8144-8151[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 4.
|
Levine, T. D.,
Gao, F.,
King, P. H.,
Andrews, L. G.,
and Keene, J. D.
(1993)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
13,
3494-3504[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 5.
|
Liu, J.,
Dalmau, J.,
Szabo, A.,
Rosenfeld, M.,
Huber, J.,
and Furneaux, H.
(1995)
Neurology
45,
544-550[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 6.
|
Szabo, A.,
Dalmau, J.,
Manley, G.,
Rosenfeld, M.,
Wong, E.,
Henson, J.,
Posner, J. B.,
and Furneaux, H. M.
(1991)
Cell
67,
325-333[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 7.
|
Okano, H. J.,
and Darnell, R. B.
(1997)
J. Neurosci.
17,
3024-3037[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 8.
|
Fan, X. C.,
and Steitz, J. A.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
15293-15298[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 9.
|
Atasoy, U.,
Watson, J.,
Patel, D.,
and Keene, J. D.
(1998)
J. Cell Sci.
111,
3145-3156[Abstract]
|
| 10.
|
Fan, X. C.,
and Steitz, J. A.
(1998)
EMBO J.
17,
3448-3460[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 11.
|
Peng, S. S.,
Chen, C. Y., Xu, N.,
and Shyu, A. B.
(1998)
EMBO J.
17,
3461-3470[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 12.
|
Di Marco, S.,
Hel, Z.,
Lachance, C.,
Furneaux, H.,
and Radzioch, D.
(2001)
Nucleic Acids Res.
29,
863-871[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 13.
|
Rodriguez-Pascual, F.,
Hausding, M.,
Ihrig-Biedert, I.,
Furneaux, H.,
Levy, A. P.,
Forstermann, U.,
and Kleinert, H.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
26040-26049[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 14.
|
Nabors, L. B.,
Gillespie, G. Y.,
Harkins, L.,
and King, P. H.
(2001)
Cancer Res.
61,
2154-2161[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 15.
|
Levy, N. S.,
Chung, S.,
Furneaux, H.,
and Levy, A. P.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
6417-6423[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 16.
|
Brennan, C. M.,
and Steitz, J. A.
(2001)
Cell Mol. Life Sci.
58,
266-277[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 17.
|
Dixon, D. A.,
Tolley, N. D.,
King, P. H.,
Nabors, L. B.,
McIntyre, T. M.,
Zimmerman, G. A.,
and Prescott, S. M.
(2001)
J. Clin. Invest.
108,
1657-1665[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 18.
|
Dean, J. L.,
Wait, R.,
Mahtani, K. R.,
Sully, G.,
Clark, A. R.,
and Saklatvala, J.
(2001)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
21,
721-730[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 19.
|
Wang, W.,
Furneaux, H.,
Cheng, H.,
Caldwell, M. C.,
Hutter, D.,
Liu, Y.,
Holbrook, N.,
and Gorospe, M.
(2000)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
20,
760-769[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 20.
|
Wang, W.,
Caldwell, M. C.,
Lin, S.,
Furneaux, H.,
and Gorospe, M.
(2000)
EMBO J.
19,
2340-2350[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 21.
|
Maurer, F.,
Tierney, M.,
and Medcalf, R. L.
(1999)
Nucleic Acids Res.
27,
1664-1673[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 22.
|
Raghavan, A.,
Robison, R. L.,
McNabb, J.,
Miller, C. R.,
Williams, D. A.,
and Bohjanen, P. R.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
47958-47965[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 23.
|
Ming, X. F.,
Stoecklin, G., Lu, M.,
Looser, R.,
and Moroni, C.
(2001)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
21,
5778-5789[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 24.
|
Ford, L. P.,
Watson, J.,
Keene, J. D.,
and Wilusz, J.
(1999)
Genes Dev.
13,
188-201[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 25.
|
Liu, Q.,
and Dreyfuss, G.
(1995)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15,
2800-2808[Abstract]
|
| 26.
|
Gary, J. D.,
and Clarke, S.
(1998)
Prog. Nucleic Acids Res. Mol. Biol.
61,
65-131[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 27.
|
Smith, J. J.,
Rucknagel, K. P.,
Schierhorn, A.,
Tang, J.,
Nemeth, A.,
Linder, M.,
Herschman, H. R.,
and Wahle, E.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
13229-13234[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 28.
|
Najbauer, J.,
Johnson, B. A.,
Young, A. L.,
and Aswad, D. W.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
10501-10509[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 29.
|
Valentini, S. R.,
Weiss, V. H.,
and Silver, P. A.
(1999)
RNA
5,
272-280[Abstract]
|
| 30.
|
Mears, W. E.,
and Rice, S. A.
(1996)
J. Virol.
70,
7445-7453[Abstract]
|
| 31.
|
Siebel, C. W.,
and Guthrie, C.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
13641-13646[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 32.
|
Kim, S.,
Merrill, B. M.,
Rajpurohit, R.,
Kumar, A.,
Stone, K. L.,
Papov, V. V.,
Schneiders, J. M.,
Szer, W.,
Wilson, S. H.,
Paik, W. K.,
and Williams, K. R.
(1997)
Biochemistry
36,
5185-5192[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 33.
|
Friesen, W. J.,
Massenet, S.,
Paushkin, S.,
Wyce, A.,
and Dreyfuss, G.
(2001)
Mol. Cell
7,
1111-1117[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 34.
|
Friesen, W. J.,
Paushkin, S.,
Wyce, A.,
Massenet, S.,
Pesiridis, G. S.,
Van Duyne, G.,
Rappsilber, J.,
Mann, M.,
and Dreyfuss, G.
(2001)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
21,
8289-8300[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 35.
|
Brahms, H.,
Meheus, L.,
de, B., V,
Fischer, U.,
and Luhrmann, R.
(2001)
RNA
7,
1531-1542[Abstract]
|
| 36.
|
McBride, A. E.,
and Silver, P. A.
(2001)
Cell
106,
5-8[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 37.
|
Tang, J.,
Frankel, A.,
Cook, R. J.,
Kim, S.,
Paik, W. K.,
Williams, K. R.,
Clarke, S.,
and Herschman, H. R.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
7723-7730[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 38.
|
Pawlak, M. R.,
Scherer, C. A.,
Chen, J.,
Roshon, M. J.,
and Ruley, H. E.
(2000)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
20,
4859-4869[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 39.
|
Wang, H.,
Huang, Z. Q.,
Xia, L.,
Feng, Q.,
Erdjument-Bromage, H.,
Strahl, B. D.,
Briggs, S. D.,
Allis, C. D.,
Wong, J.,
Tempst, P.,
and Zhang, Y.
(2001)
Science
293,
853-857[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 40.
|
Strahl, B. D.,
Briggs, S. D.,
Brame, C. J.,
Caldwell, J. A.,
Koh, S. S., Ma, H.,
Cook, R. G.,
Shabanowitz, J.,
Hunt, D. F.,
Stallcup, M. R.,
and Allis, C. D.
(2001)
Curr. Biol.
11,
996-1000[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 41.
|
Lin, W. J.,
Gary, J. D.,
Yang, M. C.,
Clarke, S.,
and Herschman, H. R.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
15034-15044[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 42.
|
Chen, D., Ma, H.,
Hong, H.,
Koh, S. S.,
Huang, S. M.,
Schurter, B. T.,
Aswad, D. W.,
and Stallcup, M. R.
(1999)
Science
284,
2174-2177[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 43.
|
Ma, H.,
Baumann, C. T., Li, H.,
Strahl, B. D.,
Rice, R.,
Jelinek, M. A.,
Aswad, D. W.,
Allis, C. D.,
Hager, G. L.,
and Stallcup, M. R.
(2001)
Curr. Biol.
11,
1981-1985[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 44.
|
Schurter, B. T.,
Koh, S. S.,
Chen, D.,
Bunick, G. J.,
Harp, J. M.,
Hanson, B. L.,
Henschen-Edman, A.,
Mackay, D. R.,
Stallcup, M. R.,
and Aswad, D. W.
(2001)
Biochemistry
40,
5747-5756[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 45.
|
Xu, W.,
Chen, H., Du, K.,
Asahara, H.,
Tini, M.,
Emerson, B. M.,
Montminy, M.,
and Evans, R. M.
(2001)
Science
294,
2507-2511[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 46.
|
Frankel, A.,
Yadav, N.,
Lee, J.,
Branscombe, T. L.,
Clarke, S.,
and Bedford, M. T.
(2002)
J. Biol. Chem.
277,
3537-3543[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 47.
|
Stallcup, M. R.
(2001)
Oncogene
20,
3014-3020[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 48.
|
Mowen, K. A.,
Tang, J.,
Zhu, W.,
Schurter, B. T.,
Shuai, K.,
Herschman, H. R.,
and David, M.
(2001)
Cell
104,
731-741[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 49.
|
Laird-Offringa, I. A.,
and Belasco, J. G.
(1995)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
92,
11859-11863[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 50.
|
Tang, J.,
Gary, J. D.,
Clarke, S.,
and Herschman, H. R.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
16935-16945[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 51.
|
Lau, J. S.,
Baumeister, P.,
Kim, E.,
Roy, B.,
Hsieh, T. Y.,
Lai, M.,
and Lee, A. S.
(2000)
J. Cell. Biochem.
79,
395-406[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 52.
|
Hong, H.,
Kohli, K.,
Trivedi, A.,
Johnson, D. L.,
and Stallcup, M. R.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
4948-4952[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 53.
|
Ma, H.,
Hong, H.,
Huang, S. M.,
Irvine, R. A.,
Webb, P.,
Kushner, P. J.,
Coetzee, G. A.,
and Stallcup, M. R.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19,
6164-6173[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 54.
|
Myer, V. E.,
Fan, X. C.,
and Steitz, J. A.
(1997)
EMBO J.
16,
2130-2139[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 55.
|
Rho, J.,
Choi, S.,
Seong, Y. R.,
Choi, J.,
and Im, D. S.
(2001)
J. Virol.
75,
8031-8044[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 56.
|
Abramovich, C.,
Yakobson, B.,
Chebath, J.,
and Revel, M.
(1997)
EMBO J.
16,
260-266[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 57.
|
Manna, S. K.,
Mukhopadhyay, A.,
and Aggarwal, B. B.
(2000)
J. Immunol.
165,
4927-4934[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 58.
|
Lee, J.,
and Bedford, M. T.
(2002)
EMBO Rep.
3,
268-273[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 59.
|
Carballo, E.,
Lai, W. S.,
and Blackshear, P. J.
(1998)
Science
281,
1001-1005[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 60.
|
Nichols, R. C.,
Wang, X. W.,
Tang, J.,
Hamilton, B. J.,
High, F. A.,
Herschman, H. R.,
and Rigby, W. F.
(2000)
Exp. Cell Res.
256,
522-532[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 61.
|
Shen, E. C.,
Henry, M. F.,
Weiss, V. H.,
Valentini, S. R.,
Silver, P. A.,
and Lee, M. S.
(1998)
Genes Dev.
12,
679-691[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 62.
|
Gallouzi, I. E.,
Brennan, C. M.,
and Steitz, J. A.
(2001)
RNA
7,
1348-1361[Abstract]
|
| 63.
|
Gallouzi, I. E.,
and Steitz, J. A.
(2001)
Science
294,
1895-1901[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 64.
|
Moore, M. J.,
and Rosbash, M.
(2001)
Science
294,
1841-1842[Free Full Text]
|
| 65.
|
Rajpurohit, R.,
Paik, W. K.,
and Kim, S.
(1994)
Biochem. J.
304,
903-909[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 66.
|
Burd, C. G.,
and Dreyfuss, G.
(1994)
EMBO J.
13,
1197-1204[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 67.
|
Park, S.,
Myszka, D. G., Yu, M.,
Littler, S. J.,
and Laird-Offringa, I. A.
(2000)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
20,
4765-4772[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
Copyright © 2002 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles: