Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M207873200 on September 24, 2002
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 49, 47834-47843, December 6, 2002
Lipopolysaccharide Rapidly Traffics to and
from the Golgi Apparatus with the Toll-like Receptor
4-MD-2-CD14 Complex in a Process That Is Distinct from the
Initiation of Signal Transduction*,
Eicke
Latz
§,
Alberto
Visintin
,
Egil
Lien
,
Kate A.
Fitzgerald
,
Brian G.
Monks
,
Evelyn A.
Kurt-Jones
,
Douglas
T.
Golenbock
¶, and
Terje
Espevik¶
**
From the
University of Massachusetts Medical School,
Division of Infectious Diseases, Worcester, Massachusetts 01605 and the
Norwegian University of Science and Technology,
Trondheim N-7489, Norway
Received for publication, August 2, 2002
 |
ABSTRACT |
Mammalian responses to LPS require the expression
of Toll-like receptor 4 (TLR4), CD14, and MD-2. We expressed
fluorescent TLR4 in cell lines and found that TLR4 densely localized to
the surface and the Golgi. Similar distributions were observed in human
monocytes. Confocal imaging revealed rapid recycling of TLR4-CD14-MD-2
complexes between the Golgi and the plasma membrane. Fluorescent LPS
followed these trafficking pathways in CD14-positive cells. The
TLR4- adapter protein, MyD88, translocated to the cell surface upon
LPS exposure, and cross-linking of surface TLR4 with antibody induced
signaling. Golgi-associated TLR4 expression was disrupted by brefeldin
A, yet LPS signaling was preserved. We conclude that LPS signaling may
be initiated by surface aggregation of TLR4 and is not dependent upon
LPS trafficking to the Golgi.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The first line defense of multicellular organisms against
bacterial pathogens relies upon germ line-encoded receptors that recognize a variety of conserved molecular structures on microorganisms (1-3). One family of such pattern recognition receptors is the type I
transmembrane signaling receptors known as Toll-like receptors (TLRs).1 These receptors are
all characterized by an intracellular signaling domain that is
homologous to that of the IL-1 receptor and an extracellular domain
with leucine-rich repeats (4, 5). The most extensively studied
microbial product known to engage TLRs is lipopolysaccharide (LPS;
endotoxin), a complex glycolipid that comprises the major portion of
the outer leaflet of the outer membrane of Gram-negative bacteria (6).
A potent immune response is orchestrated upon the recognition of LPS by
mammalian cells, including the production and release of cytokines,
activation of complement, and various other effects that result in the
killing and clearance of the pathogen. Uncontrolled hyperinflammatory host responses to LPS may lead to life-threatening complications such
as septic shock, multiorgan failure, and death (7). Toll-like receptor
4 is the signaling receptor for LPS and requires the small glycosylated
protein MD-2 for optimal signaling (8-13). We have recently observed
that a mutant form of MD-2 (C95Y) completely abrogated LPS responses
and that wild-type MD-2 was able to confer LPS responsiveness in
TLR4-positive cells lacking MD-2 expression (11, 12).
Whereas there is widespread agreement that CD14, TLR4, and MD-2
expression are necessary for optimal responses to LPS, the mechanism of
cellular activation remains in doubt. Wright and co-workers (14,
25) observed that LPS is internalized and trafficked to the Golgi
apparatus. Indeed, they reported that in the absence of
internalization and movement of LPS to the Golgi, LPS did not
activate mammalian cells (14). Wright proposed these events to
be the critical initiators of signal transduction. TLR4 has now been
reported to be localized to the Golgi in certain epithelial cells (15).
Together, these data suggested that LPS stimulates innate immune
responses by activating an internal receptor, TLR4, that normally
resides in the Golgi apparatus.
Since the discovery and development of green fluorescent protein (GFP),
the subcellular localization, trafficking, and fate of proteins can be
studied in living cells using the fluorescent protein as a fusion tag
(16-18). Moreover, spectral variants of GFP, such as yellow
fluorescent protein (YFP) and cyan fluorescent protein (CFP), have been
developed. These GFP variants can be exploited for simultaneous
visualization of two or more different proteins.
We have engineered a TLR-fluorescent protein chimera with CFP or YFP
fused in frame to the C terminus of TLR2 and TLR4 and, as a control,
fused to the TNF receptor p60. These cDNA constructs were stably
expressed in human embryonic kidney 293 (HEK293) cells. HEK293 cells
lack TLR2 or TLR4 expression, and expression of the fluorescent
chimeric Toll receptors enabled these cells to respond to the
appropriate TLR ligand. We defined the subcellular localization, trafficking, and reorganization of TLR4, CD14, MD-2, and LPS in living
cells by employing time lapse confocal microscopy of monocolor- and
dual and triple color-labeled cells as well as fluorescent photobleaching techniques. We confirmed that LPS traffics to the Golgi
and found that TLR4 is expressed in the Golgi of transfected HEK cells
as well as native monocytes. However, TLR4 is also surface-expressed. Furthermore, LPS continued to traffic between the cell surface and the
Golgi under experimental conditions where signal transduction does not
occur. Conversely, TLR4 expression in the Golgi was not necessary for
cells to respond to LPS. In addition, antibody cross-linking of surface
TLR4 was able to trigger strong signaling both in TLR4-transfected cells and human monocytes. These findings provide strong evidence that
LPS signaling is initiated on the plasma membrane. Localization of TLR4
in an intact Golgi network and the movement of LPS to this internal
pool of TLR4 is neither necessary nor sufficient for signaling to occur.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Reagents--
Reagents were obtained from Sigma unless otherwise
indicated. PBS, Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium, G418, and
trypsin/versene mixture were from BioWhittaker (Walkersville, MD). Low
endotoxin fetal bovine serum was from Hyclone (Logan, UT).
Ciprofloxacin was a gift from Miles Pharmaceuticals (West Haven, CT).
LPS derived from Escherichia coli strain 0111:B4 was
purchased from Sigma and re-extracted by phenol chloroform as described
(19). Human IL-1b and TNF-
were purchased from Genzyme
Pharmaceuticals (Cambridge, MA). The Mycoplasma
fermentans-derived membrane macrophage-activating lipopeptide of 2 kDa (MALP-2) was obtained from Dr. G. Rawadi (Institut Pasteur, Paris, France).
Fluorescent TLR Chimera and Expression Plasmids--
The
cDNA for human TLR4 was provided in the vector pcDNA3 by Drs.
C. Janeway and R. Medzhitov (Yale University, New Haven, CT). The
expression plasmid pRK7-TLR2 was obtained from Dr. C. Kirschning
(Technical University of Munich). The vector pcDNA3 (Invitrogen)
was previously modified to include either CFP or YFP as
C-terminal epitope tags in frame with a cloning site; these vectors
were provided by Drs. F. Chan and M. Lenardo (20). The same
investigators also provided epitope-tagged p60 TNFR (20). Polymerase
chain reaction of TLR2 and TLR4 was performed on pRK7-TLR2 and on
pcDNA3-TLR4 in order to construct chimeric fluorescent cDNAs.
The upper and lower primers for TLR2 were
5'-GAAGCAGGATCCATGCCACATACTTTGT-3' and
5'-GGGCTCGAGGGACTTTATCGCAGCTCTCAGA-3'. The upper and lower primers for
TLR4 were 5'-GATGATGGATCCATGATGTCTGCCTCGC-3' and
5'-ATTTTTGGCTCGAGGATAGATGTTGCTTCC-3'. The PCR fragments were digested
with BamHI and XhoI and cloned in frame into
pcDNA3-CFP and pcDNA3-YFP. The hMD-2 mammalian expression plasmid pEFBOS containing C-terminal FLAG and His epitopes was a
gift of Dr. K. Miyake (University of Tokyo). The Golgi subcelluluar localization vector consisting of the targeting sequence of human
-galactosyltransferase fused to CFP was purchased from
CLONTECH. The fluorescent MyD88 constructs were
made by PCR of MyD88 in pRK7 (provided by Dr. H. Wesche, Tularik, Inc.,
San Francisco, CA) using the following upper and lower primers for
MyD88: 5'-CCACGGGGATCCATGGCTGCAGGAGGTC-3' and
5'-GAACAGGTCGACGGGCAGGGACAAGGC-3'. The PCR fragments were trimmed with
BamHI and SalI and cloned in frame into
pcDNA3-CFP or pcDNA3-YFP, respectively.
Stable Cell Lines--
Stable cell lines of HEK293 cells
expressing the fluorescent protein TLR constructs were engineered by
calcium phosphate transfection (21), selection of bulk populations of
cells in the neomycin analog G418 (1 mg of total drug/ml), and positive
selection by fluorescence-activated cell sorting (BD Vantage, Becton
Dickinson Immunocytometry). Clonal cell lines were obtained by limiting dilution. The fluorescent HEK293 cell lines were maintained in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium supplemented with 10% fetal calf
serum and 0.5 mg/ml G418 in a 5% saturated CO2 atmosphere at 37 °C. A cell line stably expressing both TLR4 and MD-2 was generated by retroviral transduction of HEK-TLR4YFP
cells as described with a retrovirus encoding human MD-2 (12).
Western Blot and Immunoprecipitation--
Cells were analyzed by
Western blot and immunoprecipitation as previously described (12).
Briefly, MD-2-transduced HEK-TLR4YFP or
HEK-TLR2YFP cells were grown in 10-cm dishes and washed in
ice-cold Hanks' balanced salt solution, and surface proteins were
labeled at 4 °C for 30 min in 5 ml of a solution of
sulfosuccinimidobiotin (1 mg/ml; Pierce) in Hanks' balanced
salt solution. Cells were washed and then incubated in 1 M
glycine, pH 9, for 5 min, washed again, and lysed in 1 ml of buffer
(137 mM NaCl, 20 mM Tris·HCl, pH 7.4, 1 mM EDTA, 0.5% Triton X-100) containing 60 mM
n-octylglucoside, 25 mM iodoacetamide, and a
mixture of protease inhibitors (10 µg/ml leupeptin and aprotinin and
1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride). Lysates were
centrifuged, precleared for 1 h in 40 µl of packed protein
A-Sepharose (Amersham Biosciences), and immunoprecipitated with 2 µg
of a GFP polyclonal antibody (Molecular Probes, Inc., Eugene, OR) per
ml and 20 µl of protein A-Sepharose for 16 h at 4 °C. Pellets
were washed four times in lysis buffer, resolved by 4-15% SDS-PAGE
under reducing conditions, and transferred to nitrocellulose membranes.
These membranes were blocked in 5% powdered milk (Difco) and blotted
with either the M2-HRP mAb (Sigma), anti-GFP mAb
(CLONTECH), or Avidin-HRP (Bio-Rad). The blots were
then incubated with HRP substrate (enhanced chemiluminescence
substrate; Amersham Biosciences) and developed by exposure to film
(Hyperfilm; Amersham Biosciences).
Dual Luciferase Reporter Assays for NF-
B
Activation--
HEK293 cells that stably express TLR4YFP,
TLR2YFP, TNFRYFP, or empty vector (pcDNA)
were seeded into 96-well tissue culture plates at a density of 2 × 104 cells/well. The following day, cells were
transiently transfected with luciferase reporter genes using Genejuice
(Novagen) per the manufacturer's recommendations. In order to assess
NF-
B activation, an NF-
B-luciferase reporter gene consisting of
an artificial promoter composed of a multimer of five NF-
B sites
driving the firefly luciferase gene, was co-transfected with a
constitutively active Renilla-luciferase reporter gene
(Promega, Madison, WI). The following day, the cells were stimulated as
indicated. When necessary, HEK-TLR4YFP cells were either
co-transfected with MD-2, stimulated in the presence of soluble MD-2 in
conditioned medium, or retrovirally transduced with the cDNA for
MD-2 (12). Note that we have established that all three of these
methodologies for expressing MD-2 comparably enhance TLR4-mediated
responses to LPS.2 After 4-6
h of stimulation, the cells were lysed in passive lysis buffer
(Promega), and reporter gene activity was measured using a plate reader
luminometer (Victor2; PerkinElmer Life Sciences) using the
Dual-Luciferase Assay Reporter System (Promega) and normalized for
transfection efficiency. In all cases, the data shown represent one of
three separate experiments and are presented as the mean values ± S.D. of triplicate samples.
Confocal Microscopy--
Confocal microscopy was performed with
a Zeiss Axiovert 100-M inverted microscope equipped with an LSM 510 laser-scanning unit. A Zeiss 40× and a 63× 1.4 numerical aperture
plan Apochromat oil immersion objective (Zeiss) was used. Cells were
seeded on 35-mm glass bottom
-irradiated tissue culture dishes
(MatTek Corp., Ashland, MA). CFP-tagged proteins were visualized using the 453-nm argon laser line; for YFP and GFP, the 514- or 488-nm line
of a 25-milliwatt argon laser was used. Red fluorophores were excited
with a 1.0-milliwatt helium/neon laser emitting at 543 nm. Alexa 647 or
Cy5-LPS were excited with a helium/neon laser emitting at 633 nm. Band
pass or long pass filters were chosen to optimally separate the
fluorescence emissions between the different photomultipliers using
single-labeled samples of the probes as controls. When crossover of the
fluorescence signal was measured to be more than 5%, two or more
tracks were scanned alternately with only one laser active per scan and
the respective detector channel active at each time. Fluorescent
recovery after photobleaching (FRAP) experiments were performed by
selecting an area of interest and rapidly applying 99 consecutive scans
using the 514-nm line of a 25-milliwatt argon laser at full laser
power. Fluorescence recovery was observed under low illumination over
time as indicated in the figures. Additional FRAP experiments were done
after pretreatment with 200 µg/ml cycloheximide (Sigma) in complete
tissue culture medium for 2 h. Live cell images and confocal time
lapse fluorescence imaging were performed at 37 °C using a warm
stage apparatus (Zeiss).
Labeling with Antibody and Fluorescent Dyes--
Indirect
immunofluorescence staining for FACS was done using purified mouse
monoclonal antibodies (TLR4, HTA125; TLR2, TL2.1; CD14, 3C10) and
isotype-matched control antibodies (Sigma) as primary antibodies. Cells
were counterstained with APC-conjugated goat anti-mouse
secondary antibody (Caltag). Cells were analyzed by flow cytometry
(Becton Dickinson LSR) using the argon laser at 488 nm for excitation
of YFP fluorescence and the helium/neon laser emitting at 633 nm to
excite APC. Under these conditions, no spectral overlap of the
fluorophores was observed.
Transient transfection of cells observed with confocal microscopy was
done on cells plated in 35-mm glass bottom tissue culture dishes using
EffecteneTM Transfection Reagent (Qiagen) according to the
manufacturer's recommendations. Golgi stain by
BODIPY-TR-conjugated ceramide (Molecular Probes, Inc., Eugene,
OR) was done per the manufacturer's recommendations. MD-2 was stained
for confocal analysis by use of M2 (Sigma) as a primary antibody and
Alexa 647-conjugated goat anti-mouse as the secondary antibody
(Molecular Probes); mCD14 was stained by Tricolor-conjugated anti-CD14
antibody (Caltag). Monocytes were isolated by plastic adherence of
PBMCs in confocal Petri dishes (MatTek) and cultivated in RPMI1640 with 5% human A+ serum (University Hospital, Trondheim, Norway) for 48 h before they were washed three times in Hanks' solution and fixed in
2% formaldehyde (Merck) in PBS for 15 min on ice. The cells were then
washed twice in PBS with 1% A+ serum (PBS/A+) before they were treated
with acetone (
20 °C) for 10 min followed by a careful wash with
PBS/A+. Nonspecific binding was blocked by adding PBS with 20% A+ on
ice for 20 min. The cells were then stained for 30 min at room
temperature with 10 µg/ml HTA125 conjugated with Alexa 546 (Molecular
Probes) or a control murine IgG (Caltag) also conjugated with Alexa
546. After three washes with PBS/A+, the cells were examined in the
confocal microscope with a 543-nm excitation.
Membrane expression of TLR4 and TLR2 in monocytes was measured by flow
cytometry (BD LSR). Freshly isolated PBMCs were surface-stained with an
APC-labeled anti-CD14 antibody (Caltag) together with biotinylated
anti-TLR4, anti-TLR2, or isotype control antibodies (all from
eBiosciences) after preincubation in 20% human serum for 20 min.
Biotinylated antibodies were developed with fluorescein isothiocyanate-conjugated streptavidin (Sigma), and CD14-positive cells (gated according to their forward and sideward scatter
characteristics) were analyzed for TLR expression.
LPS Uptake Experiments--
E. coli 0111:B4 LPS was
subjected to a second phenol extraction to remove minor contaminants
and labeled with the amine-reactive Cy5-fluorochrome (Amersham
Biosciences) per the manufacturer's recommendations. Free dye was
separated from labeled LPS by passage through a sizing column (PD-10
column; Amersham Biosciences). The bioreactivity of the labeled LPS
preparations was comparable with unlabeled LPS. Labeled LPS was
preincubated in PBS plus 5% human serum (Sigma), human rsCD14 (5 µg/ml), and human rLBP (1 µg/ml) for 10 min prior to use.
Adherent HEK293 cells were cultured in 24-well plates and incubated
with Cy5-conjugated LPS for the indicated times at 37 °C in 5%
CO2. Cells were washed twice with ice-cold PBS,
trypsinized, and suspended in cold growth medium, washed twice by
centrifugation at 200 × g in ice-cold PBS, and analyzed by FACS at an excitation frequency of 633 nm.
Antibody Cross-linking Experiments--
Antibodies were bound to
sterile 96-well high protein binding plates (Costar) by overnight
incubation at 4 °C in PBS. After extensive washing with PBS, 4 × 105 (HEK) or 7 × 105 cells (PBMCs)
were plated in each well and incubated for 5-12 h. Supernatants were
analyzed for IL-8 (DuoSet; R&D) or TNF-
(Diaclone) by enzyme-linked
immunosorbent assay.
 |
RESULTS |
Fluorescent TLR Fusion Proteins Are Functional
Receptors--
Human embryonic kidney 293 cells are deficient in all
of the known members of the LPS signaling receptor, including TLR4, MD-2, and CD14. Thus, HEK293 cells are normally unresponsive to LPS.
Additionally, HEK293 cells do not express TLR2 or TLR9 and likewise are
unresponsive to the respective stimulatory molecules known to activate
these receptors. We and others have observed that HEK293 cells
transfected with TLR4 gain LPS responsiveness if they are either
co-transfected with MD-2 or stimulated in the presence of conditioned
medium rich in recombinant soluble MD-2 (11, 12, 22). HEK293 cells that
stably express TLR4YFP, TLR2YFP, or control
cDNA (TNFRYFP or empty vector-pcDNA) were
established. The stable cell lines were transiently co-transfected with
a reporter construct in that firefly luciferase is under the control of
the transcription factor NF-
B and stimulated with the microbial cell
wall components LPS and the Mycoplasma fermentans-derived
membrane lipopeptide MALP-2. LPS conferred responsiveness to
cells expressing TLR4YFP, whereas MALP-2 selectively
activated TLR2YFP-expressing cells (Fig.
1A). The responses observed
were indistinguishable from responses observed in transfected HEK293
cells using TLR constructs that do not include an epitope tag (data not
shown). Proper cellular responses to TLR2 or TLR4 engaging stimuli by the chimeric constructs were further illustrated by a
time-dependent decrease of total I
B-a and nuclear
translocation of NF-
B as assessed by electrophoretic mobility shift
assay or immunofluorescence and confocal imaging (not shown). All of
the various stable cell lines were tested and were equally reactive to
IL-1b, TNF-
, and phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate (Fig. 1A
and data not shown). The responsiveness was similar in each of several
clones tested regardless of which C-terminal tag (CFP, GFP, or YFP) was
used. Unlike prior observations with N-terminally FLAG-tagged
constructs, expression of these chimeric proteins at the C terminus did
not result in appreciable constitutive NF-
B activation (data not shown).

View larger version (46K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Fluorescent TLR2 and -4 fusion proteins are
functional cell surface signaling receptors. A, stable
HEK cell lines expressing TLR4YFP, TLR2YFP, or
pcDNA were transiently transfected with NF- B-luciferase and
Renilla-luciferase reporter constructs. After 24 h, the
cells were treated as indicated in the presence of MD-2-conditioned
medium. After 5 h of stimulation, cellular lysates were analyzed
for luciferase activity. Results are presented as means ± S.D. of
relative luciferase units (RLU) from triplicate
determinations of a representative experiment performed three times.
B, HEK-TLR4YFP cells retrovirally transduced
with MD-2 were surface-biotinylated and subjected to
immunoprecipitation with anti-GFP antibody. Mature glycosylated surface
TLR4-MD-2 complex was revealed by HRP-avidin blot (left).
The total amount of immunoprecipitated protein is shown in the
right panel (upper membrane Western
blot (GFP) and lower membrane Western blot (FLAG)).
C, HEK cells were incubated with anti-TLR4 (HTA125) antibody
(black line) or isotype control IgG
(tinted), stained with secondary APC-labeled antibody, and
analyzed by FACS using 633-nm excitation. Human PBMCs were
incubated with APC-conjugated anti-CD14 and either biotinylated
anti-TLR4, anti-TLR2, or control IgG and developed with fluorescein
isothiocyanate-conjugated streptavidin. Cells were analyzed
by flow cytometry using 488- and 633-nm excitation, and
CD14-positive cells (inset) were gated for the overlay of
TLR4, TLR2, or control stained cells.
|
|
Thus, fusion proteins of TLR4 and TLR2 with fluorescent tags at the C
terminus are functional signaling receptors that confer both specific
and sensitive recognition of their cognate ligands in HEK293 cells.
Subcellular Distribution of TLR4--
The use of GFP or the
spectral variants CFP and YFP as a protein tag allows protein function
and dynamics to be investigated within the environment of the living
cell. The tagged constructs were designed so that the subcellular
localization of the TLR receptors remained directed by their native
signal sequences rather than by a signal sequence contained in the
vector, as is commonly done when employing FLAG-tagged proteins. Cells
were grown on glass bottom tissue culture dishes and observed at
37 °C. TLR4YFP was primarily expressed in two different
subcellular localizations. We observed plasma membrane expression and
localization in a defined juxtanuclear area. Surface staining for TLR4
using a monoclonal antibody (HTA125) revealed a clear surface
expression of the protein independently of the fluorescent protein tag
used (Fig. 1C). Similarly, human monocytes expressed
significant levels of both TLR4 and TLR2. Surface biotinylation and
immunoprecipitation with anti-GFP antibody, followed by Western blot
with avidin-HRP, revealed that only the heavily glycosylated mature
forms of TLR4 and MD-2 (Fig. 2B) are expressed on the cell
surface. We tested whether TLR2 would bind to MD-2 or whether TLR4
would bind MD-1 under identical experimental conditions but failed to
observe co-localization of these protein pairs (data not shown) (12).
These results suggest that both TLR4 and MD-2 follow the trans-Golgi
secretory pathway and reside on the cell surface as a mature protein
complex.

View larger version (78K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Localization of TLR4 to the Golgi
complex. HEK-TLR4YFP cells were transiently
transfected with a Golgi subcellular localization vector
(A) or stained with BODIPY-TR ceramide (B).
Confocal imaging shows extensive overlay of areas positive for Golgi
stain and the intracellular paranuclear TLR4YFP pool.
C, human monocytes were intracellularly stained for TLR4
using HTA125 antibody directly conjugated with Alexa 546. A control
antibody did not label the cells. Shown are representative images of
confocal sections of experiments performed at least three times.
Scale bar, 10 µm.
|
|
We next sought to identify the intracellular compartment that is
enriched in TLR4. A fluorescent subcellular localization marker for the
Golgi complex consisting of the Golgi-targeting sequence of human
-galactosyltransferase fused to CFP co-localized with the
juxtanuclear compartment positive for TLR4 (Fig. 2A). Likewise, fluorescent ceramide, which is known to enrich in Golgi membranes (23), also co-localized with juxtanuclear TLR4YFP
(Fig. 2B). These studies identify the juxtanuclear region
enriched in TLR4 as the Golgi apparatus.
To determine whether the localization pattern of TLR4 was an artifact
of transfection and overexpression or reasonably reflected the
distribution of TLR4 in native cells, we stained human monocytes with a
monoclonal anti-TLR4 antibody. FACS analysis of monocytes revealed
detectable TLR4 on the surface of these cells (Fig. 1C). Intracellular staining of purified monocytes clearly showed that TLR4
is also expressed in a defined juxtanuclear region (Fig. 2C), consistent with the conclusion that TLR4 resides both
on the cell surface and in the Golgi.
Rapid Exchange between Plasma Membrane and Golgi Pools of
TLR4--
The Golgi complex is an intracellular compartment that is
specialized for secretory traffic. Newly synthesized proteins and lipids are received from the ER by the Golgi complex and are covalently modified in preparation for delivery to their final destination (such
as plasma membrane, lysosomes, secretory granules) or to be recycled
back to the ER. In addition to these sorting and filtering capabilities, the Golgi complex recycles plasma membrane components that are retrieved by endocytosis (17, 24).
The physical properties of GFP allow the GFP chimera to be used in a
technique known as FRAP. After GFP or its spectral variants are
excited with very high illumination, these fluorophores are readily
photobleached, a process that irreversibly extinguishes the
fluorescence. When performing FRAP, a small area of interest in the
cell is rapidly photobleached by applying scans with a high powered
laser beam. Thereafter, the movement of nonbleached fluorophores into
the photobleached area can be recorded at low illumination.
Fluorescence recovery gives insights in the diffusional properties of
the reporter chimera.
We employed FRAP to investigate whether membrane-expressed
TLR4YFP would cycle back to the Golgi complex after
photobleaching of Golgi-associated TLR4YFP. Application of
repetitive scans with full laser power to the Golgi almost completely
extinguished the Golgi-localized fluorescence, whereas neither the
surrounding areas nor the neighboring cells were affected (Fig.
3A). Observation of
fluorescence recovery revealed a fast and complete recovery of Golgi
fluorescence. Over 90% of the Golgi-associated fluorescence was
recovered within 4 min after photobleaching, indicating rapid lateral
movement of TLR4YFP between cell compartments.

View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Constitutive cycling of TLR4 between the
Golgi apparatus and the plasma membrane. A, the Golgi pool
of TLR4 recovers rapidly after photobleach. Living
HEK-TLR4YFP cells were observed by confocal microscopy at
37 °C, and Golgi-associated TLR4YFP was selectively
(area enclosed by white
circle) photobleached by repeated illumination with high
laser intensity. Shown are representative images before (prebleach),
immediately after photobleach, and minutes after photobleach as
indicated. Golgi areas unaffected by photobleaching are indicated
by the arrows. Shown is a representative
experiment of several independent experiments. B,
quantification of fluorescence recovery after photobleaching and
influence of cycloheximide treatment. Mean fluorescence intensities of
Golgi and non-Golgi pools were measured at the time points indicated
and expressed as percentage of the ratio obtained before bleaching. To
block protein synthesis, cells were pretreated with cycloheximide, and
fluorescence recovery after photobleaching was analyzed as above.
Scale bar, 10 µm.
|
|
We next questioned whether the recovery of Golgi fluorescence after
FRAP is primarily due to new protein synthesis or represents the
recycling of TLR4YFP from the membrane pool to the Golgi
apparatus. To address this question, cells were preincubated with the
protein synthesis inhibitor cycloheximide for 2 h prior to FRAP.
The recovery of Golgi fluorescence observed in the
cycloheximide-treated cells was nearly identical to that seen in
untreated cells, indicating that rapid transport of TLR4 from the
plasma membrane replenished TLR4 in the Golgi area (Fig.
3B).
These data provide evidence that TLR4 is a highly mobile protein that
rapidly and continuously recycles between its two major cellular pools,
the Golgi complex and the plasma membrane.
Subcellular Localization and Trafficking of MD-2 and
CD14--
Activation of TLR4 by LPS requires the presence of MD-2, a
glycosylated protein with a cleavable signal sequence. MD-2 has been
suggested to assemble with TLR4 in the intracellular compartment. We
have recently reported that MD-2 can be released from cells into
culture supernatants, where it retains its ability to enable TLR4
responses to LPS (11, 12). Soluble MD-2 conferred LPS responsiveness to
TLR4-positive cells, whereas a single point mutant,
MD-2C95Y, failed to enable LPS responses (11).
We transiently expressed a FLAG-tagged version of MD-2 in HEK293 cells
that stably expressed either TLR4YFP, TLR2YFP,
or TNFRYFP and visualized MD-2 by confocal microscopy in
order to investigate the localization and trafficking of MD-2.
Aggregation of MD-2 by antibody surface staining co-aggregated
TLR4YFP but not TLR2YFP or TNFRYFP,
suggesting that MD-2 forms a stable and tight complex with TLR4 on the
cell membrane (Fig. 4A and
data not shown). We next asked whether MD-2 also recycled between the
membrane and the Golgi pools of TLR4. HEK-TLR4YFP cells
that were transfected with MD-2 were surface-stained for MD-2 and
observed by time lapse confocal microscopy at 37 °C. We observed
that, like TLR4, MD-2 rapidly recycled between the cell membrane and
the Golgi and that MD-2 co-localized with TLR4 at all stages during
this process (Fig. 4B; data not shown). In order to
determine whether CD14 followed the same pattern of movement from the
cell membrane to the Golgi, we used mAb to CD14 to track its movements.
Like MD-2, CD14 initially stained on the cell surface and was found to
be rapidly internalized to the Golgi area (Fig. 5D; Supplemental Materials,
video 1). These observations lead to the conclusion that the LPS
signaling receptor complex, consisting of TLR4, MD-2, and CD14, is
formed on the plasma membrane and that this protein complex is rapidly
recycled between the plasma membrane and the Golgi. A slightly modified
interpretation of this hypothesis is that surface CD14, TLR4, and MD-2
primarily reside in lipid rafts and that this residency is enhanced by
the presence of LPS. These rafts recycle between the cell membrane and
the Golgi, carrying all of their resident proteins, including raft-localized receptors and, when present, their cognate ligands.

View larger version (104K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
MD-2 colocalizes with TLR4YFP on
the plasma membrane and recycles between the plasma membrane and the
Golgi apparatus. A, HEK-TLR4YFP cells were
transiently transfected with MD-2, and MD-2 was visualized by indirect
immunofluorescence. Living cells were analyzed by confocal microscopy
at 37 °C. Note that MD-2 and TLR4YFP co-localized on the
plasma membrane and were internalized as a complex (arrows).
Scale bar, 10 µm. B,
TLR4YFP cells expressing MD-2 were stained with an
anti-FLAG monoclonal antibody and observed by time lapse confocal
microscopy at 37 °C. Note that TLR4 and MD-2 move in both directions
between the plasma membrane and the Golgi apparatus
(arrows). Times shown are relative to the first image of
each series. Scale bar, 5 µm.
|
|

View larger version (49K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
LPS internalizes in the absence of
NF- B signaling. A, LPS binding and
uptake in HEK-TLR4YFP was assessed in cells transiently
transfected with MD-2, CD14, MD-2 and CD14, or control (pcDNA).
Cells were incubated with Cy5-LPS for various times, and binding and
uptake were assessed by FACS using 633-nm excitation. B,
HEK-TLR4YFP cells were transiently transfected with the
indicated plasmids (MD-2, CD14, MD-2 and CD14, or pcDNA) together
with reporter constructs. The following day, cells were stimulated, and
NF- B activation was assessed by luminometry after 5 h of
incubation. Data are calculated relative to the untreated control and
are representative of three independent experiments. C,
HEK-TLR4YFP cells were transiently transfected with CD14
and incubated with Cy5-LPS in MD-2-conditioned medium at 37 °C for
15 min. Confocal dual color images of living cells are shown.
D, HEK-TLR4-CD14, HEK-TLR2-CD14, and HEK-CD14 cells were
surface-stained for CD14 and incubated with fluorescently labeled LPS.
Cells were investigated by time lapse dual color confocal microscopy at
37 °C, and a representative single scan of a series is shown for
each cell line. See videos 1 and 2 in the Supplemental Material. These
videos demonstrate the trafficking of CD14 and the co-trafficking of
CD14 and LPS, respectively, from the surface of cells to the
Golgi.
|
|
LPS Internalization Follows the Path of CD14 and Is Independent of
Cellular Activation--
To address the role of MD-2 and CD14 in LPS
binding and internalization, we transiently transfected HEK cells
expressing TLR4YFP with CD14 and/or MD-2 and assessed
binding and internalization of Cy5-labeled LPS. Rapid binding and
uptake of Cy5-LPS, but not Cy5-labeled bovine serum albumin (data not
shown), was observed in cells transfected with CD14 (Fig. 5,
A and C). Co-transfection of CD14 with MD-2 did
not significantly enhance Cy5-LPS binding or uptake in comparison with
cells transfected solely with CD14. Transfection of MD-2 alone had
little effect on the uptake of Cy5-LPS (Fig. 5A).
Under the same conditions, CD14-mediated uptake of LPS occurred in the
apparent absence of signaling. Treatment of CD14-positive (and
MD-2-null) HEK-TLR4YFP cells with LPS did not result in the
activation of NF-
B (Fig. 5B) or the release of IL-8 (data
not shown), despite the ability of these cells to internalize large
amounts of LPS. In contrast, MD-2 expression conferred LPS
responsiveness despite the absence of membrane CD14. Under these
conditions (MD-2 transfection only), LPS binding and uptake were only
minimally detectable after 30 min of incubation (Fig. 5A), a
time point that is after the completion of many LPS-inducible events.
Note that whereas the FACS assay employed in Fig. 5A does
not necessarily distinguish between total cellular LPS binding and LPS
uptake, confocal microscopy was also performed. The results confirmed
our assessment that minimal LPS binding and internalization occurred in
MD-2-transfected cells (data not shown).
We transiently transfected HEK-TLR4YFP with CD14 and/or
MD-2 and analyzed these cells using confocal microscopy. Cy5-LPS bound rapidly (within 10 seconds) to the cell surface of
CD14-transfected cells, whereas LPS binding was scarcely detectable in
CD14-null cells, thus again confirming the results obtained by flow
cytometry (Fig. 5A). CD14-positive cells internalized large
quantities of Cy5-LPS, and large vesicles of LPS were visualized
shortly after cells were exposed to LPS (Fig. 5C). This type
of bulk endocytosis of LPS leads to profound redistribution of
TLR4YFP around these LPS-containing vesicles, an
observation that was not made in HEK cells expressing
TLR2YFP or TNFRYFP (Fig. 5C).
LPS and CD14 Trafficking in Living Cells--
We employed time
lapse confocal imaging in living HEK cells expressing TLR4-CD14,
TLR2-CD14, or CD14 alone to define the kinetics of the LPS
internalization process and to decipher the possible role of TLR4 in
intracellular LPS trafficking. We employed supernatants rich in
recombinant MD-2 to enable TLR4-mediated signaling in order to minimize
the effects of transient transfection upon our results. We confirmed
our previous observation that soluble recombinant MD-2 could enable
TLR4 signaling in response to endotoxin. Furthermore, we found that
soluble MD-2 failed to enable LPS responses in HEK cells stably
transfected with either CD14 or CD14 plus TLR2 (data not shown).
HEK-CD14 cells were incubated with Cy5-LPS while sitting on the
confocal stage at 37 °C. Within 10 seconds after the addition of LPS, strong membrane co-localization of LPS and CD14 was observed. Thereafter, CD14- and LPS-containing vesicles were observed to rapidly
recycle between the plasma membrane and an intracellular compartment.
The vesicle movement from the cell membrane to the juxtanuclear area of
the cell interior was repeatedly measured to require between 4 and
8 s, a time that corresponds to a movement of 1-2 µm/s. The
rate of vesicle movement and the fate of LPS with respect to its final
destination were similar between cells expressing CD14 alone and those
that expressed CD14 in combination with TLR4 or TLR2 (Fig.
5D; Supplemental Materials, video 2). Note that in the
absence of either MD-2 or TLR4 expression (or both), there is no
evidence that HEK cells can be activated by LPS. Thus, the
intracellular transport of LPS appears not to be sufficient to result
in cellular activation.
Initiation of LPS Signaling on the Plasma Membrane--
Whereas it
is clear that the movement of LPS to the Golgi is not sufficient to
activate signal transduction, several authors have postulated that LPS
internalization and trafficking to the Golgi are necessary for
LPS-induced signaling to occur (15, 25). We evaluated the subcellular
site of LPS signaling by the expression of a CFP-tagged version of
MyD88 in TLR4YFP and MD-2-positive cells in order to
address this question. MyD88 binds to the intracellular signaling
domain of TLRs to induce the downstream signaling processes (26) and is
required for full responses to LPS, such as the production and release
of cytokines. In cells unexposed to LPS, the fluorescently tagged MyD88
was expressed in cytoplasmic aggregates. Upon LPS stimulation, a
portion of the tagged MyD88 intracellular pool was observed to
translocate to the cytoplasmic side of the plasma membrane (Fig.
6). This finding is consistent with the
hypothesis that MyD88 is recruited to the TIR domain of surface TLR4,
where signal transduction is initiated.

View larger version (43K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
MyD88 translocates to the plasma membrane
after LPS stimulation. HEK-TLR4YFP cells were
transiently transfected with MyD88CFP and visualized by
confocal microscopy. Cells were left untreated (left) or
stimulated with LPS for 15 min in the presence of MD-2-containing
medium (right). Shown are representative cells of
experiments performed three times. Scale bar, 10 µm.
|
|
Brefeldin A reversibly inhibits the small GTPase Arf, which leads to
retraction of the Golgi membranes back into the ER (17, 27). We
pharmacologically disrupted the Golgi by adding brefeldin A to
HEK-TLR4YFP cells in culture to examine further the
functional significance of Golgi-localized TLR4. Under these
conditions, the release of cytokines such as IL-8 was entirely blocked
(data not shown). Confocal imaging of brefeldin A-pretreated cells
confirmed that TLR4YFP disappeared from the perinuclear
area; consequently, TLR4YFP fluorescence was greatly
enhanced in the ER (Fig. 7A).
However, despite the clear morphological changes in the subcellular
localization of TLR4, NF-
B signaling in brefeldin A-treated cells
was not diminished (Fig. 7B). This result suggests that
TLR4-mediated signaling does not require Golgi localization.

View larger version (34K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
LPS signaling is initiated at the cell
surface. A, TLR4YFP-expressing cells were imaged
by confocal microscopy in growth medium (left) or visualized
after incubation with brefeldin A for 2 h (right).
Scale bar, 10 µm. B,
HEK-TLR4YFP cells expressing MD-2 and NF- B reporter
constructs were treated for 2 h with 5 µg/ml brefeldin A or
carrier control and subsequently stimulated with 100 ng/ml LPS or IL-1.
After a 5-h incubation, cellular lysates were analyzed for luciferase
activity. Shown are mean values of triplicates ± S.D.) of a
representative experiment performed three times. C,
monoclonal antibodies (3.3 µg/ml; anti-TLR4, HTA125; anti-TLR2,
TL2.1) were immobilized on sterile high protein-binding polystyrene
96-well plates. After washing, TLR4-expressing HEK cells lacking MD-2
were seeded on the antibody-coated wells or in untreated wells and
treated as indicated. After 5 h, supernatants were analyzed for
IL-8 by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. D, freshly
isolated human PBMCs were seeded on antibody-coated polystyrene as in
C, and supernatants were analyzed for TNF after 12 h of
incubation.
|
|
Finally, we sought to determine whether surface-localized TLR4 was
capable of transducing a signal under conditions where it could be
stated with a reasonable degree of certainty that Golgi-localized TLR4
could not be engaged. In order to ask this question, we coated tissue
culture grade high protein binding plastic dishes with monoclonal
antibodies to TLR4 or irrelevant antigens. The dishes were washed
extensively with PBS, and transfected HEK293 cells were allowed to
settle onto the plastic, where their surface proteins could become
cross-linked by the bound monoclonal antibodies. We observed that
cross-linking of surface TLR4 was sufficient to activate NF-
B (data
not shown) or to induce IL-8 release (Fig. 7C) in
HEK-TLR4YFP cells. In contrast, irrelevant mAbs failed to
have this stimulatory effect. Note that LPS contamination of the
antibody preparations cannot account for the stimulatory capacity of
the anti-TLR4 antibody, because HEK-TLR4YFP cells are
LPS-unresponsive in the absence of MD-2 (Fig. 7C). Similar
to the findings in transfected cell lines, native monocytes could also
be activated by immobilized mAbs against TLRs, including both anti-TLR4
and anti-TLR2, but not by an irrelevant mAb, clone 6H8 (Fig.
7D, control).
 |
DISCUSSION |
During Gram-negative infection, the CD14-TLR4-MD-2 complex
mediates a potent immune response to minute amounts of LPS that are
released from invading bacteria. The importance of TLR4 as the LPS
signal transducer is reflected by the observation that TLR4-deficient
animals are markedly hypersusceptible to Gram-negative bacterial
infection (9, 28). The presence of functional TLR4 does not ensure a
beneficial outcome in infection either, since the response to LPS may
be either exaggerated by the host immune system or unchecked by the
production of counter regulatory measures. Under these circumstances,
the failure to resolve inflammation may give rise to septic shock and
multiorgan failure. The molecular mechanism of TLR4 function is of
great practical importance in the design of new and better therapies
for the sepsis syndrome in view of the worldwide importance of this
health care problem (29-31).
It has long been appreciated that bacterial lipopolysaccharide has the
ability to integrate into mammalian membranes and activate cells. The
discovery of CD14 as an LPS binding receptor established that this
movement occurred as a result of the intrinsic ability of CD14 to
facilitate this integration and led to the subsequent observation that
after LPS is incorporated into the membrane, a portion of the LPS moves
toward the Golgi apparatus. This report demonstrates the surprising
rapidity with which this movement takes place; the interval from
membrane to Golgi localization can be measured in seconds, not minutes
as was previously assumed. However, it has never been clear whether the
mechanism of LPS-induced cellular activation was in any way related to
the movement of LPS, although a variety of strongly held opinions
existed on this topic.
The discovery of Toll receptor 4 as the primary LPS signal transducer
(at least for endotoxins derived from enterobacteriacae), initially
seemed to answer the question of how LPS activates immune cells. Like
all of the TLRs, TLR4 has striking homology to the IL-1 receptor. This
receptor is known to initiate signal transduction by forming
heteromeric complexes with the IL-1-associated receptor; this complex
has a marked affinity for the cytoplasmic linker molecule MyD88, and
once this molecule is recruited to the TIR domain of the IL-1r,
signaling proceeds rapidly. However, despite the homology of TLRs to
the IL-1r, it has yet to be established whether TLRs function in the
same way. The issue appeared even more complex when Hornef et
al. (15) reported that TLR4 is localized in the Golgi in
intestinal epithelial cells and demonstrated co-localization of LPS
with TLR4 in this location. This report was highly suggestive that
signaling might begin in the Golgi and that the endotoxin receptor was
truly an intracellular receptor.
We engineered fusion proteins of yellow and cyan fluorescent protein
with several TLRs in order to be able to determine the subcellular
localization of TLRs without the ongoing need to permeabilize cells for
antibody staining. This approach has allowed us to monitor not only the
location of TLR4 at any given time but also how that location was
related in time to the presence of LPS. These chimera are fully
functional receptors whose expression in HEK293 cells results in the
types of immune responses to bacterial products that one would
anticipate from native cells that express TLR2 and/or TLR4.
TLR4YFP can clearly be seen to be located within the Golgi
of transfected HEK293 cells, but, unlike intestinal epithelial cells,
it is also clearly present on the cell surface. It is worth noting that
whereas the expression of TLR4 in fixed and permeabilized human
monocytes only can be documented in the perinuclear area that strongly
resembles the Golgi, FACS analysis of monocytes has consistently
demonstrated surface expression of TLR4 (Fig. 1C). This may,
in fact, be due to the disruption of the mammalian outer membrane that
occurs whenever cells are treated with a detergent. We propose that the Golgi pool of TLR4 normally serves as a steady-state pool of TLR4 protein and that cells may regulate the proper surface expression of
TLR4 by either enhancing or diminishing the retention of TLR4 in the
Golgi (32, 33). We suspect that careful inspection of the intestinal
epithelial cell outer membrane will also result in the discovery of
surface TLR4 in these cells, especially because there is no reason to
believe that the recycling of membrane components from the surface to
the Golgi and back again is unique to HEK293 cells.
Accumulating evidence exists that TLR4 requires MD-2 in order to
initiate LPS signal transduction. Furthermore, it seems apparent that
MD-2 tightly binds to the extracellular domain of TLR4 (10, 35) and
that this tight binding has functional significance. MD-2 is a secreted
protein that can enable LPS responsiveness in cells that express TLR4
but lack MD-2 (11, 12). By employing time lapse confocal dual color
imaging, we observed that the TLR4-MD-2 receptor complex was
preassembled at the plasma membrane and that MD-2 together with TLR4
rapidly recycles between the plasma membrane and the Golgi apparatus in
the absence or presence of ligand. CD14 also appears to move from the
cell surface to the Golgi, despite previous reports to the
contrary (36). In fact, our data confirm previous observations that the
entire cholesterol-rich, ganglioside-rich "lipid raft," in which
TLR4, CD14, and MD-2 all are thought to reside, is constantly shuttling
back and forth from the surface to the Golgi (24, 37, 38). Our recent
studies confirm this report, since we have found that when HEK293 cells were incubated with the rhodamine-labeled cholera toxin subunit B,
which binds to GM1 gangliosides present in lipid rafts, the cholera
toxin rapidly moved from the plasma membrane to the Golgi indistinguishably from CD14, MD-2, TLR4, and LPS (data not shown).
Whereas the observation that LPS is internalized into cells and
traffics to the Golgi under conditions where cell signaling does not
occur is consistent with the hypothesis that cellular activation begins
on the cell surface, these data alone could never be considered to be
conclusive. The ability of cells to become activated by LPS after
brefeldin A treatment clearly demonstrates that Golgi localization of
TLR4 is not necessary to observe activation, although it might be
argued that these unusual conditions simply change the important
location of interaction from the Golgi to the ER. We found that after
LPS stimulation, MyD88 will translocate from an intracellular site to
the plasma membrane in living cells, again giving additional credence
to the concept that signaling can occur on the plasma membrane. Perhaps
most importantly, surface TLR4 is capable of initiating a signal to
cells, since the antibody cross-linking experiment shown in Fig. 7,
C and D, employs surface-immobilized monoclonal
antibodies that are physically incapable of interacting with
Golgi-localized TLR4. Surface TLR4 would be expected to be the pool of
TLR4 that first interacts with LPS as bacteria are encountered by
phagocytes. Thus, it seems that the responses to LPS begin at the cell
surface but may have the potential to continue at other locations
within the cell, including the Golgi and perhaps other organelles.
Ideally, it would be interesting to inhibit LPS uptake and to test
whether LPS could nevertheless activate cells. Unfortunately, such
experiments are difficult to design and interpret. Whereas cytochalasins effectively block LPS internalization, we and others, have found that they interfere with many other aspects of cellular function (39, 40). As an alternative to the use of pharmacological agents, we previously used genetic means to prevent bacterial internalization via CD11b/CD18 in Chinese hamster ovary cells by
transfecting these cells with truncated ("tailless") LPS-binding receptors that were missing those portions of these receptors that
interact with the cytoskeleton. Under these conditions, the TLR4-mediated response was entirely unaffected by the lack of ligand internalization (41).
Recently, members of the Nod/CARD protein family have been suggested to
mediate signals to LPS that finds its way into the cytosol, especially
by pathogens that have the ability to invade mammalian cells. This
class of receptors may, in fact, be true intracellular signaling
molecules that represent a specialized form of host defense against
certain intracellular pathogens (34, 42). Regardless of the final
outcome of the study of Nod proteins, it is clear that the majority of
medically relevant responses to LPS do not occur via this intracellular
pathway but rather via the Toll pathway.
The data presented herein suggest that the movement of LPS into the
cell and toward the Golgi reservoir of TLR4 is neither necessary nor
sufficient for signal transduction to occur. We propose that although
LPS is internalized by the action of CD14 and is dragged to the Golgi
along with the CD14-rich lipid raft, this movement of LPS has little
immunological importance. Conversely, our data support the hypothesis
that LPS-initiated signaling begins with the cross-linking and
clustering of surface TLR4-MD-2, which we have observed to be
sufficient to initiate signal transduction.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
The technical assistance of Kristen Halmen,
Liv Ryan, Randi Vik, and Kjartan Egeberg is greatly acknowledged.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by National Institutes of Health
Grants GM54060, GM63244, and DK50305 (to D. T. G.), the Commission of
the European Communities, specific RTD program "Quality of Life and
Management of Living Resources" Grant QLK2-2000-336, HOSPATH,
the Norwegian Cancer Society, and the Norwegian Research Council (to
T. E.).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.
The on-line version of this article (available at
http://www.jbc.org) contains two videos. Video 1 shows CD14 movement
inside HEK cells stably transfected with CD14. A Tricolor-conjugated anti-CD14 antibody was used to stain CD14. Video 2 shows LPS uptake together with CD14. HEK-TLR4-CD14 cells were incubated with
Tricolor-conjugated anti-CD14 antibody (red) and BODIPY-LPS (green).
Shown are sequential images acquired by time-lapse confocal imaging in
the order channel red, channel green, and the overlay of red and green.
§
Supported by a stipend from the German Academic Exchange Program.
¶
These authors contributed equally to this work.
**
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Institute of Cancer
Research and Molecular Biology, Norwegian University of Science and
Technology, N-7489 Trondheim, Norway. Tel.: 47-73598668; Fax: 47-73598801; E-mail: terje.espevik@medisin.ntnu.no.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, September 24, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M207873200
2
E. Latz and A. Visintin, unpublished data.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
TLR, Toll-like
receptor;
IL, interleukin;
LPS, lipopolysaccharide;
GFP, green
fluorescent protein;
CFP, cyan fluorescent protein;
YFP, yellow
fluorescent protein;
HEK, human embryonic kidney;
MALP-2, M.
fermentans-derived membrane lipopeptide macrophage-activating
lipopeptide of 2 kDa;
mAb, monoclonal antibody;
FRAP, fluorescent
recovery after photobleaching;
TNF, tumor necrosis factor;
HRP, horseradish peroxidase;
FACS, fluorescence-activated cell sorting;
PBS, phosphate-buffered saline;
TNFR, tumor necrosis factor receptor;
ER, endoplasmic reticulum;
PBMC, peripheral blood mononuclear cell;
GM1, monosialo ganglioside GM1;
APC, allophycocyanin;
BODIPY, 4,4-difluoro-5,7-dimethyl-4-bora-3a,4a-diaza-5-indacene;
rLBP, recombinant lipopolysaccharide binding protein.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Medzhitov, R.,
and Janeway, C. A., Jr.
(1997)
Cell
91,
295-298[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 2.
|
Fearon, D. T.,
and Locksley, R. M.
(1996)
Science
272,
50-53[Abstract]
|
| 3.
|
Aderem, A.,
and Ulevitch, R. J.
(2000)
Nature
406,
782-787[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 4.
|
Rock, F. L.,
Hardiman, G.,
Timans, J. C.,
Kastelein, R. A.,
and Bazan, J. F.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
588-593[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 5.
|
Du, X.,
Poltorak, A.,
Wei, Y.,
and Beutler, B.
(2000)
Eur. Cytokine Netw.
11,
362-371[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 6.
|
Raetz, C. R.
(1990)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
59,
129-170[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 7.
|
Bone, R. C.
(1991)
Ann. Intern. Med.
115,
457-469[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 8.
|
Poltorak, A., He, X.,
Smirnova, I.,
Liu, M. Y.,
Huffel, C. V., Du, X.,
Birdwell, D.,
Alejos, E.,
Silva, M.,
Galanos, C.,
Freudenberg, M.,
Ricciardi-Castagnoli, P.,
Layton, B.,
and Beutler, B.
(1998)
Science
282,
2085-2088[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 9.
|
Hoshino, K.,
Takeuchi, O.,
Kawai, T.,
Sanjo, H.,
Ogawa, T.,
Takeda, Y.,
Takeda, K.,
and Akira, S.
(1999)
J. Immunol.
162,
3749-3752[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 10.
|
Shimazu, R.,
Akashi, S.,
Ogata, H.,
Nagai, Y.,
Fukudome, K.,
Miyake, K.,
and Kimoto, M.
(1999)
J. Exp. Med.
189,
1777-1782[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 11.
|
Schromm, A. B.,
Lien, E.,
Henneke, P.,
Chow, J. C.,
Yoshimura, A.,
Heine, H.,
Latz, E.,
Monks, B. G.,
Schwartz, D. A.,
Miyake, K.,
and Golenbock, D. T.
(2001)
J. Exp. Med.
194,
79-88[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 12.
|
Visintin, A.,
Mazzoni, A.,
Spitzer, J. A.,
and Segal, D. M.
(2001)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
98,
12156-12161[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 13.
|
Nagai, Y.,
Akashi, S.,
Nagafuku, M.,
Ogata, M.,
Iwakura, Y.,
Akira, S.,
Kitamura, T.,
Kosugi, A.,
Kimoto, M.,
and Miyake, K.
(2002)
Nat. Immunol.
3,
667-672[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 14.
|
Thieblemont, N.,
Thieringer, R.,
and Wright, S. D.
(1998)
Immunity
8,
771-777[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 15.
|
Hornef, M. W.,
Frisan, T.,
Vandewalle, A.,
Normark, S.,
and Richter-Dahlfors, A.
(2002)
J. Exp. Med.
195,
559-570[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 16.
|
Tsien, R. Y.
(1998)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
67,
509-544[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 17.
|
Lippincott-Schwartz, J.
(2001)
Histochem. Cell Biol.
116,
97-107[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 18.
|
Lippincott-Schwartz, J.,
Snapp, E.,
and Kenworthy, A.
(2001)
Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell. Biol.
2,
444-456[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 19.
|
Hirschfeld, M., Ma, Y.,
Weis, J. H.,
Vogel, S. N.,
and Weis, J. J.
(2000)
J. Immunol.
165,
618-622[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 20.
|
Chan, F. K.,
Chun, H. J.,
Zheng, L.,
Siegel, R. M.,
Bui, K. L.,
and Lenardo, M. J.
(2000)
Science
288,
2351-2354[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 21.
|
Chen, C.,
and Okayama, H.
(1987)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
7,
2745-2752[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 22.
|
Yang, H.,
Young, D. W.,
Gusovsky, F.,
and Chow, J. C.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
20861-20866[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 23.
|
Lipsky, N. G.,
and Pagano, R. E.
(1985)
Science
228,
745-747[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 24.
|
Nichols, B. J.,
Kenworthy, A. K.,
Polishchuk, R. S.,
Lodge, R.,
Roberts, T. H.,
Hirschberg, K.,
Phair, R. D.,
and Lippincott-Schwartz, J.
(2001)
J. Cell Biol.
153,
529-541[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 25.
|
Thieblemont, N.,
and Wright, S. D.
(1999)
J. Exp. Med.
190,
523-534[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 26.
|
Medzhitov, R.,
Preston-Hurlburt, P.,
Kopp, E.,
Stadlen, A.,
Chen, C.,
Ghosh, S.,
and Janeway, C. A., Jr.
(1998)
Mol. Cell
2,
253-258[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 27.
|
Ward, T. H.,
Polishchuk, R. S.,
Caplan, S.,
Hirschberg, K.,
and Lippincott-Schwartz, J.
(2001)
J. Cell Biol.
155,
557-570[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 28.
|
O'Brien, A. D.,
Rosenstreich, D. L.,
Scher, I.,
Campbell, G. H.,
MacDermott, R. P.,
and Formal, S. B.
(1980)
J. Immunol.
124,
20-24[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 29.
|
Sands, K. E.,
Bates, D. W.,
Lanken, P. N.,
Graman, P. S.,
Hibberd, P. L.,
Kahn, K. L.,
Parsonnet, J.,
Panzer, R.,
Orav, E. J.,
and Snydman, D. R.
(1997)
JAMA (J. Am. Med. Assoc.)
278,
234-240[Abstract]
|
| 30.
|
Brun-Buisson, C.,
Doyon, F.,
Carlet, J.,
Dellamonica, P.,
Gouin, F.,
Lepoutre, A.,
Mercier, J. C.,
Offenstadt, G.,
and Regnier, B.
(1995)
JAMA (J. Am. Med. Assoc.)
274,
968-974[Abstract]
|
| 31.
|
Centers for Disease Control.
(1990)
JAMA (J. Am. Med. Assoc.)
263,
937-938[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 32.
|
Visintin, A.,
Mazzoni, A.,
Spitzer, J. H.,
Wyllie, D. H.,
Dower, S. K.,
and Segal, D. M.
(2001)
J. Immunol.
166,
249-255[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 33.
|
Muzio, M.,
Polentarutti, N.,
Bosisio, D.,
Prahladan, M. K.,
and Mantovani, A.
(2000)
J. Leukoc. Biol.
67,
450-456[Abstract]
|
| 34.
|
Girardin, S. E.,
Tournebize, R.,
Mavris, M.,
Page, A. L., Li, X.,
Stark, G. R.,
Bertin, J.,
DiStefano, P. S.,
Yaniv, M.,
Sansonetti, P. J.,
and Philpott, D. J.
(2001)
EMBO Rep.
2,
736-742[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 35.
|
da Silva Correia, J.,
Soldau, K.,
Christen, U.,
Tobias, P. S.,
and Ulevitch, R. J.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
21129-21135[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 36.
|
Vasselon, T.,
Hailman, E.,
Thieringer, R.,
and Detmers, P. A.
(1999)
J. Exp. Med.
190,
509-521[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 37.
|
Pfeiffer, A.,
Bottcher, A.,
Orso, E.,
Kapinsky, M.,
Nagy, P.,
Bodnar, A.,
Spreitzer, I.,
Liebisch, G.,
Drobnik, W.,
Gempel, K.,
Horn, M.,
Holmer, S.,
Hartung, T.,
Multhoff, G.,
Schutz, G.,
Schindler, H.,
Ulmer, A. J.,
Heine, H.,
Stelter, F.,
Schutt, C.,
Rothe, G.,
Szollosi, J.,
Damjanovich, S.,
and Schmitz, G.
(2001)
Eur. J. Immunol.
31,
3153-3164[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 38.
|
Triantafilou, M.,
Miyake, K.,
Golenbock, D. T.,
and Triantafilou, K.
(2002)
J. Cell Sci.
115,
2603-2611[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 39.
|
Poussin, C.,
Foti, M.,
Carpentier, J. L.,
and Pugin, J.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
20285-20291[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 40.
|
Cowan, D. B.,
Noria, S.,
Stamm, C.,
Garcia, L. M.,
Poutias, D. N.,
del Nido, P. J.,
and McGowan, F. X., Jr.
(2001)
Circ. Res.
88,
491-498[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 41.
|
Ingalls, R. R.,
Arnaout, M. A.,
and Golenbock, D. T.
(1997)
J. Immunol.
159,
433-438[Abstract]
|
| 42.
|
Inohara, N.,
Ogura, Y.,
Chen, F. F.,
Muto, A.,
and Nunez, G.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
2551-2554 |