![]()
|
|
||||||||
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 5, 3176-3185, February 1, 2002
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
§,
¶,
,
, and
**
From the
Departament de Ciències
Fisiològiques II, Campus de Bellvitge, Universitat de Barcelona,
Feixa Llarga s/n, 08907 L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain and
Cell Biology Program and Howard Hughes Medical Institute,
Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center,
New York, New York 10021
Received for publication, July 19, 2001, and in revised form, November 6, 2001
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) are potent
inhibitors of myoblast differentiation and inducers of bone formation
both in vivo and in vitro. Expression of Id1, a
negative regulator of basic helix-loop-helix transcription factors, is
up-regulated by BMPs and contributes to the antimyogenic effects of
this family of cytokines. In this report, we have identified a specific
BMP-2 immediate early response enhancer in the human Id1
gene. Transcriptional activation of the enhancer was increased by
overexpression of BMP-responsive Smads, and Smad4 and was completely
abrogated in Smad4-deficient cells. Deletion analysis demonstrates that
the responsive region is composed of two separate DNA binding elements, a set of overlapping GC boxes, which bind BMP-regulated Smads upon BMP
stimulation, and three repeats of CAGAC boxes. Gel shift and
oligonucleotide pull-down assays demonstrated that these two types of
motifs were capable of binding their corresponding Smads. However,
deletion or mutation of either DNA binding element was nonadditive,
since disruption of either GC or CAGAC boxes resulted in complete or
severe loss of BMP-2 responsiveness. These data suggest the
simultaneous requirement of two independent DNA binding elements to
allow functional cooperativity of BMP-regulated Smads and Smad4 in
BMP-activated gene promoters.
During the process of
differentiation, progenitor cells develop into more specialized
phenotypes by highly specific changes in gene expression. The
developmental maturation of precursor cells can be divided at least in
two stages, the commitment of undifferentiated cells to a particular
lineage followed by the terminal differentiation into a specific
phenotype. Thus, a common progenitor such as undifferentiated
mesenchymal cells can differentiate into osteoblasts, chondrocytes,
myocytes, or adipocytes depending on the signals derived from the
cellular environment.
The complex framework of the molecular mechanisms by which regulation
in gene expression governs cell fate includes tissue-determining transcription factors such as peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor Particular cell lineage commitment decisions depend on a complex
network of gene expression of
bHLH1 transcription factors
and their Id antagonists. This network is ultimately controlled by
cell-intrinsic programs as well as by mutually exclusive
extracellular-signaling factors. For example, a number of signals that
induce the osteoblast phenotype, such as bone morphogenetic proteins
(BMPs), repress myogenic differentiation in vitro (15-17)
and induce bone formation after implantation in intramuscular sites
in vivo (18). This ability to switch myogenic or neurogenic
developmental fates has been related to the ability of BMPs to
up-regulate Id1 expression and repress tissue-specific bHLH
transcriptional activities (16, 19, 20).
The BMPs belong to the TGF- Upon entry to the nucleus, Smads usually form complexes containing
sequence-specific DNA binding factors and transcriptional coactivators
or corepressors to achieve stable binding and transcriptional activation (24-26). Smad proteins have DNA binding activity at their
amino-terminal domain (or MH1 domain) and transactivation activity in
their carboxyl-terminal domain (MH2 domain). R-Smads and Smad4 bind
with preference to the sequence CAGAC (27, 28), which is found in
diverse TGF- Compared with much recent work on a large number of genes regulated by
TGF- Cell Culture and Transfection
C2C12 cells were cultured in DMEM supplemented with 20% fetal
bovine serum and HEK-293-T cells in DMEM supplemented with 10% fetal
bovine serum and 1 mM sodium pyruvate. HTC-116 and 5-18 cells (provided by B. Vogelstein, John Hopkins Oncology Center, Baltimore, MD) were cultured in DMEM supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum and, for 5-18 cells, with 0.4 mg/ml G-418 plus 0.1 mg/ml
hygromycin. Cells were grown in a 10% CO2 atmosphere with 95% humidity.
C2C12 and HEK-293-T cells were transiently transfected with the
indicated vectors by the calcium phosphate method as described previously (36). HCT-116 and 5-18 cells were transiently transfected with the Lipofectin procedure according to the manufacturer's protocol (Invitrogen).
Plasmid Constructs
The promoter region of the human Id1 gene ( Constructs containing deletions within the 183-bp fragment were
generated as follows. The 183-bp fragment was digested with HaeIII, and fragments of 130 bp were subcloned into pId 170. The pId 183 reporter was digested with PstI plus
AatII, NcoI plus AatII, and
PstI plus NcoI, blunt-ended, and religated
generating, respectively, pId 60, pId 183 GST-Smad3 Luciferase and C2C12, HCT-116, and 5-18 cells were split 24 h after
transfection, cultured in DMEM supplemented with 0.1% fetal bovine
serum and treated with 1 nM BMP-2 (Genetics Institute,
Cambridge, MA) or 200 pM human recombinant TGF- RNA Analysis by Northern Blot Hybridization
RNA Isolation--
C2C12 were treated with 1 nM
BMP-2, 5 µg/ml actinomycin D, or 10 µg/ml cycloheximide for 1 h. Plates were washed twice with cold phosphate-buffered saline, and
total RNA was prepared using the UltraspecTM RNA Isolation
System (Biotecx Laboratories, Inc., Houston, TX)
Reverse Transcriptase-PCR--
Two micrograms of total RNA was
reverse-transcribed using a Ready-To-Go first-strand kit (Amersham
Biosciences, Inc.) and oligo-dT as primer. PCR amplification was
carried out using 2 µl of the reverse-transcribed RNA product and
oligonucleotides Id1.1 5'-CGCTGAGGCGGCGCACTGAGG-3' and Id1.2
5'-TCAGCCAGTGATCATTGTAAT-3'. The resulting fragment was used as a probe
and was directly labeled by incorporation of
[ Northern Blot Analysis--
Samples of 20 µg of RNA were
separated by electrophoresis on a 1% agarose-formaldehyde gel and
transferred to nylon membranes by capillary transfer. The RNA
hybridization was carried out at 42 °C, and the membranes were then
washed 3 times at 46 °C in 0.1% SDS and 0.1 × SSC and
subjected to autoradiography by exposing to Kodak MS film for 36 h
at Western Blot Analysis
Total Extracts--
After treatment with 1 nM BMP-2
for different times, C2C12 cells were washed with cold
phosphate-buffered saline and lysed with sample buffer 1× (62.5 nM Tris, pH 6.8, 10% glycerol, 1% SDS, 100 nM
dithiothreitol, and 0.25 mg/ml bromphenol blue).
Western Blot--
Protein extracts were resolved on 15%
SDS-polyacrylamide gels, transferred to nitrocellulose membranes
(Millipore, Bedford, MA), and subjected to Western blot analysis using
a 1:1000 dilution of antibody for Id1, sc-488 (Santa Cruz
Biotechnology, Santa Cruz, CA). Immunocomplexes were visualized by
developing membranes with a horseradish peroxidase-conjugated
anti-rabbit IgG antibody (1:5000) followed by incubation with ECL
Western blot reagent (Amersham Biosciences, Inc.).
Biotinylated Oligonucleotide Precipitation Assays
HEK-293-T cells, 48 h after transfection, or C2C12 cells,
after 16 h of serum starvation, were treated with 1 nM
BMP-2 for 1 h, washed twice with cold phosphate-buffered saline,
and sonicated as described previously (32). Oligonucleotide 120 corresponds to the fragment included in the pId 120 reporter (the
oligonucleotide 120mut is identical to 120 but contains the three CAGAC
boxes mutated GTCTG to TAATG and CAGAC to CATTA); BRE oligonucleotide was described previously (32). After overnight incubation with biotinylated oligonucleotide, collection with streptavidin-agarose beads (Pierce), and washing with the lysis buffer, DNA-bound proteins were separated on 10% SDS-polyacrylamide gels and immunodetected as
described above. Detection was performed using polyclonal anti-Smad4 or
anti-Smad1 antibodies for assays with endogenous Smad4 and Smad1 or
anti-FLAG (Sigma) and anti-Myc (Amersham Biosciences, Inc.) monoclonal
antibodies for epitope-tagged Smads.
Electrophoretic Mobility Shift Assay
Nuclear Extracts--
After 48 h of transfection, 293-T
cells were washed twice with phosphate-buffered saline. Nuclear
extracts were obtained as described previously (37). The protein
content was determined using the Bradford protein concentration assay
(Bio-Rad) with bovine serum albumin as standard.
Protein Purification--
BL21 cells harboring a control plasmid
or GST-Smad-encoding plasmids (GST-Smad1 MH1, GST-Smad3 EMSA--
The Id1 promoter probes used in these assays were
double-strand oligonucleotide corresponding to the complete 120-bp
BMP-2-responsive region (see Fig. 5 for sequence), the 120-bp region
containing the three CAGAC boxes mutated (120mut), GC oligonucleotide,
and the CAGAC oligonucleotide. Probes were directly labeled by
incorporation of [ Induction of Id1 Expression Is an Immediate Early Response to
BMP-2--
Previous studies show that Id1 mRNA levels increase
after BMP-2 addition in various cell types, including mesenchymal and neuroepithelial cells (19, 20, 38, 39). To more accurately assess the
temporal pattern of this response, we evaluated Id1 mRNA and
protein levels in C2C12 cells at different time points after BMP-2
addition. As shown in Fig. 1A,
Id1 mRNA levels were strongly increased upon BMP-2 stimulation,
reached peak levels after 1 h, and decreased thereafter. Id1
protein levels followed both the induction and the decay of mRNA
levels, which is consistent with a rapid turnover of Id1 protein in the
cell, with a reported half-live of 20-30 min (8, 40) (Fig.
1B). This induction by BMP-2 was more evident if cells were
serum-starved overnight before the addition of BMP-2, since Id1 is also
up-regulated by serum (41). To investigate whether the regulation of
Id1 by BMP-2 is mediated at the level of gene transcription and
requires protein synthesis, we assessed the effect of the protein
synthesis inhibitor cycloheximide and the inhibitor of transcription
actinomycin D (Fig. 1C). BMP-2-mediated up-regulation of Id1
mRNA was completely blocked by pretreatment of cells with
actinomycin D (second versus third lanes
from the left side), whereas the addition of cycloheximide even
increased induction of Id1 by BMP-2 (second versus fourth lanes). These data indicate that BMP-2 increases Id1
mRNA likely through a transcriptional event that does not require
protein synthesis.
To define the BMP-2-responsive elements in the Id1 promoter, we
isolated the upstream regulatory sequence of the human Id1 gene
(nucleotides Identification of Id1 Promoter-Enhancer Sequences Required for
BMP-2 Responsiveness--
To characterize the elements within the
1.5-kilobase promoter-enhancer sequence responsible for the
BMP-2-dependent transcriptional responses, we constructed a
series of 5' deletions of the 1.5-kilobase upstream region included in
pId-lux and transfected these constructs in C2C12 cells. Sequences from
Smad1 and Smad4 Participate in Activation of the BMP-responsive
Element--
We next analyzed whether these transcriptional effects on
Id1 transcription were mediated through Smads. As shown in Fig. 4A, overexpression of Smad1,
-5, and -4 increased both basal and BMP-2-induced activation of the
minimal responsive reporter construct pId 183, whereas overexpression
of Smad3 only induced a small increase in basal luciferase activity and
did not modify BMP-2 responsiveness. We next assessed the functional
role of Smads in transcriptional induction of the Id1 promoter in cells
lacking Smad4. Targeted deletion of Smad4 in the colorectal HCT116 cell line generated a clone (named 5-18) that lacks TGF- Two Distinct DNA Elements Are Required for BMP-2
Responsiveness--
Sequence analysis of the 183-bp enhancer reveals
consensus sites for YY1, Sp1, Egr-1, ATF/CREB, and four CAGAC boxes
(Fig. 5A). To investigate
which part of the region was responsible of BMP-2 transcriptional
induction, we performed further deletion analysis of pId120 using
convenient restriction sites or oligonucleotide fusion to the minimal
pId 170. 5' deletion of the region from
Examination of these separate elements revealed that one of them
contains CAGAC boxes, which have been shown to bind Smad3 and Smad4
(27, 42, 44). The other element contains a GC-rich region that includes
five overlapping motifs identical or highly similar to the sequence
GCCGNCGC (GC box) (Fig.
6A). This sequence has been
identified as a binding site for Mad (the Drosophila ortholog of Smad1) in several Dpp-responsive genes (29, 30). To explore
the biological significance of this motif, we generated a series of
constructs containing the minimal responsive reporter construct pId 120 (from Direct Binding of BMP-regulated Smads to the GC-overlapping Motifs
of Id1 Promoter--
We next tested whether mammalian Smad1 and -4 bind to the BMP-responsive elements of Id1 promoter using two
complementary approaches. Oligonucleotide pull-down assays of HEK-293-T
cells transfected with FLAG epitope-tagged Smads showed that Smad1 or Smad4 alone or in combination are able to bind to the BMP-2-responsive region (
To also define whether endogenous Smads also bind to the BMP-responsive
region upon cytokine stimulation, we conducted oligo pull-down assays
using C2C12 cells treated with BMP-2 for 1 h. We included as a
control an oligonucleotide containing the BMP-2-responsive region of
the Xvent-2 gene (32). As shown in Fig. 7C, we could detect
binding of Smad1 and Smad4 to both responsive regions. Binding of Smad1
to the Id-1-responsive region required BMP-2 stimulation, whereas Smad4
showed a slight binding in the basal state, which is strongly increased
upon BMP-2 stimulation. Mutation of the three CAGAC boxes abrogates
binding of Smad4 in the basal state and decreases the BMP-2-stimulated
binding of both Smad1 and -4 to the mutated probe.
The previous experiments demonstrate the presence of Smad1 and 4 in the
BMP-2-responsive binding complex but cannot determine whether or not
binding of Smads to the distinct DNA motifs is direct. To address this
issue, we used recombinant Smad-MH1 domains. As shown in Fig.
8A, Smad1, Smad3, Smad5, and
Smad4 MH1 domains bound to the complete BMP-2-responsive probe. To
determine their binding specificity to the distinct motifs, we
performed similar assays using a probe containing the complete
responsive region with mutated CAGAC motifs as well as probes
exclusively containing the GC-overlapping motifs or a probe containing
the three CAGAC motifs.
Whereas Smad1, -3, and -5 bound the CAGAC-mutated complete probe as
well as the CAGAC and the GC regions, Smad4 showed lower affinity
binding to the CAGAC-mutated or GC probes compared with its the binding
to the CAGAC probe (Fig. 8, B, C, and
D). Taken together, these results suggest that BMP-2 induces
the association of BMP-restricted Smads and Smad4, which
synergistically bind to their preferentially bound GC and CAGAC motifs
and induce transcriptional activation of the Id1 gene.
In this study we have identified a BMP-2 immediate early response
region in the Id1 promoter in C2C12 cells and shown the basis of
selective BMP responsiveness of this region. The responsive region is
composed of two distinct DNA motifs, a set of overlapping GC boxes,
which preferentially bind pathway-restricted Smads, and three repeats
of CAGAC boxes. These two elements are capable of binding their
corresponding Smads separately. However, specific transcriptional
activation of Id1 promoter requires the synergistic cooperation of both
types of elements, since deletion or mutation of either element results
in almost a complete loss of BMP-2 responsiveness. In conclusion, our
present results suggest that cooperative direct binding of Smad
proteins to distinct DNA motifs could mediate activation of
BMP-specific target genes.
Id family members encode negative regulators of the bHLH transcription
factors that have been found to play a central role in the control of
mammalian development (6, 7, 49). Because Id proteins behave similarly
biochemically and most tissues appear to express multiple Id genes,
there are some levels of functional redundancy between different Id
genes. For instance, during neurogenesis and angiogenesis, the
expression patterns of Id1 and Id3 are highly overlapping with each other, which is supported by the fact that Id1 The role of Smads as nuclear effectors of TGF- Our genetic evidence strongly suggests that Smads play an essential
role in mediating this response. Cells with a targeted deletion of
Smad4 are unable to activate the Id1 reporter in
response to BMP-2, whereas complementation of these cells by expression of exogenous Smad4 restores BMP-2 responsiveness.
Furthermore, the ability to activate Id1 is specific to
BMP-activated Smads. Overexpression of BMP-activated Smads enhances
both the basal and BMP-stimulated transcriptional activity of this
promoter, whereas TGF- We have identified a set of three CAGAC sequences in the Id1
promoter as elements necessary for its responsiveness to BMP. The CAGAC
motif was originally identified as a binding site for Smad3 and -4 based on random oligonucleotide selection experiments (27). The crystal
structure of the MH1 domain of Smad3 bound to the CAGAC motif has been
solved (44). Three amino acids in a Our results, however, also show that these CAGAC boxes are not
sufficient for the BMP response. We have identified a nearby GC-rich
sequence (the "GC box") that is required, together with the CAGAC
boxes, for the BMP response. Previous work on the transcriptional activation of Dpp-target genes such us vestigial,
tinman, or Ultrabithorax in Drosophila
indicated a direct interaction of the Smad1 orthologue, Mad, with a
GC-rich motifs in the promoter region of these genes (29-31). We show
that activation of the BMP-signaling pathway results in
increased binding of Smad1 to the GC region from the
Id1 BMP response element. Furthermore, in
vitro this region binds recombinant Smad MH1 domains,
although Smad4 showed an apparent preference for binding to the CAGAC
region over the GC region (Fig. 8).
Pathway-restricted Smads have conserved differences in a few amino
acids in the DNA binding region, which could confer different binding
specificities. An interesting observation is that the helix H2 in the
MH1 domain of Smads contains several lysine residues that are
completely solvent exposed. BMP-activated Smads contain additional
lysine residues in the H2 helix that are not present in TGF- Several studies show that additional proteins may be required as DNA
binding cofactors in order for BMP-activated Smads to recognize
specific target genes (28, 32, 48, 56, 57). Although we cannot rule out
the requirement of additional proteins for Smad recognition of the
Id1 promoter, it is possible that the cooperative binding of
Smad1/5 and Smad4 to the GC box and the CAGAC boxes is sufficient for
the specificity of this recognition process. Sequence comparison of the
human, mouse, and rat Id1 genes reveals that the CAGAC and
GC boxes are highly conserved, whereas the sequences surrounding them
are less well conserved (see Fig. 5 for details). Furthermore, mutation
of Egr1 or Sp1 sites in the BMP-responsive region of Id1
results in at most a slight decrease in inducibility (Fig. 6), and
overexpression of Sp1 or Egr-1 does not augment the BMP response (data
not shown). Mutation of the single ATF/CREB site only partially
decreased the magnitude of the induction by BMP-2, which suggests some
level of cooperativity between ATF binding factors and Smad complexes (45, 46, 48, 58). Thus, none of the other recognizable sites within the
BMP-responsive region of the Id1 promoter appears to be
essential for this response.
The low binding affinity of Smads for isolated CAGAC or GC boxes would
explain the need to multimerize Smad binding motifs to obtain strongly
responsive reporter constructs (51, 53) and, more importantly, the
requirement for clusters of multiple Smad binding motifs in natural
promoter regions that may respond to Smads without the agency of other
DNA binding cofactors. It would also explain our observation that
either deletion of CAGAC or GC motifs abolishes the BMP responsiveness
of Id1. The co-operative binding ability of the Smad
subunits in the BMP-activated complex together with the geometry of
this complex and of the matching GC and CAGAC boxes in the
Id1 promoter may provide a strong and highly selective
interaction leading to transcriptional activation of this important
regulator of cell differentiation.
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
2 and C/EBPs for adipocytes or Cbfa1 for osteoblasts (1-3) as well as signal transduction regulators. One of the best known
regulators of cell differentiation is the family of basic helix-loop-helix (bHLH)1 transcription factors. Most of the
members of this family have been shown to be involved in the
development of different mammalian cell lineages. For example, two
members of the bHLH family, MyoD and myf-5, execute myogenic lineage
determination, whereas myogenin and MRF4 appear to execute the
differentiation program (4). Other examples include the bHLH factors
Mash1, Math, or neurogenin, which control neurogenesis in the nervous
system (5, 6). All the members of this family have the ability to homo-
or, more commonly, hetero-dimerize through their HLH domain and to bind DNA through their basic domain. Only one subfamily of HLH factors, known as Id proteins, lacks this basic region. Heterodimerization of Id
proteins with bHLH is sufficient to block both bHLH DNA binding and
function (7-9). Thus, Id proteins are mainly known as negative
regulators of the commitment or differentiation that the bHLH factors
promote not only in muscle cells but also in lymphoid or neurogenic
precursors (10-12). Four mammalian Id proteins have been identified,
Id-1 to -4, which have partially overlapping expression patterns and
certain levels of functional redundancy (7, 8). For instance, mammalian
Id1, -2, and -3 proteins are able to interact with E and/or myogenic
proteins inhibiting muscle differentiation, whereas Id4 fails in this
inhibition (13, 14).
superfamily of cytokines (21). Each
ligand of this family exerts its biological function by inducing the
formation of heteromeric complexes of specific type I and type II
serine/threonine kinase receptors. Then type II receptor phosphorylates
the type I receptor, which in turn propagates the signal inside the
cell. Although several BMP receptor substrates and signal transducers
may exist, the best known substrates and mediators of TGF-
family
receptors are the Smad family of transcription factors. Eight members
have been described for mammals, which fall into three subfamilies. The
R-Smads are directly phosphorylated by the activated receptors at
serine residues in their carboxyl terminus. R-Smads include Smads1, -5, and -8, which primarily function in BMP signaling, and the
TGF-
/activin/nodal-specific Smad2 and -3. After phosphorylation,
receptor-specific Smads hetero-oligomerize with Smad4, so far the only
co-Smad isolated from mammals, and translocate to the nucleus. The
third subfamily includes Smad6 and -7, which are named I-Smads for
their ability to inhibit receptor-mediated signaling (22, 23).
and BMP response elements (for review, see Ref. 24).
However, the MH1 domain of Mad, the Drosophila homologue of
Smad1/5, has been shown to bind a GC-rich sequence in Dpp-responsive
vestigial, Ultrabithorax, tinman, and
labial promoters (29-31). Smad binding to target promoters
usually involves additional factors that increase the affinity and
specificity of the resulting complex for the target DNA. A growing list
of examples includes the proteins OAZ and Cbfa1, which direct
BMP-activated Smads to Vent-2 (32) or
osteocalcin (33), respectively, Fast1 that directs
nodal activated Smads to Mix.2 (34), and Cbfa3 that directs
TGF-
-activated Smads to IgC
(35).
, relatively little is known about transcriptional regulation by
BMP in mammals and the interaction of mammalian Smads with natural
BMP-responsive promoters. In this study, we identified a
BMP-2-responsive region in the Id1 promoter, which is an immediate
early gene induced by BMP-2. This element is sufficient to confer BMP-2
responsiveness and requires Smad1/5 and Smad4 DNA binding motifs. These
data suggest that a combination of distinct DNA binding activities of
Smads is able to specify the choice of BMP-specific target genes
independent of other transcription factors.
![]()
MATERIALS AND METHODS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
1370 to
+86) was amplified by PCR and subcloned into pBluescript vector,
sequenced, and further subcloned into the promoterless luciferase
reporter vector pGL2-basic, pId1lux (Promega, Madison, WI).
Sequences of the primers used for the PCR were
5'-GACAAACTCTTCATCAGAGCTCGCT-3' (upstream) and
5'-CATGATTCTTGTCGACTGGCTGAAA-3' (downstream). 5' deletions were
generated through partial and total SmaI digestions using
the sites present in the vector and the promoter region. The pId 170 reporter construct (
170 to +86) corresponds to the minimal promoter
and includes the endogenous TATA box. The 183-bp fragment was subcloned
into SmaI sites of pId 170 or pGL2-fos, which contains the
minimal c-fos promoter.
GC, and pId 120 reporters.
pId GC was constructed by insertion of phosphorylated double-strand
oligonucleotides into pId 170. Sequences of the oligonucleotides
are 5'-CCATGGCGACCGCCCGCGCGGCGCCAGCCTGACAGTCCGTCCGGG-3' and its
complementary sequence. Oligonucleotide
5'-GTCTCCATGGCTTTTATGAATGGGTGACGTCACAGG-3' and its complementary
sequence was annealed and digested with NcoI plus
AatII and then subcloned into the pId 183. The resulting construct was digested with PstI plus NcoI,
blunt-ended, and religated to generate a reporter containing the
minimal promoter with an 80-bp fragment originated from the 183-bp
fragment. pId 120 plasmid was digested with AatII,
blunt-ended, and religated, generating the
ATF construct with a 4-bp
deletion. Point mutations were performed using the
QuikChangeTM site-directed mutagenesis kit (Stratagene, La
Jolla, CA). Construct integrity was confirmed by restriction analysis
and sequencing.
MH2 (corresponding to Met1 to
Ala229) and GST-Smad4
MH2 (from Met1 to
Glu321) were gifts from P. ten Dijke. GST-Smad5 MH1 (from
Met1 to Phe147) and GST-Smad1 MH1 (from
Met1 to Ser151) were generated by PCR and
subcloned in the pGEX 4T-1 (Amersham Biosciences, Inc.) and
verified by sequencing. Expression vector for FLAG-tagged Smad5 was
provided by R. Nishimura.
-Galactosidase Assays
1 (Sigma)
for 16 h. Luciferase activities were quantified using the
luciferase assay system (Promega). Luciferase values were normalized
using
-galactosidase activity measured with the luminescent
-galactosidase detection kit II (CLONTECH
Laboratories, Inc., Palo Alto, CA) and expressed as the mean ± S.E. assayed in triplicate in three to five independent experiments.
-32P]dCTP using standard procedures.
80 °C.
MH2,
GST-Smad4
MH2, and GST-Smad5 MH1) were grown and induced with 0.3 mM isopropyl-1-thio-
-D-galactopyranoside for
3 h. After sonication, fusion proteins were bound to with glutathione-Sepharose 4B (Amersham Biosciences, Inc.). After washing, MH1 domains were obtained by cleavage with thrombin protease (Amersham Biosciences, Inc.) at 22 °C for 16 h.
-32P]dATP using T4-polynucleotide
kinase (MBI Fermentas, Vilnius, Lithuania). 10 µg of nuclear proteins
or 500 ng of purified MH1 Smad recombinant proteins were diluted to a
final volume of 20 µl in a reaction mixture containing 20 mM Tris, pH 7.9, 50 mM NaCl, 10% glycerol, 0.1 mM dithiothreitol, 1.25 µg of poly(dI-dC). Samples were
incubated at room temperature for 10 min before adding 0.1 pmol of
labeled probe (5-10 × 104 cpm). After a 20-min
incubation, the reaction mixture was loaded onto a 5% polyacrylamide
gel, 0.25 × Tris-buffered EDTA, and 2.5% glycerol and
resolved at 20 mA for 2.5 h. Gels were dried and autoradiographed.
Where indicated, antibodies were added, and the reaction was incubated
for an additional 15 min before loading onto the gel.
![]()
RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (32K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Id1 induction by BMP-2 correlates with an
early pattern. C2C12 cells were treated with 1 nM
BMP-2 for different times. Total RNA was extracted, analyzed by
Northern blotting, and hybridized with the Id1 probe (A), or
total extracts were obtained and analyzed by Western blotting
(B). C, C2C12 cells were treated with BMP-2 alone
or with cycloheximide (CHX) or actinomycin-D (Act
D) for 1 h. Total RNA was extracted, and Id expression was
measured by Northern blot analysis.
1370 to +86) by PCR and subcloned into the promoterless
luciferase reporter vector pGL2-basic (referred thereafter as pId-lux).
This region contains the TATA box as well as the transcription
initiation site (at position +1) (41). Using this promoter-enhancer
sequence to drive expression of a luciferase reporter gene, we observed
strong dose-response effects after BMP-2 addition (10-15-fold
induction at 1 nM) when transfected in C2C12 cells (Fig.
2A). We then examined the time
course of Id1 reporter induction by BMP-2 in further detail. It has
been shown that the reporter construct p3TP-lux binds Smad3 and -4 and
confers immediate responses to TGF-
(42). As shown in Fig. 2B, C2C12 cells transfected with pId1 lux reporter construct
and treated with BMP-2 gave an even faster pattern of induction than cells transfected with p3TP-lux and treated with TGF-
. It has been
shown that TGF-
blocks myogenic differentiation of C2C12 cells by a
mechanism independent of Id1 and induces only a very modest
up-regulation of Id1 compared with the strong induction observed by
BMP-2 (38). To determine whether pId-lux drives BMP-specific
transcriptional responses, we transfected this construct into C2C12
cells. Incubation with 200 pM TGF-
in serum-depleted media for 16 h induced a marginal increase (2-fold) in reporter activity compared with the induction by BMP-2, suggesting the presence
of a response element highly specific for BMP-2 (Fig. 2C).
We also examined whether this promoter was BMP-2-inducible in different
cell types. Mesenchymal C2C12 and C3H10T1/2 cells gave a BMP-2
responsiveness of 12- and 6-fold, respectively, whereas the epithelial
Mv1Lu cell line also allowed induction by BMP-2 although to a much
lesser extent (Fig. 2D). Altogether, these results suggest
that this promoter sequence contains the necessary information to
mediate BMP-2-dependent transcriptional activation of Id1,
which is consistent with the transcriptional activation of the Id1 gene
in C2C12 cells.

View larger version (21K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Identification of a BMP-2-responsive region
in the Id1 promoter. A and C, C2C12 cells
were transfected with the reporter pId1lux. 24 h later, cells were
incubated with 0, 2, 5, 20, 50, 200, 500, or 1000 pM BMP-2
for 16 h (A) or 1 nM BMP-2
(B-D) or 200 pM TGF-
(B and
C) in DMEM supplemented with 0.1% fetal calf serum.
B, cells were transfected with pId1lux or 3TPlux and, the
day after transfection, were treated with BMP-2 or TGF-
,
respectively, for different times, and luciferase activity was assayed.
D, C2C12, Mv1Lu, and C3H10T1/2 cells were transfected with
the pId1lux reporter vector and treated for 16 h with BMP-2. The
results are shown as the mean ± S.E. of triplicates of three to
five independent experiments.
1370 to
1046 can be deleted with a slight decrease in BMP-2-induced
luciferase activity (Fig. 3A). The further removal of the region between
1046 to
863, however, resulted in a complete loss of BMP-2 responsiveness (Fig.
3A) without significant changes in basal reporter activity
(data not shown). To test whether the 183-bp region (comprised between
1046 and
863) alone has the ability to render a minimal promoter
responsive to BMP-2, we assayed the BMP-2 responses of two luciferase
constructs containing this 183-bp region upstream of either a minimal
Id1 (from
170 to +86) or a heterologous c-fos minimal
promoter. As shown in Fig. 3B, minimal promoters showed no
response at all to BMP-2, whereas the cytokine activated both
constructs bearing the enhancer. Moreover, this element behaves like a
classical enhancer with similar activities when placed in both
orientations (data not shown). Thus, these data suggest that the region
from
1046 to
863 is necessary and sufficient for BMP-2
responsiveness of the Id1 gene expression.

View larger version (22K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Characterization of Id promoter region
required for BMP-2 responsiveness. A, a series of 5'
deletions of the 1.5-kilobase upstream region of the Id promoter were
transfected in C2C12 cells. After treatment with BMP-2 1 nM
for 16 h, luciferase activity was assayed. Nucleotides are
numbered with respect to the transcription start site. B,
the region comprised between
1046 and
863 was subcloned into the
minimal non-responsive Id1 promoter (pId 170) or an heterologous
c-fos minimal promoter and transfected in C2C12 cells.
24 h later, cells were treated with BMP-2 for 16 h. The
results are shown as the mean ± S.E. of triplicates of three to
five independent experiments.
and activin responses (27, 43). As shown in Fig. 4B, this
Smad4-deficient clone exhibited a complete loss of BMP-2 responsiveness
compared with the control HCT116 cells. In addition, co-transfection of increasing doses of Smad4 expression vector increased the basal luciferase activities in both cell lines and partially restored transcriptional responses to BMP-2 in the Smad4-deficient clone 5-18. Altogether, these data suggest that both Smad1 and -5, in conjunction
with Smad4, can function as effectors of the BMP-2-induced transcription of the Id1 gene.

View larger version (19K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Involvement of Smads in Id1 induction by
BMP-2. C2C12 cells were cotransfected with the pId 183 reporter in
combination with Smads (A), HCT-116 cells and a
Smad4-deficient clone, 5-18, were transfected with the pId 183 reporter, alone or with increasing amounts of Smad4 expression vector
(B). Luciferase assays were performed after 16 h of
treatment with 1 nM BMP-2. Total DNA was kept constant by
the addition of empty vector. Results are shown as the mean ± S.E. of triplicates of three to five independent experiments.
1046 to
985, which includes
a CAGAC box, did not change BMP-2-dependent reporter
inducibility when transfected into C2C12 cells (Fig. 5B).
However, further deletion up to
945 or
925, which eliminates YY1,
Sp1, and Egr1 binding sites in a GC-rich region, lead to almost a
complete suppression of induction of reporter activity. Similarly, an
internal deletion of this GC-rich region (pId 183
GC) also abolished
cytokine responses. In addition, constructs including 3' deletions
including the three CAGAC boxes also showed loss of BMP-2
responsiveness (Fig. 5B). Taken together, the above results indicated that two separate elements, with no sequence homology between
them, were the critical determinants in the Id1 promoter-enhancer for
the BMP-2 responsiveness.

View larger version (35K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Two separate elements are required for BMP-2
responsiveness. A, nucleotide sequence of the 183-bp
responsive region. This 183-bp region includes different consensus
sequences: 4 CAGAC boxes and YY1, Egr1, Sp1, ATF/CREB binding sites.
The nucleotides underlined and in bold correspond
to divergences between human and mouse or rat sequences in this region
of the Id1 promoter. B, deletion analysis of the 183-bp
region, from
1046 to
863. As indicated, appropriate deleted
constructs were transfected in C2C12 cells, and luciferase assay was
performed as described. Results are shown as the mean ± S.E. of
triplicates of three to five independent experiments.
985 to
863) with the corresponding mutations listed in Fig.
6A. As shown in Fig. 6B, point mutation of the Egr1 site (mEgr1) did not show significant effects on
luciferase inducibility by BMP-2. However, point mutations that disrupt
the two overlapping GC boxes located more 5' (GCmut1) showed about half
the inducibility compared with the wild type promoter. Moreover, mutations of the three GC boxes located more 3' (GCmut2) or disruption of four GC boxes (GCmut3) strongly decreased BMP-2 responsiveness to a
levels similar to those obtained with a full deletion of the GC region
(previously shown in Fig. 5B). We also analyzed the effects
of mutating an ATF/CREB site located between these CAGAC and GC
essential regions. ATF/CREB sites and CREB or ATF-2 binding activity
have been shown to cooperate with Smads in some TGF-
or BMP
transcriptional responses (45-48). Fig. 6B shows that point
mutation of the ATF/CREB site resulted in 20% inhibition of BMP-2
inducibility.

View larger version (32K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 6.
Mutational analysis of the GC-rich
enhancer. A, nucleotide sequence of the 120-bp region.
Consensus sites are boxed, and substituted nucleotides are
in bold. B, C2C12 cells were transfected with
constructs containing the indicated mutations. After treatment with 1 nM BMP-2, cells were lysed, and luciferase activity was
measured. The results are shown as the mean ± S.E. of triplicates
of three to five independent experiments.
985/
863) (Fig. 7A,
left panel). On the contrary, Smad3 did not show significant
binding either alone or in combination with Smad4 (Fig. 7A,
right panel). To further characterize their binding
specificities as well as the effects of receptor activation for Smad
binding, we performed electrophoretic mobility shift assays.
FLAG-tagged Smad1 was expressed in HEK-293-T cells in the presence or
absence of a constitutively active form of BMPR-IB, BMPR-IB(QD). As
shown in Fig. 7B, Smad1 bound to the GC-rich probe as a
broad band plus other weaker bands of lower mobility, and this binding
is enhanced by coexpression of BMPR-IB(QD) (third versus
second lanes). These multiple bands could represent various forms of DNA binding complexes because of the multiple GC binding sites
present in the enhancer, or alternatively, the Smad1-containing complexes could also incorporate endogenous Smads or coactivators in
HEK-293-T cells. To further confirm that those bands correspond, in
fact, Smad-containing complexes, the addition of anti-FLAG antibody
supershifted the complexes (fourth and fifth lanes). We also
used the complete BMP-responsive region as a probe to be shifted by the
same extracts, obtaining similar results to those of the GC region
alone (data not shown).

View larger version (48K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 7.
Smads are capable of binding the
BMP-2-responsive region. A, HEK-293-T cells were
transfected with FLAG-epitope or Myc epitope-tagged Smads as indicated.
Two days later total extracts were obtained, and oligonucleotide
pull-down assay was performed using biotinylated double-stranded
oligonucleotides corresponding to the 120-bp region (see "Materials
and Methods" for sequence). Total extracts and the precipitated
complexes were analyzed by immunoblotting using anti-FLAG and anti-Myc
antibodies. B, nuclear extracts were obtained 2 days after
transfection of HEK-293-T cells with FLAG epitope-tagged Smad1. After
the addition of 32P-labeled probe, extracts (10 µg of
protein) were incubated with anti-FLAG antibody (Ab) where
indicated. The probe corresponds to the GC-rich region (described under
"Materials and Methods"). Smad overexpression was tested by Western
blot (Wb) with anti-FLAG antibody (data not shown).
BMPR-IB(OD), constitutively active BMP type I receptor.
C, C2C12 cells were treated with BMP-2 for 1 h, and the
pull-down assay was performed using biotinylated double-stranded
oligonucleotides corresponding to the BRE, the Id1-responsive 120-bp
region as well as the 120-bp oligonucleotide containing the three CAGAC
boxes mutated (120mut). Oligo-bound Smad1 and Smad4 were monitored by
Western blot with specific anti-Smad1 and anti-Smad4 antibodies.

View larger version (92K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 8.
Smads directly binds to the GC-rich and the
CAGAC regions. Purified Smad MH1 domains were tested for DNA
binding. Gel shift was performed using 32P-labeled probes
for the complete 120-bp BMP-2-responsive region (A), the
120-bp region containing the three CAGAC boxes mutated (120mut)
(B), the overlapping GC motifs (C), or the three
CAGAC boxes (D).
![]()
DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
/
;Id3
/
double
knock-out is required for neurogenesis and angiogenesis in
vivo (49). BMP has been shown to generate the same profile of
induction for both Id1 and -3 in myogenic and neurogenic cell lines
(39). Interestingly, sequence analysis of the Id3 promoter reveals a region with a pattern of GC motifs and CAGAC boxes spaced similarly to those present in the Id1 promoter, raising the
possibility that BMP-activated Smads may coordinately induce of
Id1 and Id3. BMP induction of Id
family members may function as a molecular switch, inhibiting
developmental programs such as myogenesis or neurogenesis, which are
regulated by bHLH transcription factors, thereby promoting the
initiation of alternative programs such as osteogenesis or
astrocytogenesis (6, 20, 38, 49).
family signals is
well established (for review, see Refs. 24 and 25). However, the
molecular events that allow selective regulation of many important
target genes of the TGF-
family remain to be defined. Only a few
mammalian BMP-responsive promoters have been characterized (50-53).
The relatively low DNA binding affinity and specificity of Smads has
limited the progress in this area. Some of the BMP-responsive elements
described to date do not discriminate between BMP, activin, or TGF-
signals (51), or their responsiveness in reporter constructs requires
multimerization of BMP response elements or overexpression of
BMP-signaling molecules (51-53). In contrast to these properties, the
BMP-responsive region of Id1 identified here specifically
responds to BMP-2 without the need for further modification of the
promoter/enhancer region or overexpression of BMP pathway components.
-activated Smads do not.
-hairpin that contact DNA are
invariant among all Smads, suggesting that BMP and
TGF-
/activin-specific Smads share this DNA contacting ability.
Indeed, Smad1 has been shown to bind to the CAGAC sequence both
in vitro (44) and in target promoters (32, 42, 53). Our
results show that these CAGAC boxes in the Id1 promoter are essential for its response to BMP.
/activin
Smads (44). Structural studies suggested that this H2 helix could be
modeled into the major groove of DNA, and basic residues have been
shown to bind preferentially GC rich sequences (44, 54). In agreement
with this, it has been recently shown that point mutations in the H2
helix are important for specific DNA binding and transcriptional
activation of Smad3 (55).
| |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
We thank all the members of our labs, especially Lluís Riera, Cristina Cruz, and Joan Seoane for their help and Esther Adanero for technical assistance. We also thank Drs. P. ten Dijke, B. Vogelstein, and R. Nishimura for gifts of plasmids and cells. We also thank the Genetics Institute for recombinant BMP-2.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* This work was supported by Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia Grant PM98-0183.The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
§ Supported by a doctoral fellowship from the Ministerio de Educación y Ciencia (F.P.I.).
¶ Supported by a doctoral fellowship from the Fundació Pi i Sunyer.
** To whom correspondence should be addressed: Unitat de Bioquímica, Campus de Bellvitge, Universitat de Barcelona, Feixa Llarga s/n, 08907 L'Hospitalet de Llobregat, Spain. Tel.: 34-93-4024281; Fax: 34-93-4024213; E-mail: fventura@bellvitge.bvg.ub.es.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, November 7, 2001, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M106826200
| |
ABBREVIATIONS |
|---|
The abbreviations used are:
bHLH, basic
helix-loop-helix;
TGF-
, transforming growth factor
;
BMP, bone
morphogenetic protein;
CREB, cAMP-response element-binding protein;
ATF, activating transcription factor HEK-293-T;
DMEM, Dulbecco's
modified Eagle's medium;
HEK cells, human embryonic kidney cells;
bp, base pair(s);
GST, glutathione S-transferase.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Brun, R. P., Kim, J. B., Hu, E., Altiok, S., and Spiegelman, B. M. (1996) Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 8, 826-832[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 2. | Rodan, G. A., and Harada, S. (1997) Cell 89, 677-680[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 3. | Spiegelman, B. M., and Flier, J. S. (1996) Cell 87, 377-389[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 4. | Rawls, A., and Olson, E. N. (1997) Cell 89, 5-8[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 5. | Lee, J. L. (1997) Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 7, 13-20[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 6. | Cai, L., Morrow, E. M., and Cepko, C. L. (2000) Development 127, 3021-3030[Abstract] |
| 7. | Norton, J. D., Deed, R. W., Craggs, G., and Sablitzky, F. (1998) Trends Cell Biol. 8, 58-65[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 8. | Norton, J. D. (2000) J. Cell Sci. 113, 3897-3905[Abstract] |
| 9. | Benezra, R., Davis, R. L., Turner, D. L., and Weintraub, H. (1990) Cell 61, 49-59[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 10. | Sun, X-H. (1994) Cell 79, 893-900[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 11. |
Spits, H.,
Couwenberg, F.,
Bakker, A. Q.,
Weijer, K.,
and Uittenbogaart, C. H.
(2000)
J. Exp. Med.
192,
1775-1783 |
| 12. | Kee, B. L., Rivera, R. R., and Murre, C. (2001) Nat. Immunol. 2, 242-247[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 13. |
Langlands, K.,
Yin, X.,
Anand, G.,
and Prochownik, E. V.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
19785-19793 |
| 14. | Melkinova, I. N., Bounpheng, M., Schatteman, G. C., Gilliam, D., and Christy, B. A. (1999) Exp. Cell Res. 247, 94-104[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 15. |
Yamaguchi, A.,
Katagiri, T.,
Ikeda, T.,
Wozney, J. M.,
Rosen, V.,
Wang, E. A.,
Kahn, A. J.,
Suda, T.,
and Yoshiki, S.
(1991)
J. Cell Biol.
113,
681-687 |
| 16. | Katagiri, T., Akuyama, S., Namiki, M., Komaki, M., Yamaguchi, A., Rosen, V., Wozney, J. M, Fujisama-Sehara, A., and Suda, T. (1997) Exp. Cell Res. 230, 342-351[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 17. |
Chalaux, E.,
López-Rovira, T.,
Rosa, J. L.,
Bartrons, R.,
and Ventura, F.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
537-543 |
| 18. |
Urist, M. R.,
DeLange, R. J.,
and Finerman, G. A.
(1983)
Science
220,
680-686 |
| 19. |
Ogata, T.,
Wozney, J. M.,
Benezra, R.,
and Noda, M.
(1993)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
90,
9219-9222 |
| 20. |
Nakashima, K.,
Takizawa, T.,
Ochiai, W.,
Yanagisawa, M.,
Hisatsune, T.,
Nakafuku, M.,
Miyazono, K.,
Kageyama, R.,
and Taga, T.
(2001)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
98,
5868-5873 |
| 21. | Massagué, J., Blain, S. W., and Lo, R. S. (2000) Cell 103, 295-309[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 22. |
Piek, E.,
Heldin, C. H.,
and ten Dijke, P.
(1999)
FASEB J.
13,
2105-2124 |
| 23. | ten Dijke, P., Miyazono, K., and Heldin, C. H. (2000) Trends Biochem. Sci. 25, 64-70[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 24. | Massagué, J., and Wotton, D. (2000) EMBO J. 19, 1745-1754[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 25. | Itoh, S., Itoh, F., Goumans, M. J., and ten Dijke, P. (2000) Eur. J. Biochem. 267, 6954-6967[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 26. | Wrana, J. L. (2000) Cell 100, 189-192[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 27. | Zawel, L., Dai, J. L., Buckhaults, P., Zhou, S., Kinzler, K. W., Vogelstein, B., and Kern, S. E. (1998) Mol. Cell 1, 611-617[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 28. |
Shi, X.,
Yang, X.,
Chen, D.,
Chang, Z.,
and Cao, X.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
13711-13717 |
| 29. | Kim, J., Johnson, K., Chen, H. J., Carroll, S., and Laughon, A. (1997) Nature 388, 304-308[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 30. |
Xu, X.,
Yin, Z.,
Hudson, J. B.,
Ferguson, E. L.,
and Frasch, M.
(1998)
Genes Dev.
12,
2354-2370 |
| 31. | Raftery, L. A., and Sutherland, D. J. (1999) Dev. Biol. 210, 251-268[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 32. | Hata, A., Seoane, J., Lagna, G., Montalvo, E., Hemmati-Brivanlou, A., and Massagué, J. (2000) Cell 100, 229-240[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 33. |
Zhang, Y. W.,
Yasui, N.,
Ito, K.,
Huang, G.,
Fujii, M.,
Hanai, J. I.,
Nogami, H.,
Ochi, T.,
Miyazono, K.,
and Ito, Y.
(2000)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
97,
10549-10554 |
| 34. | Chen, X., Rubock, M., and Whitman, M. (1997) Nature. 383, 691-696 |
| 35. |
Hanai, J. I.,
Chen, L. F.,
Kanno, T.,
Ohtani-Fujita, N.,
Kim, W. Y.,
Guo, W. H.,
Imamura, T.,
Ishidou, Y.,
Fukuchi, M.,
Shi, M. J.,
Stavnezer, J.,
Kaxabata, M.,
Miyazono, K.,
and Ito, Y.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
31577-31582 |
| 36. | Ausubel, F. M., Brent, R., Kingsotn, R. E., Moore, D. D., Seidman, J. G., Smith, J. A., and Struhl, K. (1992) Current Protocols in Molecular Biology, Chapter 9.1 , John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York |
| 37. |
López-Rovira, T.,
Chalaux, E.,
Rosa, J. L.,
Bartrons, R.,
and Ventura, F.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
28937-28946 |
| 38. |
Katagiri, T.,
Yamaguchi, A.,
Komaki, M.,
Abe, E.,
Takahashi, N.,
Ikeda, T.,
Rosen, V.,
Wozney, J. M.,
Fujisawa-Sehara, A.,
and Suda, T.
(1994)
J. Cell Biol.
127,
1755-1766 |
| 39. |
Hollnagel, A.,
Oehlmann, V.,
Heymer, J.,
Rüther, U.,
and Nordheim, A.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
19838-19845 |
| 40. |
Bounpheng, M. A.,
Dimas, J. J.,
Dodds, S. G.,
and Christy, B. A.
(1999)
FASEB J.
13,
2257-2264 |
| 41. | Tournay, O., and Benezra, R. (1996) Mol. Cell. Biol. 16, 2418-2430[Abstract] |
| 42. | Dennler, S., Itoh, S., Vivien, D., ten Dijke, P., Huet, S., and Gauthier, J. M. (1998) EMBO J. 17, 3091-3100[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 43. |
Zhou, S.,
Buchaults, P.,
Zawel, L.,
Bunz, F.,
Riggins, G., Le,
Dai, J.,
Kern, S. E.,
Kinzler, K. W.,
and Vogelstein, B.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
2412-2416 |
| 44. | Shi, Y. (2001) Bioessays 23, 223-232[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 45. |
Hanafusa, H.,
Ninomiya, J.,
Masuyama, N.,
Nishita, M.,
Fujisawa, J.,
Matsumoto, K.,
and Nishida, E.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
27161-27167 |
| 46. |
Sano, Y.,
Harada, J.,
Tashiro, S.,
Gotoh-Mandeville, R.,
Maekawa, T.,
and Ishii, S.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
8949-8957 |
| 47. |
Zhang, Y.,
and Derynck, R.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
16979-16985 |
| 48. |
Monzen, K.,
Hiroi, Y.,
Kudoh, S.,
Akazawa, H.,
Oka, T.,
Takimoto, E.,
Hayashi, D.,
Hosoda, T.,
Kawabata, M.,
Miyazono, K.,
Ishii, S.,
Yazaki, Y.,
Nagai, R.,
and Komuro, I.
(2001)
J. Cell Biol.
153,
687-698 |
| 49. | Lyden, D., Young, A. Z., Zagzag, D., Yan, W., Gerald, W., O'Reilly, R., Bader, B. L., Hynes, R. O., Zhuang, Y., Manova, K., and Benezra, R. (1999) Nature 401, 670-677[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 50. | Tang, S. J., Hoodless, P. A., Lu, Z., Breitman, M. L, McInnes, R. R, Wrana, J. L., and Buchwald, M. (1998) Development 125, 1877-1887[Abstract] |
| 51. |
Jonk, L. J. C.,
Itoh, S.,
Heldin, C. H.,
ten Dijke, P.,
and Kruijer, W.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
21145-21152 |
| 52. |
Ishida, W.,
Hamamoto, T.,
Kusanagi, K.,
Yagi, K.,
Kawabata, M.,
Takehara, K.,
Sampath, T. K.,
Kato, M.,
and Miyazono, K.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
6075-6079 |
| 53. |
Kusanagi, K.,
Inoue, H.,
Ishidou, Y.,
Mishima, H. K.,
Kawabata, M.,
and Miyazono, K.
(2000)
Mol. Biol. Cell
11,
555-565 |
| 54. | Choo, Y., and Klug, A. (1997) Curr. Opin. Struct. Biol. 7, 117-125[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 55. |
Kusanagi, K.,
Kawabata, M.,
Mishma, H. K.,
and Miyazono, K.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
28155-28163 |
| 56. |
Chen, YG,
Hata, A., Lo, R. S.,
Wotton, D.,
Shi, Y.,
Pavletich, N.,
and Massague, J.
(1998)
Genes Dev.
12,
2144-2152 |
| 57. | Hullinger, T. G., Pan, Q., Viswanathan, H. L., and Somerman, M. (2001) Exp. Cell Res. 262, 69-74[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 58. | Eresh, S., Riese, J., Jackson, D. B., Bohmann, D., and Bienz, M. (1997) EMBO J. 16, 2014-2022[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
O. Gautschi, C. G. Tepper, P. R. Purnell, Y. Izumiya, C. P. Evans, T. P. Green, P. Y. Desprez, P. N. Lara, D. R. Gandara, P. C. Mack, et al. Regulation of Id1 Expression by Src: Implications for Targeting of the Bone Morphogenetic Protein Pathway in Cancer Cancer Res., April 1, 2008; 68(7): 2250 - 2258. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. R. Grimmer and |