|
Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M104595200 on October 29, 2001
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 6, 4206-4214, February 8, 2002
Isolation and Characterization of a Novel
Calmodulin-binding Protein from Potato*
Anireddy S. N.
Reddy ,
Irene S.
Day,
S. B.
Narasimhulu,
Farida
Safadi,
Vaka S.
Reddy,
Maxim
Golovkin, and
Melissa J.
Harnly
From the Department of Biology and Program in Cell and Molecular
Biology, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, Colorado 80523
Received for publication, May 20, 2001, and in revised form, September 24, 2001
 |
ABSTRACT |
Tuberization in potato is controlled by hormonal
and environmental signals. Ca2+, an important
intracellular messenger, and calmodulin (CaM), one of the primary
Ca2+ sensors, have been implicated in controlling diverse
cellular processes in plants including tuberization. The regulation of cellular processes by CaM involves its interaction with other proteins.
To understand the role of Ca2+/CaM in tuberization, we have
screened an expression library prepared from developing tubers with
biotinylated CaM. This screening resulted in isolation of a cDNA
encoding a novel CaM-binding protein (potato calmodulin-binding protein
(PCBP)). Ca2+-dependent binding of the
cDNA-encoded protein to CaM is confirmed by 35S-labeled
CaM. The full-length cDNA is 5 kb long and encodes a protein of
1309 amino acids. The deduced amino acid sequence showed significant
similarity with a hypothetical protein from another plant,
Arabidopsis. However, no homologs of PCBP are found
in nonplant systems, suggesting that it is likely to be specific to
plants. Using truncated versions of the protein and a synthetic peptide
in CaM binding assays we mapped the CaM-binding region to a 20-amino
acid stretch (residues 1216-1237). The bacterially expressed protein
containing the CaM-binding domain interacted with three CaM isoforms
(CaM2, CaM4, and CaM6). PCBP is encoded by a single gene and is
expressed differentially in the tissues tested. The expression of CaM,
PCBP, and another CaM-binding protein is similar in different tissues
and organs. The predicted protein contained seven putative nuclear
localization signals and several strong PEST motifs. Fusion of
the N-terminal region of the protein containing six of the seven
nuclear localization signals to the reporter gene
-glucuronidase targeted the reporter gene to the nucleus,
suggesting a nuclear role for PCBP.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
In plants, hormonal and environmental signals control many aspects
of growth and development. In recent years, Ca2+ has
emerged as an important messenger in controlling many normal growth and
developmental processes and in eliciting responses to biotic and
abiotic stresses (1-5). A tip-focused Ca2+ gradient has
been shown to be important for the growth of root hairs and pollen
tubes (6-8). Furthermore, diverse signals including hormones, light,
touch, wind, cold, drought, oxidative stress, nodulation factors, and
fungal elicitors have been shown to cause a transient increase in free
Ca2+ in the cytoplasm (2, 5, 9, 10). Ca2+
sensors then transmit the changes in cytosolic Ca2+ level
to cellular metabolic processes. Plants have at least four major
families of Ca2+ sensors: (i) calmodulin
(CaM)1; (ii) CaM-like and
other EF-hand containing Ca2+-binding proteins; (iii)
Ca2+-regulated protein kinases; and (iv)
Ca2+-binding proteins without EF-hand motifs (2). An
EF-hand is a helix-loop-helix that binds Ca2+.
CaM, a highly conserved well characterized Ca2+ sensor in
eukaryotes, is a small protein with four EF-hands that each bind
Ca2+ (11). The EF-hands are paired in two globular domains
connected by a central helix (12). In plants, CaM is encoded by
multiple genes that have been shown to be expressed differentially (11, 13-17). In addition, different CaM isoforms are known to interact differentially with the target proteins (18-22). Binding of
Ca2+ to CaM results in a conformational change that exposes
hydrophobic pockets that can then interact with target proteins (23,
24). CaM mediates intracellular Ca2+ by regulating the
activity/function of diverse proteins in a Ca2+-dependent manner. The physiological
response that is elicited by the elevated cytosolic Ca2+
signal is derived, to some extent, from the expression patterns and
activities of the proteins regulated by CaM (11). In a few cases CaM
can interact with its target proteins in the absence of
Ca2+ (2).
Identification and characterization of calmodulin-binding proteins
(CBPs) is critical to the understanding of
Ca2+/CaM-mediated signaling pathways. The CaM-binding
domain of CBPs is not conserved; hence, biochemical and molecular
methods based on protein-protein interaction have been used to identify
CBPs (25-28). These methods have allowed identification of several
plant CBPs that are involved in morphogenesis, cell division, cell
elongation, ion transport, gene regulation, cytoskeletal organization,
cytoplasmic streaming, pollen function, and stress tolerance (2, 11, 29).
Potato is the fourth most important crop, and understanding of
molecular events in potato tuber initiation and development is of
importance for manipulation of these processes to improve the yield and
quality of potato (30). Both environmental and hormonal factors affect
tuberization. Three factors have a major effect on tuberization:
nitrogen levels, temperature, and light. High nitrogen levels were
found to prevent tuberization, but how nitrogen levels control
tuberization is not known (31). Some evidence shows that a withdrawal
of nitrogen affects phytohormone levels, causing a reduction in
gibberellic acid (GA) and an increase in abscisic acid, whereas other
evidence indicates that the nitrogen/carbohydrate ratio is involved
(31, 32). High temperature is also an inhibitor of tuberization and may
also be mediated by GA levels. In one study, an inhibitor of GA
biosynthesis overcame the inhibition of tuberization caused by high
temperature (33). Light intensity as well as day length affects
tuberization. Potato is a short day plant (the length of the dark
period is the important factor) (34). Low light intensity delays
tuberization even in short day conditions, and as is the case with
nitrogen levels, both GA and carbohydrate have been implicated as
mediators (30). The photoperiodism response of tuberization has to be
transmitted from the leaf to the underground stolons, and GA has been
implicated in this response also (30).
There is some evidence indicating the involvement of
Ca2+/CaM in tuberization (35, 36). Potato leaf cuttings
could be induced to produce tubers under short day conditions.
Ca2+ depletion in the leaf cuttings prevented tuberization,
and subsequent to Ca2+ depletion, if the leaf cuttings were
transferred to CaCl2 solution, tuber development occurred
(35). In addition, treatment of leaf cuttings with CaM antagonists was
found to inhibit tuberization (35). Transfer of the leaf cuttings that
were pretreated with CaM antagonists to medium with no antagonists
reversed the inhibition. Furthermore, transgenic potato plants with a
moderate increase in expression of a CaM gene (PCM1) produced elongated
tubers, whereas a large increase of PCM1 inhibited tuber formation and increased stolon elongation (36). Eight CaM (PCM1-PCM8) genes have
been isolated and characterized from potato (16, 37). The expression
patterns of these genes differed in various tissues (16, 37). These
studies indicate regulation of tuberization by
Ca2+/CaM.
To identify CaM-binding proteins that mediate CaM action in
tuberization, we have used labeled CaM to screen an expression library
prepared from developing tubers. A full-length clone of a novel
CaM-binding protein (potato calmodulin-binding protein (PCBP)) was
isolated in this screen. Ca2+-dependent binding
of PCBP to CaM was confirmed using both biotinylated and
35S-labeled CaM. The CaM-binding site was mapped to a
stretch of 22 amino acids. Bacterially expressed PCBP interacted with
three CaM isoforms. Fusion of the N-terminal region of PCBP to a
cytosolic reporter gene targeted the fusion protein to the nucleus,
indicating a nuclear role for PCBP.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Materials--
Easy tag [35S] isotope labeling mix
was obtained from PerkinElmer Life Sciences. Exassist helper phage and
Escherichia coli SOLR cells were from Stratagene. Triton
X-100 free nitrocellulose filter discs were obtained from Millipore.
Nitroblue tetrazoleum, 5-bromo-4-chloro-3-indolyl phosphate, and IPTG
were obtained from Invitrogen. pET vectors and E. coli
strain BL21 (DE3) were purchased from Novagen. Gelatin and
diaminobenzidene were obtained from Sigma. Biotinylated CaM and
bovine CaM were procured from Calbiochem. Avidin/biotin blocking
reagents and Vectastain ABC horseradish peroxidase kit were obtained
from Vector Laboratories. The complete protease inhibitor mix was from
Roche Molecular Biochemicals. Bovine CaM Sepharose-4B was obtained from
Amersham Biosciences, Inc. Immobilon membrane was obtained from
Millipore. Potato plants were grown in the greenhouse at 26 °C
(day)/18 °C (night).
Screening of Potato Expression Library with Biotinylated
CaM--
A potato cDNA expression library was screened using
biotinylated CaM following the procedure described previously (26, 27). The cDNA library in Zap II was made from RNA isolated from
swelling stolon tips of potato (38). About 5 × 104
plaque-forming units were plated on each plate using E. coli XL1-blue MRA as the host strain. The plates were incubated at 42 °C
until the plaques appeared. Then the plates were overlaid with
nitrocellulose filters that were presoaked in 10 mM IPTG. The plaques were allowed to grow overnight at 37 °C, the plates were
cooled to 4 °C, and the filters were removed and rinsed briefly in
TNMC buffer (50 mM Tris, pH 7.5, 0.2 M NaCl, 50 mM MgCl2, 0.5 mM CaCl2)
at room temperature. The filters were blocked for 1 h in the above
buffer containing 3% (w/v) gelatin at 30 °C, rinsed, and blocked
with avidin and biotin as described earlier (26). The filters were then
incubated in TNMC buffer containing biotinylated CaM (1 µg/ml) and
1% gelatin for 3 h at 30 °C. The filters were washed and
transferred to TMNC buffer containing Vectastain ABC-horseradish peroxidase reagent (avidin DH-biotinylated horseradish peroxidase H
complex) at 30 °C. The filters were washed twice, and the positive plaques were identified by incubating them in a substrate solution (0.8 mg/ml diaminobenzidine, 0.4 mg/ml NiCl2, and 0.009%
H2O2 in 100 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.5).
Screening of about a million recombinants resulted in the isolation of
10 putative CaM-binding clones, which were purified by two additional
rounds of screening. The cDNA clones were excised in
vivo in a plasmid (pBluescript) form following standard procedures.
Confirmation of Positive Clones with 35S-Labeled
CaM--
Ca2+-dependent binding of the
isolated clones to CaM was further confirmed with
35S-labeled CaM. An E. coli strain UT481
containing a CaM gene in an expression vector (pVUCH-1) was used to
label CaM with [35S]methionine (26, 39). Preparation of
35S-CaM was described earlier (26). A cDNA ( ICM-1)
encoding a Ca2+/CaM-dependent protein kinase
from mouse was used as a positive control (40).
DNA Sequencing and Analysis--
The cDNA insert from each
clone was sequenced by a dideoxynucleotide chain termination method
using double-stranded DNA as a template. Both strands of cDNAs were
sequenced. Nucleotide sequences were assembled and analyzed using
MacVector and Sequencher. BLAST searches were performed at the websites
of the National Center for Biotechnology Information and the
Arabidopsis Information Resource. Nuclear localization and
PEST signals were identified using ExPASy Proteomics tools
(www.expasy. ch/tools).
Construction of Recombinant Plasmids to Express Fusion
Proteins--
Two constructs expressing truncated fusion proteins (pET
1.1 and pET 0.3) were prepared in pET28 expression vector. A
1.1-kb SacI/SalI cDNA fragment
corresponding to the C-terminal end of the protein (amino acids
976-1309) was cloned into a pET28c vector that is digested with the
same enzymes to generate pET 1.1 construct. The second construct (pET
0.3) containing the coding region for residues 976-1098 was made by
deleting a 0.9-kb XhoI fragment from the pET 1.1 construct.
Expression of Fusion Proteins in E. coli--
pET 1.1 and pET
0.3 constructs were introduced into the E. coli BL21 (DE3)
strain. Overnight cultures containing these constructs were used to
inoculate fresh cultures that were grown to an approximate optical
density of 0.6. The fusion protein was induced by adding 0.2 mM IPTG and growing the culture overnight at room
temperature. The pellets were resuspended in 50 mM Tris, pH
8.0, 2 mM EDTA, 200 µg/ml lysozyme, and complete
proteinase inhibitor mix. Lysed cells were sonicated six times for
10-15 s each and then centrifuged at 15,000 rpm (Sorvall) for 30 min
to obtain soluble proteins.
Calmodulin-Sepharose Column Chromatography--
A
calmodulin-Sepharose-4B column was prepared and equilibrated according
to the instructions provided by Amersham Biosciences, Inc. The
bacterial pellet from a 50-ml culture was suspended in 5 ml of buffer
containing 50 mM Tris, pH 7.5, 150 mM NaCl,
10% glycerol, and complete proteinase inhibitor mix. The suspension was lysed by incubating on ice for a period of 1 h in the presence of 200 µg/ml lysozyme followed by five to six pulses of sonication on
ice. The supernatant obtained after high speed centrifugation was
passed through a CaM-Sepharose column. The unbound protein was washed
with several volumes of binding buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl, pH
7.5, 150 mM NaCl, 5 mM CaCl2), and
the bound protein was eluted with binding buffer except that
CaCl2 was replaced with 2 mM EGTA.
Calmodulin Interaction with Fusion Proteins--
Fusion proteins
were separated on SDS-PAGE, blotted onto a nitrocellulose membrane,
blocked overnight in 3% gelatin, and incubated with biotinylated CaM
(26). The blots were then incubated in Vectastain ABC-horseradish
peroxidase in TBS/calcium/magnesium or TBS/EGTA/magnesium for 30 min
and washed three times for 10 min each time with the above buffer, and
the CaM-binding proteins were detected colorimetrically as described above.
CaM Binding to a Synthetic Peptide--
A synthetic peptide
(SKLKKLILLKRSIKALEKARKF) corresponding to amino acids 1216-1237 was
synthesized in the Macromolecular Resource facility at Colorado State
University. The purity of the peptides is over 95%. The interaction of
bovine CaM and Arabidopsis CaM isoforms with the synthetic
peptide was analyzed using electrophoretic mobility shift of CaM in the
presence of the synthetic peptide (27, 41). Each of the
Arabidopsis CaM isoforms and the bovine CaM (178 pmol) was
incubated with increasing concentrations of the synthetic peptide (89, 178, and 356 pmol) in the presence of 4 M urea in a buffer
containing 100 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, and 1 mM
CaCl2 at room temperature for 1 h in a total volume of
20 µl. Ten µl of sample buffer (0.375 M Tris-HCl, pH
6.8, 30% glycerol, and 0.023% bromphenol blue) was added to each
sample, and the mixture was electrophoresed in 14% polyacrylamide gels
containing 7.5% glycerol, 0.375 M Tris-HCl, pH 8.8, and 1 mM CaCl2. The gels were run, stained, and
destained essentially as described previously (42).
Binding of PCBP to CaM Isoforms--
Soluble and insoluble
proteins from the induced and uninduced cultures containing the pET 1.1 construct and the pET 1.1 protein that was purified on CaM-Sepharose
column were separated on SDS-polyacrylamide gels and blotted as
described above. To detect the binding of the fusion protein to
35S-labeled CaM isoforms, blots were incubated for 15 min
in a blocking buffer (50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 150 mM NaCl, 1% nonfat dry milk) containing 5 mM
of either CaCl2 or EGTA. The blots were then incubated for
12 h in 35S-labeled CaM2, CaM4, or CaM6 isoforms at 1 µg/ml in the same buffers as above. The filters were then washed with
the corresponding buffer, dried, and exposed to x-ray film.
Southern and Northern Blots--
Genomic DNA was isolated from
potato leaves following standard procedures and purified by CsCl
density gradient (43). About 8 µg of genomic DNA was digested with
different restriction enzymes, electrophoresed in a 1.0% agarose gel,
and transferred onto a Hybond N nylon membrane. The DNA was fixed to
the membrane by UV cross-linking. The blot was hybridized to
radiolabeled cDNA fragment at 65 °C and washed under high
stringency conditions (43). Total RNA was isolated by homogenizing the
tissue in guanidinium thiocyanate and pelleting the RNA through a
cesium chloride cushion (43). The RNA was separated in a 1.2% agarose
gel containing formaldehyde and blotted onto a nylon membrane. The RNA
blots were prehybridized and hybridized as above using the full-length cDNA as a probe. Prior to blotting RNA gels were tested for equal loading by staining with ethidium bromide.
Transient Expression of the N-terminal Region of PCBP Fusion in
Onion Epidermal Cells--
A recombinant plasmid with a 2-kb
BglII/BamHI fragment from PCBP containing
multiple nuclear localization sequences was cloned in-frame following a
GUS gene driven by a cauliflower mosaic virus 35S promoter in pRTL
2-GUS. A pRTL 2-GUS-NIa construct (44) was used to make the pRTL
2-GUS-PCBP construct. The BglII/BamHI fragment in
pRTL 2-GUS/NIa was deleted and replaced with the
BglII/BamHI fragment from PCBP to create pRTL
2-GUS-PCBP. The plasmids pBI-GUS, in which GUS is driven by the same
promoter, and pRTL2-GUS-NIa, in which GUS is fused to a known nuclear
protein, were used as controls. Cells in the epidermal layer of onion
bulbs were transformed with the pRTL 2-GUS-PCBP, pRTL 2-GUS-NIa, or
pBI-GUS using the helium biolistic particle delivery system (Bio-Rad).
Onion epidermal layers were peeled and placed on solidified phytagar
(0.4%) in Petri dishes. Plasmid DNA was precipitated on to sterilized
tungsten particles (1.1 µm) by mixing 50 µl (3 mg) of particles, 5 µl of DNA (1 µg/µl), 50 µl of 2.5 M calcium
chloride, and 20 µl of 0.1 M spermidine. The mixture was
vortexed, incubated for 10 min at room temperature, and centrifuged
briefly. The beads were washed first with 70% ethanol and then with
100% ethanol. Tungsten particles coated with DNA were resuspended in
48 µl of 100% ethanol, and 12 µl of this was used for each
bombardment. 1100 p.s.i. rupture discs were used. After
bombardment, Petri plates containing the epidermal layers were
incubated overnight at 22 °C. The cell layers were then stained for
GUS activity as described earlier (45) and mounted in
phosphate-buffered saline containing 1 µg/ml
4',6'-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI). The GUS-stained cells were
visualized using bright field microscopy, and the nuclei were
visualized under UV. The pictures were captured using a digital camera (Kodak).
 |
RESULTS |
Isolation of cDNAs Encoding a CaM-binding Protein--
To
isolate CBPs from developing tubers, a cDNA library from swelling
stolon tips of potato was screened with biotinylated CaM (26).
Screening of about one million recombinants resulted in isolation of 10 positives. Rescreening of these positive clones by excluding the
incubation step with biotinylated CaM did not yield positive signals,
indicating that the isolated clones are true positives. Furthermore,
all 10 clones bound biotinylated CaM only in the presence of
Ca2+ (data not shown). To further confirm
Ca2+-dependent binding of proteins encoded by
isolated clones, plaques from positive clones were probed with
35S-CaM in the presence of CaCl2 or EGTA. A
cDNA ( ICM-1), which encodes a CaM-binding protein from mouse,
was used as a positive control (40). Positive clones were detected in
the presence of CaCl2 but not in the presence of EGTA (Fig.
1). Sequence analysis of all the clones
has revealed that the isolated cDNAs fall into two groups. One
group of clones was represented by three independent clones (PCBP4,
PCBP7, and PCBP25) of the same gene but differing in their length. One
of the three clones (PCBP25) is a full-length cDNA, whereas the
other two clones contain partial cDNAs (see below).

View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Ca2+-dependent
binding of 35S-labeled CaM to PCBP. Recombinant phages
containing full-length PCBP (upper panel) or ICM-1
(lower panel) were lifted from plates onto filters and
probed with 35S-labeled CaM. One half of each filter was
incubated in buffer containing CaCl2, and the other half
was incubated in buffer containing EGTA. ICM-1 encodes a CaM-binding
protein from mouse (40).
|
|
Sequence Analysis of the Potato CaM-binding Protein--
The
longest cDNA is about 5 kb and has an open reading frame starting
at nucleotide 70 and terminating at 3997. The deduced protein is 1309 amino acids long. PCBP7 and PCBP4 contain the coding region from amino
acids 18 and 631, respectively. In addition, these three clones
differed in the length of the 3'-untranslated region with the longest
3'-untranslated region in PCBP25. This variation in the 3'-untranslated
region is most likely due to differential polyadenylation, which is
prevalent in plants (46). The deduced protein from the full-length gene
has a molecular mass of about 146 kDa with an isoelectric point of
6.06. The predicted protein is rich in serine (13%), acidic (16%),
and basic (17%) amino acids. 46% of the total amino acids are
represented by six amino acids (Ser, Asp, Glu, Lys, Arg, and His).
Similarity searches with PCBP were done using BLAST at the National
Center for Biotechnology Information and the Arabidopsis Information Resource (www.arabidopsis.org). A hypothetical
protein in the recently completed Arabidopsis genome
sequence data base (AT5g04020) (47) showed significant similarity to
PCBP. Overall there is 23% identity and 52.4% similarity between PCBP
and the Arabidopsis protein (Fig.
2A). PCBP has two sequence
stretches (PCBP/D1 and PCBP/D2) that are very similar, having 58%
identity and 88% similarity (Fig. 3).
PCBP/D1 consists of amino acids 750-838, and PCBP/D2 consists of amino
acids 1215-1303. The CaM-binding domain is in PCBP/D2 (see below).
AT5g04020 has four sequence regions (Fig. 3, At1/D1-At1/D4)
that show very high amino acid identity (41-60%) and similarity
(77-89%) to the two repeat regions of PCBP and to each other. Two
other Arabidopsis hypothetical proteins (At2g38800 and
At3g54570) have a small region that shows similarity to the PCBP repeat
domains (41-49% identity, 75-82% similarity). The CaM-binding
domain in PCBP (see below) is conserved in At5g04020 (At1) but not in
At2g38800 and At3g54570 (Fig. 3, At2 and
At3).

View larger version (84K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Analysis of PCBP sequence. A,
alignment of deduced amino acid sequence of PCBP with a hypothetical
from Arabidopsis (AT5g04020). Sequences were aligned using
the FASTA program. Identical amino acids are in white on a
black background, and similar amino acids are shaded
gray. The numbers on the right correspond to
the amino acid number of each protein. The AT5g04020 protein sequence
starts at amino acid 138. PCBP is shorter than AT5g04020 by 131 amino
acids. Dashes indicate gaps introduced to give the best
alignment. The CaM-binding domain of PCBP is overlined.
B, schematic diagram showing NLS and PEST sequences. The NLS
are clustered in the N terminus except for one near the C terminus.
Boxes labeled B, bipartite NLS; boxes
labeled S, SV 40-like NLS (the number next to B or S
indicates the beginning of the NLS). The range of PEST scores is 0.37
to 4.33 for weak PEST sequences and 6.31-14.99 for strong PEST
sequences (weak PEST Scores <5; strong PEST scores >5).
|
|

View larger version (52K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Alignment of two PCBP repeats with similar
regions in Arabidopsis hypothetical proteins. Two
repeats in PCBP, four repeats (At1/D1-At1/D4) in Arabidopsis
protein AT5g04020, and one domain of Arabidopsis proteins
At2g38800 (At2) and At3g54570 (At3) have strong sequence similarity.
Identical amino acids are in white on a black
background. The numbers on the left
correspond to the amino acid numbers of each protein. The
asterisks mark residues conserved in all sequences. The
CaM-binding region is overlined.
|
|
The PCBP sequence was analyzed using programs found on the ExPASy
Proteomics tools web page (www.expasy.ch/tools). Using PSORT (psort.nibb.ac.jp/), seven potential nuclear localization
signals were identified (Fig. 2B). Four SV40 large T antigen
nuclear targeting signals (4-residue pattern composed of all basic
amino acids or three basic amino acids (and a Pro) and three bipartite
nuclear targeting signals were identified (48). The final certainty number reported by PSORT for PCBP being a nuclear protein is 0.980. Proteins containing PEST regions are thought to be rapidly degraded proteins (49, 50). PEST sequences are defined as hydrophilic stretches
of amino acids greater than or equal to 12 residues in length. Such
regions contain at least one Pro, one Glu or Asp, and one Ser or Thr.
They are flanked by lysine, arginine, or histidine, but positively
charged residues are disallowed within the PEST sequence (49, 50). Fig.
2B shows the location of several potential strong (pest
scores, 6.31-14.99) and weak (pest scores, 0.37-4.33) PEST
sequences in PCBP (PESTfind,
www.at.embnet.org/embnet/tools/bio/PESTfind/). A
SMART (Simple Modular Architecture Research Tool) search that identifies the presence of known domains in a protein did not result in
any identifiable domains in PCBP (51, 52). Prosite scan revealed
several potential phosphorylation sites in PCBP indicating that
post-translation changes may be involved in regulating the
activity/stability of this protein.
Mapping of the Calmodulin-binding Domain--
Both the full-length
cDNA and the two shorter clones isolated in the original library
screen were positive for binding CaM (Fig.
4A). Expressed full-length and
truncated proteins from all three clones showed CaM-binding (data not
shown). Because the shorter clone begins at amino acid 631 (Fig.
4A), the CaM-binding domain was first narrowed down to the
region C-terminal to 631. To map the location of the CaM-binding
domain, two truncated versions of the cDNA were made and expressed
in E. coli as T-7 tag fusions. As shown in Fig.
4A, one truncated clone contained amino acids 976-1309
(pET1.1) and the other 976-1098 (pET 0.3). Protein from uninduced and
induced E. coli containing pET 1.1 was isolated, and the
induced protein was purified on a CaM-Sepharose column. Protein was
loaded on two gels, and one gel was stained, and the other was blotted
and probed with biotinylated CaM. As shown in Fig. 4B, the
protein was purified to near homogeneity and was bound by biotinylated
CaM both in the pure form and in the induced crude protein. Protein
from pET 0.3 was run on a gel with uninduced bacterial protein and with
crude extract from a positive control containing KCBP (expressed as T7
fusion) (53). Two identical blots were prepared and probed with either
biotinylated CaM or T-7 antibody. Fig. 4C shows the stained
gels and the two blots. The CaM-binding protein KCBP binds CAM, but the
pET 0.3 clone does not. However, the T-7 antibody recognized both KCBP
and the pET 0.3 protein product as expected. These results map the
CaM-binding domain to the region between amino acids 1098 and 1309.

View larger version (26K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Mapping of CaM-binding domain.
A, three cDNAs of PCBP (PCBP4, PCBP7, and PCBP25) were
isolated from the library screen. pET 1.1 (amino acids 976-1309) and
pET 0.3 (amino acids 976-1098) are constructs made in pET28 in which
the proteins are expressed as a T7 tag fusion. CaM binding ability is
shown in the right-hand column. +, binds CaM; , does not
bind CaM. B, E. coli cells containing pET1.1 were
induced with IPTG to express the truncated PCBP. Crude uninduced
protein (u), induced protein (i), and purified
protein (p) were run on duplicate gels. One gel was stained
(Stain), and the other was blotted and probed with
biotinylated CaM (BCaM). C, E. coli
cells containing pET 0.3 were induced with IPTG to express the
truncated PCBP. Crude uninduced (u), induced (i),
and a known CaM-binding T7 tag fusion protein called KCBP (+) were run
on triplicate gels. One was stained (Stain) and two were
blotted and probed with biotinylated CaM (BCaM) or T7
antibody (T7). The arrows indicate PCBP fusion
protein, and the arrowheads indicate truncated KCBP, a
positive control. Molecular mass markers are shown to the
left in kDa.
|
|
Binding of PCBP to CaM Isoforms and Mapping of Its CaM-binding
Domain--
CaM isoforms have been shown to differentially regulate
their target proteins, and some CaM isoforms have been shown to act as
competitive antagonists in activating target enzymes (18-22). To test
whether different isoforms of plant CaM interact with PCBP, bacterially
produced truncated protein (crude and CaM-Sepharose purified) from the
pET 1.1 construct was separated on a gel, blotted, and probed with
three 35S-labeled CaM isoforms. All three CaM isoforms
(CaM2, CaM4, and CaM6) bound to purified PCBP and specifically to PCBP
in the induced crude protein (Fig.
5A). No binding was seen with
crude uninduced bacterial protein (Fig. 5A) or in the
presence of calcium chelator, EGTA, in the buffer (data not shown).

View larger version (48K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
PCBP binding to plant CaM isoforms.
A, truncated PCBP binding to different CaMs. Bacterially
expressed protein containing truncated PCBP (pET 1.1) consisting of
amino acids 631-1309 (including the CaM-binding domain) was purified
on a CaM-Sepharose column. Crude bacterial protein from E. coli containing the vector only (lanes 1), crude
bacterial protein containing truncated PCBP (lanes 2), and
purified truncated PCBP (lanes 3) were electrophoresed, and
the gels were either stained or blotted to a membrane. The blots were
probed with Arabidopsis CaM2, CaM4, or CaM6. The markers are
indicated on the right in kDa. B, synthetic
peptide binding to CaMs. Binding of a synthetic peptide corresponding
to amino acids 1216-1237 of PCBP (Fig. 2) was analyzed by
electrophoretic mobility shift. Bovine CaM or Arabidopsis
CaM isoforms CaM2, CaM4, or CaM6 were mixed with the peptide in a 1:0
(CaM to peptide), 1:0.5, 1:1, or 1:2 molar ratio. The lower
bands are unbound CaM, and the upper bands are bound
CaM.
|
|
CaM-binding proteins do not have a conserved amino acid sequence that
can be identified as the CaM-binding domain. However, the binding
region is known to form a basic, amphiphilic -helix in which
hydrophobic residues are segregated from hydrophilic residues along the
helix (2, 11, 23, 29, 54, 55). The PCBP region that showed CaM binding
(1098-1309) was analyzed using a helical-wheel program, and a sequence
was identified that could form a basic, amphiphilic -helix. The
sequence SKLKKLILLKRSIKALEKARKF from amino acids 1216-1237 (Fig. 2)
was predicted to form a basic, amphiphilic -helix.
A synthetic peptide containing the predicted sequence was made and used
for CaM binding studies. The binding of the synthetic peptide was
detected by gel mobility shift assays (Fig. 5B). A bovine
CaM and three plant CaM isoforms (CaM2, CaM4, and CaM6) were used in
the binding assay with the synthetic peptide in three different ratios
of CaM:peptide: 1:0.5, 1:1, and 1:2. Calmodulin alone (1:0 in Fig.
5B) migrates according to its molecular weight. With the
addition of 1:0.5 synthetic peptide, a small amount of CaM is shifted
up indicating binding by the synthetic peptide and formation of a
peptide-CaM complex. An increase to 1:1 increases the amount of CaM
bound to about 50%, whereas a 1:2 ratio of peptide bound almost all of
the CaM protein. These binding studies indicate that PCBP binds three
CaM isoforms and that the CaM-binding domain is present in a 22-amino
acid stretch (from 1216-1237) at the C terminus.
PCBP Is Coded by a Single Gene--
To determine whether PCBP is
coded by a single gene, we digested the potato genomic DNA with
different restriction endonucleases and probed the DNA blot with a
cDNA fragment that is expected to hybridize to a single band in
each digestion. As shown in Fig. 6,
Southern analysis revealed a single hybridizing band with each of the
restriction enzyme digestions, indicating that PCBP is coded by a
single gene. Low stringency washes did not reveal additional bands
(data not shown), suggesting that there are no other PCBP-related genes
in the potato genome. In the recently completed
Arabidopsis genome sequence data base
(www.arabidopsis.org), there is only one gene that is
highly similar to PCBP, suggesting that the PCBP ortholog in
Arabidopsis is also encoded by a single gene.

View larger version (43K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Southern blot analysis. 8 µg of
genomic DNA was digested with EcoRI (E),
HindIII (H), XhoI (X), or
BamHI (B) and electrophoresed through a
0.8% agarose gel, transferred onto a Hybond nylon membrane, and probed
with a 32P-labeled cDNA fragment. Size markers are
shown on the right in kb.
|
|
Expression of PCBP, CaM, and Another Potato CBP in Different
Tissues--
To determine whether the longest cDNA (about 5 kb)
represents the full-length transcript and to determine the expression
of PCBP in different tissues, RNA was isolated from the apical bud, leaf, root, stem, stolon tip, tuber, and flower tissues. Using labeled
full-length cDNA as a probe, a transcript of about 5 kb was
identified in Northern hybridization analysis (Fig.
7). High levels of PCBP transcript were
found in the stem, leaf, and apical bud with the highest expression in
the stem. The expression of PCBP in tubers and stolons is low. Longer
exposure of blots clearly showed PCBP expression in tubers and stolons
(data not shown).

View larger version (58K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
Northern blot analysis. Total RNA from
plant tissues as labeled was electrophoresed on formaldehyde-containing
agarose gels, transferred to Hybond N+ membranes, and
hybridized with 32P-labeled full-length cDNAs of PCBP,
KCBP, CaM, or ubiquitin. The stained gel as well as the expression of a
constitutively expressed ubiquitin show that the amount of RNA is
loaded equally in each lane. A, expression in vegetative
tissues. B, expression in reproductive tissues. Transcript
sizes are shown on the right in kb.
|
|
Using duplicate blots, the RNA was also probed with KCBP, another known
CaM-binding protein from potato, a potato CaM, and ubiquitin, a gene
expressed equally in all tissues (Fig. 7) (37, 53). KCBP and CaM were
expressed in a similar pattern to PCBP with most expression in the
apical bud, leaf, and stem tissues. Ubiquitin was expressed equally in
all tissues tested (Fig. 7). The expression of KCBP in all the tissues
shown in Fig. 7A was demonstrated previously by reverse
transcription PCR (53). PCBP, KCBP, and CaM were all also expressed in
flower and berry (Fig. 7B). Expression in flowers was
further analyzed by isolating RNA from the sepals, petals, stamens, and
carpels separately. Expression of PCBP in petals, stamens, and carpels
was less than in sepals (Fig. 7B). KCBP and CaM were present
in a similar pattern except KCBP is expressed more strongly in carpels.
These results indicate that CaM and its target proteins are
coordinately expressed.
PCBP Localization--
The presence of multiple nuclear
localization signals (NLS) in PCBP suggests that it is likely to be a
nuclear protein. Six of the seven NLS sequences are in the first 600 amino acids of PCBP (Fig. 2B). GUS is a cytosolic protein,
and fusion of this reporter gene to putative NLS sequences has been
used to redirect GUS to the nucleus to verify the NLS sequences (56).
The N-terminal region of PCBP (amino acids 18-716) containing six of
the seven NLS sequences was fused to a GUS reporter gene under the
control of a constitutive promoter (cauliflower mosaic virus 35S
promoter). The GUS-PCBP construct was used to analyze the cellular
localization of PCBP. A construct containing only the reporter (GUS)
gene under the control of the same promoter was used as a negative
control. A construct containing a known nuclear localized protein NIa
(GUS-NIa) was used as a positive control (44). GUS, GUS-NIa, and
GUS-PCBP constructs were introduced into onion epidermal cells by using particle bombardment and stained for GUS activity following overnight incubation. As shown in Fig. 8, for the
construct containing the GUS reporter gene only, GUS activity is
distributed more or less evenly in the cytoplasm, and the nucleus is
not distinguishable (Fig. 8). However, the GUS activity from the fusion
of PCBP to GUS was found mostly in the nucleus with some GUS staining
in the cytoplasm (Fig. 8, GUS-PCBP). The distribution of
PCBP-GUS is very similar to NIa-GUS, where GUS is fused to a known
nuclear protein (Fig. 8, GUS-NIa). These results suggest
that PCBP is a nuclear protein.

View larger version (52K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
Nuclear localization of GUS-PCBP.
Plasmids containing GUS, GUS-NIa, or GUS-PCBP fusions were introduced
into onion bulb epidermal peels by biolistic transformation. Following
bombardment, the epidermal peels were incubated overnight at 22 °C
and stained with GUS. DAPI was used to stain the nucleus. A
and B show two representative samples of GUS staining with
each construct. The upper panels show GUS activity,
and the lower panels show DAPI stain. The white
arrows point to the DAPI stained nuclei, and the black
arrows point to the corresponding nuclei showing high GUS
activity.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
We isolated a full-length cDNA encoding a novel CaM-binding
protein (PCBP) using a protein-protein interaction-based screening. With 35S-labeled CaM we confirmed that PCBP binds CaM in
the presence of Ca2+ but not in the presence of EGTA (Fig.
1). CaM binding studies with truncated proteins have also shown that
the CaM-binding domain is located near the C terminus of the protein
(Figs. 2, 4, and 5). A truncated version of PCBP was purified on a
CaM-Sepharose column, further confirming that the protein is a
CaM-binding protein that binds CaM in the presence of CaCl2
but not in the presence of EGTA (Fig. 5A). A peptide that is
predicted to form a basic, amphiphilic -helix was identified as a
possible CaM-binding domain, and this was verified by CaM mobility
shift assays (Fig. 5B). Binding of CaM by peptide increased
as the ratio of peptide to CaM increased until most of the CaM was
bound at a ratio of 1:2 (CaM:peptide). The synthetic peptide retarded
the mobility of plant and animal CaM in a similar manner. There are two
regions in PCBP (PCBP/D1 and PCBP/D2) that share a very high sequence similarity (Fig. 3). The CaM-binding domain that we mapped is in the D2
region, and there is a high degree of similarity between PCBP/D1 and
PCBP/D2 in the CaM-binding domain; hence it is possible that there is a
second CaM-binding domain. Proteins with more than one CaM-binding site
have been reported (57, 58). Although CaM-binding sequences in
different proteins are not conserved, orthologs of a CBP in different
species and members of CaM-binding protein gene families have a similar
CaM-binding sequence (59-63).
Comparison of the sequence using Blast revealed significant similarity
to a hypothetical protein from Arabidopsis (At5g04020), suggesting that it is an Arabidopsis ortholog of PCBP (Fig.
2). Because the Arabidopsis genome is completely
sequenced (47), it is not likely that there is a more closely
related protein in Arabidopsis. As shown in Fig. 3, the
homologous regions of PCBP show significant similarity to each other
and to four regions in the PCBP-related Arabidopsis protein.
The CaM-binding domain (1216-1237) in the PCBP/D2 region (1215-1303)
is highly conserved in the four At1 domains, suggesting that the
Arabidopsis protein is also likely to be a CaM-binding
protein and may contain more than one CaM-binding domain. In addition,
two other Arabidopsis proteins showed limited sequence
similarity to the repeated regions (D1 and D2) in PCBP (Fig. 3),
suggesting that this region may represent a domain of unknown function
that is present in other plant proteins. However, the CaM-binding
domain is not conserved in these two other hypothetical proteins from
Arabidopsis (Fig. 3, At2 and At3), and
hence they may not be CaM-binding proteins. The highly conserved region
between the four proteins, however, indicates that they are likely to
be involved in some conserved function. No other proteins in the data
bases, neither plant nor animal, showed any significant similarity to
PCBP. The absence of PCBP in the completely sequenced genomes of yeast
(Saccharomyces cerevisiae and Schizosaccharomyces
pombe), Caenorhabditis elegans, Drosophila
melanogaster, and Homo sapiens suggests that PCBP is likely to be a plant-specific CaM-binding protein.
So far, only two other CaM-binding proteins have been isolated from
potato. These include KCBP (53) and a homolog of mammalian multidrug-resistant P-glycoprotein (PMDR1) (64). Genetic studies have
shown that KCBP is essential for trichome morphogenesis (65, 66). In
addition, several lines of evidence indicates that KCBP, a minus-end
microtubule motor protein, is involved in cell division (67-72). PMDR1
was isolated from a stolon tip library and is expressed in all organs
studied. Expression of PMDR1 is higher in the stem and the stolon tip
with highest expression during tuber initiation and decreased
expression during tuber development (64). The homologs of PMDR1 are
involved in transport or secretion to keep toxic metabolites and
xenobiotics out of normal tissues. PMDR1 may be involved in some
transport, but its function has not been established.
Both of these potato CaM-binding proteins (KCBP and PMDR1) have
homologs in Arabidopsis. The Arabidopsis KCBP
(AtKCBP) is 80% identical and 91% similar to potato KCBP at the amino
acid level (53). The Arabidopsis homolog of PMDR1 (ATPGP1)
is 85.7% identical and 92.4% similar at the amino acid level (64).
However, the similarity between PCBP and its ortholog in
Arabidopsis is only 52.4%, suggesting that this protein is
not as highly conserved as KCBP or PMDR1 between potato and
Arabidopsis.
The presence of a number of PEST signals suggests that this protein is
rapidly turned over. PEST signals are found in rapidly degraded
enzymes, transcription factors, and components of receptor signaling
pathways. They are, by contrast, rarely present among long lived
cellular proteins (73). Multiple PEST sites are common among proteins
in signal pathways (74). Because there are multiple PEST sites
throughout the protein, PCBP is likely to be involved in a signal
pathway (Fig. 2). The fact that PCBP binds CaM in a
Ca2+-dependent manner is also indicative of its
involvement in a Ca2+ signaling pathway.
Because PCBP was isolated from a swelling stolon tip library, logically
it could be involved in stolonization, tuberization, or both. However,
expression studies indicate that the gene encoding PCBP is expressed in
all the tested tissues including vegetative and reproductive tissues. A
high level of expression was observed in stems, flowers, and fruits,
whereas its expression is very low in stolon tips and young tubers.
Although the PCBP cDNAs are isolated from a library prepared from
developing tubers (38), the expression patterns indicates a role for
PCBP in other tissues also. Similar expression patterns of PCBP, CaM,
and KCBP suggest a coordinate regulation of transcription of CaM and
its targets. It is likely that CaM and CaM-binding proteins that are
studied here may have some common cis-elements in their
promoter regions.
Another feature of the amino acid sequence of PCBP is the presence of
nuclear localization signals. Both SV40-type and bipartite NLS
sequences are present in PCBP. The bipartite pattern is: 2 basic
residues, an ~10-residue spacer, and another basic region consisting
of at least 3 basic residues of 5 (48). Seven putative nuclear
localization signals with high certainty were identified in PCBP using
PSORT, suggesting that it is most likely a nuclear protein. Fusion of
the PCBP N-terminal region containing six of seven nuclear localization
signals to a cytosolic reporter gene targeted the reporter gene to the
nucleus, giving more evidence that PCBP may be a nuclear protein.
The presence of CaM in the nucleus has been documented in different
cell types (75), and nuclear CaM-binding proteins in animals have been
identified that include protein kinases, calcineurin, transcription
factors, RNA-binding proteins, nucleolar-ribosomal proteins,
chaperones, and others (76). Nuclear CBPs have also been identified in
plants including a chromatin-associated NTPase in pea (77) and a
DNA-binding protein from cauliflower (78). A CaM-binding protein with a
putative DNA-binding domain was also isolated recently from
Arabidopsis (61). However, the localization of this protein
to the nucleus has not been demonstrated. The localization of PCBP to
the nucleus indicates that nuclear Ca2+ levels are likely
to regulate the activity/function of this protein. Recently, it has
been shown that the nuclear membrane is not passively permeable to
Ca2+ and that a Ca2+ gradient exists between
the nucleus and cytoplasm, suggesting the existence of regulatory
mechanisms that control movement into and out of the nucleus (79, 80).
Furthermore, the transport of Ca2+ across the nuclear
membrane in plant and animal cells is dependent on ATP (79, 81). Also,
changes in nuclear and cytoplasmic Ca2+ appear to be
controlled independently (80). Certain signals in plants have been
shown to differentially alter free Ca2+ in the cytoplasm
and nuclear compartment (82). Nuclear CaM-binding proteins such as PCBP
are likely to be regulated by the changes in free Ca2+ in
the nucleus.
In summary, using a protein-protein interaction-based screening we have
isolated a novel plant-specific CaM-binding protein and mapped the
CaM-binding region to a short stretch of amino acids at the C terminus.
The binding of PCBP to three CaM isoforms suggests its interaction with
different CaM isoforms. Ca2+-dependent binding
of CaM to PCBP suggests the involvement of PCBP in Ca2+
signaling pathway and likely regulation of its activity/function by
Ca2+. The expression pattern of PCBP indicates its role in
various tissues. Localization of PCBP to the nucleus strongly suggests a nuclear role for PCBP.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank Dr. Mark A. Taylor of Scottish Crop
Research Institute (Dundee, UK) for providing the cDNA library, Dr.
D. M. Watterson (Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN) for the
pVUCH-1 clone, Dr. R. E. Zielinski (University of Illinois) for
Arabidopsis CaM constructs, and Dr. James Carrington
(Washington State University) for pRTL2-GUS vector. Nucleotide and
protein sequence analyses were performed at the National Center for
Biotechnology Information, the Arabidopsis Information
Resource, and ExPASy.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported in part by Agricultural Experiment
Station Project 702 and grants from the National Science Foundation and
the National Aeronautic and Space Administration (to A. S. N. R.).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 nucleotide sequence(s) reported in this paper has been submitted to the GenBankTM/EBI Data Bank with accession number(s) AF378084.
To whom correspondence should be addressed. Tel.:
970-491-5773; Fax: 970-491-0649; E-mail:
reddy@lamar.colostate.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, October 29, 2001, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M104595200
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
CaM, calmodulin;
PCBP, potato calmodulin-binding protein;
CBP, calmodulin-binding
protein;
KCBP, kinesin-like calmodulin-binding protein;
GUS, -glucuronidase;
GA, gibberellic acid;
IPTG, isopropyl-1-thio- -D-galactopyranoside;
DAPI, diamidinophenylindole;
NLS, nuclear localization signal(s).
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Poovaiah, B. W.,
and Reddy, A. S. N.
(1993)
CRC Crit. Rev. Plant Sci.
12,
185-211[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 2.
|
Reddy, A. S. N.
(2001)
Plant Sci.
160,
381-404[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 3.
|
Knight, H.
(2000)
Int. Rev. Cytol.
195,
269-324[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 4.
|
Trewavas, A. J.,
and Malho, R.
(1998)
Curr. Opin. Plant Biol.
1,
428-433[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 5.
|
Bush, D. S.
(1995)
Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol.
46,
95-122[CrossRef]
|
| 6.
|
Pierson, E. S.,
Miller, D. D.,
Callaham, D. A.,
Shipley, A. M.,
Rivers, B. A.,
Cresti, M.,
and Hepler, P. K.
(1994)
Plant Cell
6,
1815-1828[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 7.
|
Bibikova, T. N.,
Zhigilei, A.,
and Gilroy, S.
(1997)
Planta
203,
495-505[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 8.
|
Franklin-Tong, V. E.
(1999)
Curr. Opin. Plant Biol.
2,
490-495[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 9.
|
Reddy, A. S. N.,
and Reddy, V.
(2001)
in
Handbook of Plant and Crop Physiology
(Pessarakali, M., ed)
, pp. 697-733, Mercel Dekker, New York
|
| 10.
|
Sander, D.,
Brownlee, C.,
and Harper, J.
(1999)
Plant Cell
11,
691-706[Free Full Text]
|
| 11.
|
Zielinski, R. E.
(1998)
Annu. Rev. Plant Physiol. Plant Mol. Biol.
49,
697-725[CrossRef]
|
| 12.
|
Babu, Y. S.,
Bugg, C. E.,
and Cook, W. J.
(1988)
J. Mol. Biol.
204,
191-204[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 13.
|
Yang, T.,
Segal, G.,
Abbo, S.,
Feldman, M.,
and Fromm, H.
(1996)
Mol. Gene Genet.
252,
684-694[CrossRef]
|
| 14.
|
Lee, S. H.,
Kim, J. C.,
Lee, M. S.,
Heo, W. D.,
Seo, H. Y.,
Yoon, H. W.,
Hong, J. C.,
Lee, S. Y.,
Bahk, J. D.,
Hwang, I.,
and Cho, J.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
21806-21812[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 15.
|
Ling, V.,
Perea, I.,
and Zielinski, R. E.
(1991)
Plant Physiol.
96,
1196-1212[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 16.
|
Takezawa, D.,
Liu, Z. H., An, G.,
and Poovaiah, B. W.
(1995)
Plant Mol. Biol.
27,
693-703[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 17.
|
Heo, W. D.,
Lee, S. H.,
Kim, M. C.,
Kim, J. C.,
Chung, W. S.,
Chun, H. J.,
Lee, K. J.,
Park, C. Y.,
Park, H. C.,
Choi, J. Y.,
and Cho, M. J.
(1999)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
19,
766-771
|
| 18.
|
Liao, B.,
Gawienowski, M. C.,
and Zielinski, R. E.
(1996)
Arch. Biochem. Biophys.
327,
53-60[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 19.
|
Cho, M. J.,
Vaghy, P. L.,
Kondo, R.,
Lee, S. H.,
Davis, J. P.,
Rehl, R.,
Heo, W. D.,
and Johnson, J. D.
(1998)
Biochemistry
37,
15593-15597[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 20.
|
Lee, S. H.,
Kim, M. C.,
Heo, W. D.,
Kim, J. C.,
Chung, W. S.,
Park, C. Y.,
Park, H. C.,
Cheong, Y. H.,
Kim, C. Y.,
Lee, S. H.,
Lee, K. J.,
Bahk, J. D.,
Lee, S. Y.,
and Cho, M. J.
(1999)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1433,
56-67[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 21.
|
Lee, S. H.,
Johnson, J. D.,
Walsh, M. P.,
Van Lierop, J. E.,
Sutherland, C., Xu, A.,
Snedden, W. A.,
Kosk-Kosicka, D.,
Fromm, H.,
Narayanan, N.,
and Cho, M. J.
(2000)
Biochem. J.
350,
299-306
|
| 22.
|
Reddy, V. S.,
Safadi, F.,
Zielinski, R. E.,
and Reddy, A. S. N.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
31727-31733[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 23.
|
O'Neil, K. T.,
and DeGrado, W. F.
(1990)
Trends Biochem. Sci.
15,
59-64[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 24.
|
Rhoads, A. R.,
and Friedberg, F.
(1997)
FASEB J.
11,
331-340[Abstract]
|
| 25.
|
Fromm, H.,
and Chua, N.-H.
(1992)
Plant Mol. Biol. Rep.
10,
199-206
|
| 26.
|
Fordham-Skelton, A. P.,
Safadi, F.,
Golovkin, M.,
and Reddy, A. S. N.
(1994)
Plant Mol. Biol. Reporter
12,
355-363
|
| 27.
|
Reddy, A. S. N.,
Safadi, F.,
Narasimhulu, S. B.,
Golovkin, M.,
and Hu, X.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
7052-7060[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 28.
|
Schuurink, R. C.,
Shartzer, S. F.,
Fath, A.,
and Jones, R. L.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
1944-1949[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 29.
|
Snedden, W. A.,
and Fromm, H.
(1998)
Trends Plant Sci.
3,
299-304
|
| 30.
|
Jackson, S. D.
(1999)
Plant Physiol.
119,
1-8[Free Full Text]
|
| 31.
|
Krauss, A.
(1985)
in
Potato Physiology
(Li, P. H., ed)
, pp. 209-231, Academic Press, London
|
| 32.
|
Koda, Y.,
and Okazawa, Y.
(1983)
Jpn. J. Crop Sci.
52,
582-591
|
| 33.
|
Menzel, C. M.
(1983)
Ann. Bot.
52,
697-702[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 34.
|
Snyder,
and Ewing, E. E.
(1989)
Hortic. Sci.
24,
336-338
|
| 35.
|
Balamani, V.,
Veluthambi, K.,
and Poovaiah, B. W.
(1986)
Plant Physiol.
80,
856-858[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 36.
|
Poovaiah, B. W.,
Takezawa, D., An, G.,
and Han, T. J.
(1996)
J. Plant Physiol.
149,
553-558[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 37.
|
Jena, P. K.,
Reddy, A. S. N.,
and Poovaiah, B. W.
(1989)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
86,
3644-3649[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 38.
|
Taylor, M. A.,
Mad Arif, S. A.,
Kumar, A.,
Davies, H. V.,
Scobie, L. A.,
Pearce, S. R.,
and Flavell, A. J.
(1992)
Plant Mol. Biol.
20,
641-651[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 39.
|
Lukas, T. J.,
Craig, T. A.,
Roberts, D. M.,
and Watterson, D. M.
(1987)
Proc. Fifth Intnl. Symp. on Calcium Binding Proteins in Health and Disease
, pp. 533-543, Academic Press, New York
|
| 40.
|
Sikela, J. M.,
and Hahn, W. E.
(1987)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
84,
3038-3042[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 41.
|
Erickson-Vitanen, S.,
and DeGrado, W. F.
(1987)
Methods Enzymol.
139,
455-478[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 42.
|
Safadi, F.,
Reddy, V.,
and Reddy, A. S. N.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
35457-35470[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 43.
|
Sambrook, J.,
Fritsch, F. F.,
and Maniatis, T.
(1989)
Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual
, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, NY
|
| 44.
|
Restrepo, M. A.,
Freed, D. D.,
and Carrington, J. C.
(1990)
Plant Cell
2,
987-998[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 45.
|
Stomp, A.-M.
(1992)
in
GUS Protocols: Using the GUS Gene as a Reporter of Gene Expression
(Gallagher, S. R., ed)
, pp. 103-113, Academic Press, New York
|
| 46.
|
Golovkin, M.,
and Reddy, A. S. N.
(1996)
Plant Cell
8,
1421-1435[Abstract]
|
| 47.
|
Initiative, T. A. G.
(2000)
Nature
408,
796-815[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 48.
|
Dingwall, C.,
and Laskey, R. A.
(1991)
Trends Biochem. Sci.
16,
478-481[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 49.
|
Rogers, S.,
Wells, R.,
and Rechsteiner, M.
(1986)
Science
234,
364-368[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 50.
|
Rechsteiner, M.,
and Rogers, S. W.
(1996)
Trends Biochem. Sci.
21,
267-271[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 51.
|
Schultz, J.,
Copley, R. R.,
Doerks, T.,
Ponting, C. P.,
and Bork, P.
(2000)
Nucleic Acids Res.
28,
231-234[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 52.
|
Schultz, J.,
Bork, P.,
and Ponting, C. P.
(1998)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
95,
5857-5864[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 53.
|
Reddy, A. S. N.,
Narasimhulu, S. B.,
Safadi, F.,
and Golovkin, M.
(1996)
Plant J.
10,
9-21[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 54.
|
Cox, J. A.,
Comte, M.,
Fitton, J. E.,
and DeGrado, W. F.
(1985)
J. Biol. Chem.
260,
2527-2534[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 55.
|
Crivici, A.,
and Ikura, M.
(1995)
Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct.
24,
85-116[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 56.
|
Varagona, M. J.,
Schmidt, R. J.,
and Raikhel, N. V.
(1992)
Plant Cell
4,
1213-1227[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 57.
|
Warr, C. G.,
and Kelly, L. E.
(1996)
Biochem. J.
314,
497-503
|
| 58.
|
Bertrand, B.,
Wakabayashi, S.,
Ikeda, T.,
Pouyssegur, J.,
and Shigekawa, M.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
13703-13709[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 59.
|
Reddy, A. S. N.,
Takezawa, D.,
Fromm, H.,
and Poovaiah, B. W.
(1993)
Plant Sci.
94,
109-117[CrossRef]
|
| 60.
|
Lu, Y.,
and Harrington, H. M.
(1994)
Plant Physiol. Biochem.
32,
413-422
|
| 61.
|
Reddy, A. S. N.,
Reddy, V.,
and Golovkin, M.
(2000)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
279,
762-769[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 62.
|
Kohler, C.,
and Neuhaus, G.
(2000)
FEBS Lett.
4710,
133-136
|
| 63.
|
Reddy, A. S. N.
(2001)
Intl. Rev. Cytol. Cell Biol.
204,
98-179
|
| 64.
|
Wang, W.,
Takezawa, D.,
and Poovaiah, B. W.
(1996)
Plant Mol. Biol.
31,
683-687[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 65.
|
Krishnakumar, S.,
and Oppenheimer, D. G.
(1999)
Development.
126,
3079-3088[Abstract]
|
| 66.
|
Oppenheimer, D. G.,
Pollock, M. A.,
Vacik, J.,
Szymanski, D. B.,
Ericson, B.,
Feldmann, K.,
and Marks, D.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
6261-6266[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 67.
|
Song, H.,
Golovkin, M.,
Reddy, A. S. N.,
and Endow, S. A.
(1997)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
94,
322-327[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 68.
|
Narasimhulu, S. B.,
and Reddy, A. S. N.
(1998)
Plant Cell
10,
957-965[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 69.
|
Smirnova, E.,
Reddy, A. S. N.,
Bowser, J.,
and Bajer, A. S.
(1998)
Cell Motil. Cytoskeleton
41,
271-280[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 70.
|
Bowser, J.,
and Reddy, A. S. N.
(1997)
Plant J.
12,
1429-1438[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 71.
|
Kao, Y.-L.,
Deavours, B. E.,
Phelps, K. K.,
Walker, R.,
and Reddy, A. S. N.
(2000)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun.
267,
201-207[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 72.
|
Vos, J. W.,
Safadi, F.,
Reddy, A. S.,
and Hepler, P. K.
(2000)
Plant Cell
12,
979-990[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 73.
|
Rechsteiner, M.
(1990)
Semin. Cell Biol.
1,
433-440[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 74.
|
Rechsteiner, M.
(1988)
Adv. Enzyme Regul.
27,
135-151[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 75.
|
Bachs, O.,
Agell, N.,
and Carafoli, E.
(1994)
Cell Calcium
16,
289-296[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 76.
|
Agell, N.,
Aligue, R.,
Alemany, V.,
Castro, A.,
Jaime, M.,
Pujol, M. J.,
Rius, E.,
Serratosa, J.,
Taules, M.,
and Bachs, O.
(1998)
Cell Calcium
23,
115-121[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 77.
|
Hsieh, H. L.,
Tong, C. G.,
Thomas, C.,
and Roux, S. J.
(1996)
Plant Mol. Biol.
30,
135-147[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 78.
|
Szymanski, D. B.,
Liao, B.,
and Zielinski, R. E.
(1996)
Plant Cell
8,
1069-1077[Abstract]
|
| 79.
|
Nicotera, P.,
McConkey, D. J.,
Jones, D. P.,
and Orrenius, S.
(1989)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
86,
453-457[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 80.
|
Pauly, N.,
Knight, M. R.,
Thuleau, P.,
van der Luit, A. H.,
Moreau, M.,
Trewavas, A. J.,
Ranjeva, R.,
and Mazars, C.
(2000)
Nature
405,
754-755[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 81.
|
Bunney, T. D.,
Shaw, P. J.,
Watkins, P. A.,
Taylor, J. P.,
Beven, A. F.,
Wells, B.,
Calder, G. M.,
and Drobak, B. K.
(2000)
FEBS Lett.
476,
145-149[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 82.
|
van Der Luit, A. H.,
Olivari, C.,
Haley, A.,
Knight, M. R.,
and Trewavas, A. J.
(1999)
Plant Physiol.
121,
705-714[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
Copyright © 2002 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

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

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. C. Kim, W. S. Chung, D.-J. Yun, and M. J. Cho
Calcium and Calmodulin-Mediated Regulation of Gene Expression in Plants
Mol Plant,
January 6, 2009;
(2009)
ssn091v1.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
L. Ma, S. Liang, R. L. Jones, and Y.-T. Lu
Characterization of a Novel Calcium/Calmodulin-Dependent Protein Kinase from Tobacco
Plant Physiology,
July 1, 2004;
135(3):
1280 - 1293.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 2002 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
|