HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 278, Issue 40, 38707-38714, October 3, 2003

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 278/40/38707    most recent M301637200v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Tsuruta, D. Articles by Jones, J. C. R. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Tsuruta, D. Articles by Jones, J. C. R. Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

Crucial Role of the Specificity-determining Loop of the Integrin ₄ Subunit in the Binding of Cells to Laminin-5 and Outside-in Signal Transduction^*

Daisuke Tsuruta , Susan B. Hopkinson , Kimberly D. Lane, Michael E. Werner, Vincent L. Cryns and Jonathan C. R. Jones 

From the Departments of Cell and Molecular Biology and Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois 60611

Received for publication, February 14, 2003 , and in revised form, July 1, 2003.

	ABSTRACT

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
Within each hemidesmosome, ₆₄ integrin plays a crucial role in hemidesmosome assembly by binding to laminin-5 in the basement membrane zone of epithelial tissue. Recent analyses have implicated "specificity-determining loops" (SDLs) in the I-like domain of integrin in regulating ligand binding. Here, we investigated the function of an SDL-like motif within the extracellular I-like domain of ₄ integrin. We generated point mutations within the SDL of ₄ integrin tagged with green fluorescent protein (GFP-₄K150A and GFP-₄Q155L). We also generated a mutation within the I-like domain of the ₄ integrin, lying outside the SDL region (GFP-₄V284E). We transfected constructs encoding the mutated ₄ integrins and a GFP-conjugated wild type ₄ integrin (GFP-₄WT) into 804G cells, which assemble hemidesmosomes, and human endothelial cells, which express little endogenous ₄ integrin. In transfected 804G cells, GFP-₄WT and GFP-₄V284E colocalize with hemidesmosome proteins, whereas hemidesmosomal components in cells expressing GFP-₄K150A and GFP-₄Q155L are aberrantly localized. In endothelial cells, GFP-₄WT and mutant proteins are co-expressed at the cell surface with ₆ integrin. When transfected endothelial cells are plated onto laminin-5 matrix, GFP-₄WT and GFP-₄V284E localize with laminin-5, whereas GFP-₄K150A and GFP-₄Q155L do not. GFP-₄WT and GFP-₄V284E expressed in endothelial cells associate with the adaptor protein Shc when the cells are stimulated with laminin-5. However, GFP-₄K150A and GFP-₄Q155L fail to associate with Shc even when laminin-5 is present, thus impacting downstream signaling. These results provide evidence that the SDL segment of the ₄ integrin subunit is required for ligand binding and is involved in outside-in signaling.

	INTRODUCTION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
Integrins are members of a family of cell surface receptor proteins involved in cell-matrix and cell-cell interactions (1, 2). A primary function of many integrins is to adhere cells to extracellular matrix molecules and to provide a structural link between the outside of the cell and the cytoskeleton (1-3). In addition, integrins mediate inside-out and outside-in signaling pathways, thereby regulating growth, differentiation, and migration of cells during development, wound healing, and in a variety of pathological conditions including tumor metastasis (4).

Each integrin is a heterodimer containing an and a subunit. At present 18 and 8 subunits have been identified, which combine to form 24 integrins (1, 2). Both subunits have large extracellular amino-terminal domains, single membranespanning regions, and short cytoplasmic tails of about 50 residues that interact with components of the microfilament cytoskeleton system (1, 2). One notable exception is the ₄ integrin subunit, whose cytoplasmic domain comprises over 1000 amino acids. It links to the keratin intermediate filament network at the site of hemidesmosomes in certain epithelial tissues via interaction with a transmembrane molecule of 180 kDa (BP180), a cytoplasmic structural protein of 230 kDa (BP230) and the cytoskeletal linker protein plectin (5, 6).

The binding of integrins to their extracellular ligands triggers outside-in signaling events that may include activation of tyrosine, serine/threonine, and lipid kinases as well as small GTP-binding proteins, including RhoA, RacI, and Cdc42 (4). Activation of these signaling pathways can lead to a variety of responses in the cell, including changes in cytoskeletal organization, cell division, differentiation, and apoptosis. Conversely, intracellular signals are believed to trigger conformational changes in the cytoplasmic domains of an integrin that are transmitted along the molecule to its extracellular domain. These conformational changes appear to regulate the affinity of integrins for their ligands (2).

Recent structural data, including crystallographic analyses, have shed new light onto how integrins bind ligand, how ligand-binding specificity is accomplished, and how signals are transmitted by integrin molecules across the membrane (2). For example, the extracellular domains of several of the integrin subunits contain an "inserted" sequence, the I or A domain, of about 200 amino acids, that has been implicated in ligand binding (2). The integrin subunit also possesses an extracellular I-like domain within which a short sequence of about 30 residues appears to specify ligand binding. This 30 residue domain has been termed the specificity-determining loop (SDL).¹ In particular, Takagi et al. (7) have shown that removal of the SDL blocks the ability of the ₅₁ integrin to bind its ligand, fibronectin. Moreover, when a seven-residue sequence contained within the SDL of ₁ integrin is switched with a comparable sequence in ₃ integrin, ligand binding specificity of the mutated integrin is altered (8). In addition, the SDLs of the ₁ and ₂ integrin subunit appear to play an essential role in heterodimerization with specific integrin subunits (namely ₆₁, _v1, and _l2) (7).

The SDL of the ₄ integrin does not appear to play a role in mediating its interaction with its ₆ integrin (7), its only known partner (1, 2). The ₆₄ integrin heterodimer is primarily expressed in epithelial cells and plays an essential role in the assembly of hemidesmosomes, certain matrix adhesion devices that stabilize the interaction of epithelia with the underlying connective tissue (5, 6, 9). The importance of the ₆₄ integrin in the adhesion of epithelial cells to the basement membrane is underscored by the blistering that occurs at the dermal-epidermal border in the skin of patients afflicted with junctional epidermolysis bullosa associated with pyloric atresia, in which expression of ₆₄ integrin is aberrant, and in genetically engineered mice in which expression of ₆ or ₄ integrin protein is inactivated by targeted disruption (5, 6, 10-12). The ligand of integrin ₆₄ is laminin-5, a major structural component of the basement membranes of epithelial tissues (5, 6). Indeed, the binding of ₆₄ integrin and laminin-5 is a necessary prerequisite to certain epithelial cell adhesion, migration, and morphogenetic events (5, 6). Yet, despite this importance, structural and molecular characterization of regions that regulate ₆₄ integrin binding to laminin-5 have not been investigated. Takagi et al. (7) have suggested that the SDLs of all integrin subunits are involved in regulating ligand binding. However, to date no studies have addressed whether the SDL of ₄ integrin modulates ₆₄ integrin/laminin-5 interaction. Hence, we have undertaken assays of the function of the SDL of ₄ integrin with regard to both ligand binding and transduction of outside-in signals.

	MATERIALS AND METHODS

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
Cell Culture and Transfection—Cells of the rat bladder epithelial cell line 804G were cultured and transiently transfected as previously reported (13-15). Briefly, 804G cells were cultured at 37 °C in minimum essential medium containing a final concentration of 2 mM L-glutamine, 10% fetal bovine serum, 50 units/ml penicillin, and 50 units/ml streptomycin. Prior to transfection, 804G cells were maintained for 48 h on 22-mm glass coverslips or 100-mm plastic dishes. They were transfected with 8.8 µg of plasmid DNA using the calcium phosphate protocol detailed elsewhere (14, 15). Immortalized human bone marrow-derived endothelial cells (TrHBMECs) were maintained in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium containing a final concentration of 2 mM L-glutamine, 10% fetal bovine serum, 50 units/ml penicillin, and 50 units/ml streptomycin and 1x RPMI 1640 vitamin solution (16). For transfection, TrHBMECs were trypsinized and resuspended in HEPES-buffered Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium at about 1 x 10⁶ cells/ml. The cells were electroporated with DNA at 950 microfarads, 196 ohms, and 210 V in a BTX Electro Cell Manipulator 600 (BTX, San Diego, CA) (17).

Construction of ₄ Integrin Wild Type Protein and Generation of Point Mutations—A mammalian expression vector encoding the sequence of the green fluorescent protein (GFP) fused to a full-length human integrin ₄ subunit (GFP-h₄WT) was described elsewhere (15). Point mutations were generated in the ₄ integrin sequence in this vector using the QuikChange XL site-directed mutagenesis kit from Stratagene (La Jolla, CA) following the procedure of the manufacturer. Plasmids were used to transform XL10-Gold Ultracompetent Cells (Stratagene), which were then plated on selective media and incubated overnight at 37 °C. DNA was prepared from the resultant colonies using the Wizard Plus Miniprep DNA Purification System (Promega, Madison, WI) and sequenced using Big Dye chemistry on an ABI Prism automated sequencer (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA) to confirm the presence of the appropriate point mutation. Plasmid DNA was purified by equilibrium centrifugation in CsCl₂-ethidium bromide gradient and was used to transform mammalian cells as described above.

Antibodies—Mouse monoclonal antibodies against GFP (clones 7.1 and 13.1), the dephosphorylated light chain of ₆ integrin subunit (4E9G8), and the ₄ integrin subunit (3E1) were purchased from Roche Applied Science, Immunotech (Marseille, France), and Chemicon International (Temecula, CA), respectively. 5E, a human monoclonal antibody against BP230, was a gift from Dr. Takashi Hashimoto (Kurume University, Fukuoka, Japan). Antibody 5C5 against the ₃ chain of laminin-5 was described previously (18, 19). Monoclonal antibodies against BP180 were characterized previously (13). The polyclonal anti-Shc antibody was purchased from Transduction Laboratories (Lexington, KY). Secondary antibodies conjugated to rhodamine or horseradish peroxidase were purchased from Jackson ImmunoResearch Laboratories, Inc. (West Grove, PA). Protein G-agarose was bought from Invitrogen. Plectin antibody 7A8 was obtained from Sigma, and the phosphotyrosine antibodies 4G10 and PY20 were purchased from Upstate Biotechnology, Inc. (Lake Placid, NY) and Transduction Laboratories, respectively.

Matrix Proteins—The laminin-5-rich matrix of 804G cells was prepared as described previously (18). In brief, 804G cells were plated onto either glass coverslips or 100-mm dishes and allowed to reach confluence. The culture medium was removed, and the cells were washed in sterile PBS. Cells were removed from their matrix by treatment for 10 min in sterile 20 mM NH₄OH. Any remaining cells were removed by three washes with sterile PBS.

Immunoblotting and Immunoprecipitation Protocols—For immunoblotting, confluent cell cultures of 804G cells and TrHBMECs were solubilized in sample buffer consisting of 8 M urea, 1% SDS in 10 mM Tris-HCl, pH 6.8, 15% -mercaptoethanol. Proteins were separated by SDS-PAGE, transferred to nitrocellulose, and processed for immunoblotting (20, 21). Nitrocellulose-bound antibodies were detected by chemiluminescence using the ECL kit (Amersham Biosciences).

Proteins were immunoprecipitated from 804G cells or TrHBMECs by first extracting the cells with immunoprecipitation buffer consisting of 25 mM HEPES, pH 7.5, 1% Brij 97, 150 mM NaCl, 5 mM MgCl₂, 0.2% SDS, supplemented with a protease inhibitor mixture and 1 mM orthovanadate (Sigma). Integrin or GFP antibodies were added to the extract and incubated at 4 °C for 2 h. Subsequently, protein G-agarose (Invitrogen) was added to the mix for an additional 2 h. The protein G-agarose was collected by centrifugation, washed three times in immunoprecipitation buffer, and then solubilized in Laemmli type SDS-PAGE sample buffer (20). The resulting protein solution was processed for Western immunoblotting as detailed above.

Flow Cytometry—Cells were trypsinized and resuspended in either PBS or tissue culture medium containing a 50% dilution of normal goat serum. The cell suspension was then incubated with the monoclonal antibody 3E1 for 45 min at room temperature. Cells were washed, and Cy5-conjugated goat anti-mouse IgG (Jackson ImmunoResearch) was added to each of the samples. Following a 45-min incubation at room temperature, stained cells were washed, resuspended in 0.5% formaldehyde, and then analyzed by flow cytometry using a Beckman Coulter Elite PCS sorter (Beckman Coulter, Miami, FL).

Immunofluorescence Microscopy—Cells on glass coverslips were fixed in 3.7% formaldehyde in PBS for 1 min at room temperature and then extracted for 8 min in 0.5% Triton X-100 in PBS at 4 °C. Antibody was overlaid onto the cells, and the preparations were incubated for 37 °C for 60 min. The cells on coverslips were washed in three changes of PBS and then overlaid with fluorochrome-conjugated secondary antibody, placed at 37 °C for an additional 60 min, washed extensively, and then mounted on slides. All preparations were viewed in a Zeiss laser-scanning microscope (LSM) 510 confocal microscope (Zeiss Inc., Thornwood, NY). Microscope images were exported as TIFF files, and figures were generated using Adobe Photoshop 7.0 software. At least 50 cells were examined for each experimental condition.

	RESULTS

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
Comparison of the SDLs of Integrin Subunits—Fig. 1 shows the alignment of a relatively conserved sequence of amino acids within the extracellular domain of integrin subunits. This region is located within the I-like domain and contains the so-called SDL, which is proposed to regulate ligand interaction (7). The residues at the amino-flanking region of the SDLs of all of the integrins share a high level of homology, each being FGXXVX. However, the sequences of the SDLs themselves show more diversity. Interestingly, all of the SDLs of integrin subunits, with the exception of ₄, possess a short region of 5-8 amino acids flanked by cysteine residues, which, at least in ₂ integrin, appears to play an important role in regulating ligand binding (22) (Fig. 1).

View larger version (34K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIG. 1. Comparison of the sequences within and surrounding the SDLs of integrin subunits. The putative sequence of each of the SDLs is demarcated by the bracket. The SDL of the 4 integrin subunit spans residues 150-174. Note that, with the exception of the 4 integrin subunit, cysteine residues border a series of between 5 and 8 residues (underlined) within each SDL. In our analyses, residues 150, 155, and 165 of the SDL of the 4 integrin subunit were mutated (indicated by the hatched boxes).

The divergence of the sequence of the ₄ integrin SDL, particularly the absence of cysteine residues, motivated us to assess whether the ₄ integrin SDL is involved in the regulation of ₆₄ integrin binding to its ligand laminin-5 and, if so, to determine which residues are important in this pivotal function for a matrix receptor. To begin to do so, we first prepared a series of expression vectors encoding human GFP-tagged ₄ integrin subunit, in which residues within the SDL (residues 150, 155, and 165) or within the I-like extracellular domain of the ₄ integrin, which lies outside the SDL region (residue 284), were mutated (Fig. 1). We selected one conserved and two nonconserved residues within the ₄ integrin subunit SDL region for our mutational analyses. Each of the polar residues at positions 150, 155, and 165 was replaced by a small, nonpolar amino acid. We mutated residue 284 in the non-SDL region to a charged residue to increase the possibility of mutational effects. Constructs encoding the resulting tagged mutated proteins (GFP-₄K150A, GFP-₄Q155L, GFP-₄E165A, and GFP-₄V284E) as well as a GFP-tagged wild type ₄ integrin subunit (GFP-₄WT) were transfected into either rat bladder 804G cells or immortalized TrHBMECs (16, 23). We chose 804G cells for this analysis, since they assemble mature hemidesmosomes in vitro and express all known hemidesmosome structural proteins (23). Thus, using this cell line, we would be able to assess the impact of expression of the mutated ₄ integrin subunits on the localization of other hemidesmosome proteins. In addition, an immortalized endothelial cell line was used in our studies, since these cells possess barely detectable levels of ₄ integrin subunit but express ₆ integrin, partnered with ₁ integrin as determined by fluorescence-activated cell sorting (see below) (24). Furthermore, when such endothelial cells are induced to express wild type ₄ integrin and are plated subsequently onto laminin-5-rich matrix derived from 804G cells, ₄ integrin clusters in the membrane at sites of cell-substratum interaction in a pattern that reflects the organization state of laminin-5 polymer on the substrate (25, 26) (see below). In other words, this endothelial cell model system provides a morphological readout of ₄ integrin subunit/ligand binding.

At 48 h following transfection of 804G cells and TrHBMECs with vectors encoding GFP-tagged wild type and mutated ₄ integrin subunits, extracts of the transfected cells were prepared for immunoblotting using an antibody against GFP to confirm expression of the appropriately sized protein (Fig. 2). Proteins of 227 kDa are detected in extracts of the transfected cells using the GFP antibody probe with one exception. The GFP antibody recognizes a 180-kDa polypeptide in extracts of both 804G and endothelial cells expressing GFP-₄E165A. This suggests that GFP-₄E165A is subjected to proteolytic degradation, and, for this reason, we did not analyze this mutation further. We are currently investigating why this mutation makes the mutated ₄ integrin protein more susceptible to cleavage.

View larger version (81K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIG. 2. Western immunoblotting analysis of tagged 4 integrin proteins. Expression of GFP-tagged wild type and mutated 4 integrin subunits in 804G cells (upper panels) and TrHBMECs (lower panels) was assessed by western immunoblotting of cell extracts using a GFP monoclonal antibody. The GFP antibody fails to recognize any polypeptides in mock-transfected cells (lane mock). In extracts derived from cells expressing GFP-4WT (lane WT), GFP-4V284E (lane V284E), GFP-4K150A (lane K150A), and GFP-4Q155L (lane Q155L), the GFP antibody recognizes a polypeptide of 227 kDa, whereas the same probe recognizes a 180-kDa polypeptide in extracts of cells expressing GFP-4E165A (lane E165A). Note that with the exception of extracts of cells expressing GFP-4E165A, comparable loadings of protein (20 µg) were loaded onto each lane. Approximately 50 µg of cells expressing GFP-4E165A was processed for immunoblotting (IB) in order to assess whether full-length tagged protein could be detected.

In transfected 804G cells and TrHBMECs, fluorescence-activated cell sorting analyses indicate that GFP-₄WT, GFP-₄K150A, GFP-₄Q155L, and GFP-₄V284E exist at the cell surface (Fig. 3A and Table I). Moreover, antibodies against human ₆ integrin subunit precipitate a 227-kDa protein recognized by anti-GFP antibodies in cells expressing GFP-tagged wild type and all of the mutated ₄ integrin subunit proteins (Fig. 3B). In addition, antibodies against GFP precipitate the integrin ₆ subunit from extracts of cells induced to express wild type and mutant human ₄ integrin subunits, confirming that wild type and all of our mutated GFP-tagged ₄ integrin subunits complex with ₆ integrin (Fig. 3C). We used antibody 4E9G8, which recognizes the 26-kDa light chain of the ₆ integrin subunit in these studies. In summary, these results confirm that all the tagged ₄ integrin proteins complex with ₆ integrin at the cell surface.

View larger version (54K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIG. 3. GFP-4 wild type and mutated integrin proteins are expressed at the cell surface with 6 integrin in transfected 804G cells and TrHBMECs. A, mock-transfected rat 804G cells (upper row) and TrHBMECs (lower row) or cells expressing GFP-4WT (WT), GFP-4V284E, GFP-4Q155L, and GFP-4K150A were prepared for fluorescence-activated cell sorting using antibody 3E1, which recognizes an extracellular epitope of the human 4 integrin subunit and which does not recognize rat protein. B and C, sorting profiles were plotted according to fluorescence intensity for GFP (x axis) and Cy5 (y axis). Left boxes represent base-line fluorescence for the negative population of mock-transfected cells. Boxes on the right depict cells displaying fluorescence for both GFP and Cy5. The percentage of such double-positive cells is indicated in each box. Extracts of mock-transfected 804G cells (B) and TrHBMECs (C) or cells expressing GFP-4WT, GFP-4V284E, GFP-4Q155L, and GFP-4K150A (lanes marked WT, V284E, Q155L, and K150A) were processed for immunoprecipitation (IP) using either antibody 4E9G8 against the 6 integrin light chain subunit (upper panels) or GFP antibody (lower panels). The precipitated proteins were prepared for immunoblotting (IB) using the GFP monoclonal antibody (upper panels) or 4E9G8 antibody (lower panels). Note that antibody 4E9G8 precipitates a 227-kDa polypeptide recognized by the GFP probe in the last four lanes of the upper panels in B and C, whereas the GFP probe precipitates a 26-kDa polypeptide recognized by antibody 4E9G8 in the last four lanes of the lower panels in B and C. No proteins are recognized by either the antibodies against the 6 integrin or GFP in the precipitates of the mock-transfected cells (lanes at the left).

Expression of ₄ Integrin Subunit Protein Containing Point Mutations within the SDL and Its Impact on the Organization of Hemidesmosome Proteins in 804G Cells—We next assessed the fate of GFP-₄WT, GFP-₄K150A, GFP-₄Q155L, and GFP-₄V284E following their expression in 804G cells. GFP-₄WT and GFP-₄V284E localize in distinct cat paw arrays along the substratum-attached surface of transfected 804G cells (Fig. 4). This cat paw organization has been used by us as an indicator of hemidesmosome-like protein clusters (25-27). In contrast, in the majority of cells expressing GFP-₄K150A and GFP-₄Q155L, the GFP signal is diffusely distributed along the basal surface of the transfectants. We quantified these results by evaluating the localization of the four ₄ integrin proteins in at least 50 804G cells expressing each transgene protein product in multiple trials (Table II displays results G from a representative trial). We scored the GFP signal in transfected cells as being in an extensive cat paw pattern (greater than 50% of the basal cell surface exhibits cat paw arrays), in a partial cat paw pattern (less than 50% of the basal cell surface exhibits cat paw arrays), or diffuse/spotty.

View larger version (17K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIG. 4. Expression of GFP-4 wild type and mutated integrins in 804G cells. 804G cells expressing GFP-4WT (A), GFP-4V284E (B), GFP-4Q155L (C), and GFP-K150A (D) were visualized by confocal microscopy with the focal plane being at the substratum-attached surface of the cells. Note that in A and B, the GFP-tagged protein is organized into cat paw arrays, whereas in C and D, GFP-tagged protein appears primarily diffusely localized along the basal surface of the cells. Bar, 10 µm.

View this table: [in this window] [in a new window]   TABLE II Localization of tagged 4 integrin proteins in transfected 804G cells Transfected cells were viewed by confocal microscopy, and the distribution of the transgene product was evaluated by focusing at the substratum-attached surface of the cells.

Next, populations of 804G cells expressing GFP-₄WT protein and cells expressing the various mutated ₄ integrins were analyzed by immunofluorescence microscopy to assess the impact of the protein products of the transgene on the organization of the endogenous cytoplasmic, transmembrane, and matrix proteins of hemidesmosomes. Specifically transfected cell populations were probed with antibodies against BP230, plectin, BP180, and the ₃ laminin subunit of laminin-5. GFP-₄WT and GFP-₄V284E proteins distribute precisely with BP230, plectin, and BP180 in extensive cat paw arrays along the substratum attached surface in all transfected 804G cells we have analyzed (Fig. 5, A, B, and C and E, F, and G, respectively). GFP-₄WT and GFP-₄V284E protein also co-localize with the ₃ laminin subunit in the extracellular matrix secreted by 804G cells (Fig. 5, D and H). In sharp contrast, in 804G cells expressing GFP-₄K150A or GFP-₄Q155L, the GFP-tagged proteins show minimal co-localization with other hemidesmosome proteins, and, in the majority of the same cells, the organization of BP230, plectin, and BP180 is also perturbed (Fig. 5, I, J, and K; only results where 804G cells are expressing GFP-₄Q155L are shown) (Tables II and III). Although the degree of perturbation differs from cell to cell, in the majority of the transfected 804G cells, BP230, BP180, and plectin appear diffusely distributed or in a spotlike pattern (Fig. 5, I, J, and K). In all instances, expression of the mutated tagged ₄ integrin subunit had little, if any, impact on the organization of laminin-5 in the matrix of the transfected cells (Fig. 5L). At least 50 cells were counted for each condition in each trial, and these immunofluorescence observations are quantified in Table III. We assessed whether the endogenous plaque and transmembrane hemidesmosome proteins in cells expressing the tagged ₄ proteins organize into an extensive cat paw array or a partial cat paw array or appear diffusely/spottily distributed as above (Table III). These results indicate that both GFP-₄K150A and GFP-₄Q155L have a dominant negative impact on the ability of 804G cells to organize clusters of plaque and transmembrane hemidesmosome proteins.

View larger version (143K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIG. 5. Impact of expression of GFP-4 wild type and mutated integrins on hemidesmosome protein localization in 804G cells. 804G cells expressing GFP-4WT (A-D), GFP-4V284E (E-H), or GFP-4Q155L (I-L) protein were prepared for immunofluorescence microscopy using antibodies against BP230 (A, E, and I), plectin (B, F, and J), BP180 (C, G, and K), or the 3 subunit of rat laminin 5 (D, H, and L). In each case, images of the GFP-tagged protein are shown overlaid on those generated by the antibodies. The yellow color indicates overlapping stain. In I-L, the green color shows lack of co-localization. Cells were viewed by confocal microscopy, and the focal plane for imaging is as close as possible to the substratum-attached surface of the cells. Bar, 10 µm.

Mutations in the ₄ Integrin SDL Inhibit the Interactions of ₆₄ Integrin and Laminin-5—Within 5 h of plating endothelial cells expressing GFP-₄WT integrin onto laminin-5-rich matrix, GFP-₄WT integrin clusters in the membrane at sites of cell-substratum interaction in a cat paw pattern that reflects the organization of the laminin-5 on the substrate immediately underlying the transfected cell (18, 25) (Fig. 6, A-C). We used this in vivo morphological assay system to assess whether our mutated ₄ integrin proteins expressed in endothelial cells show co-distribution with organized laminin-5 arrays. Like GFP-₄WT integrin, GFP-₄V284E protein in transfected endothelial cells shows colocalization with laminin-5 matrix (Fig. 6, D-F). In sharp contrast, GFP-₄K150A or GFP-₄Q155L protein fails to co-distribute along endothelial cell-substratum adhesion sites in a pattern that mirrors that of laminin-5 in the matrix (Fig. 6, G-I; results for GFP-₄Q155L only are shown).

View larger version (106K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIG. 6. GFP-4 wild type and mutated integrin protein localization in endothelial cells plated onto a laminin-5-rich matrix. TrHBMECs expressing GFP-4WT (A-C), GFP-4V284E (D-F), or GFP-4Q155L (G-I) were trypsinized and plated onto the laminin-5-rich matrix of 804G cells. At 5 h after plating, the samples were processed for immunofluorescence microscopy. The GFP signal from the cells is shown in A, D, and G. Localization of antibodies against the 3 laminin subunit of laminin-5 is shown in B, E, and H. The images in the two right panels of each row were merged and are shown in C, F, and I, respectively. In C and F, there are numerous areas where GFP-tagged protein in transfected cells co-distributes in a cat paw arrangement that mirrors the stained laminin-5 matrix molecules immediately underlying the cells (arrows). In I, no cat paw arrays of GFP-tagged protein are observed, and there is no obvious co-distribution of mutated 4 integrin subunit and the laminin-5 under the transfected cell. Bar, 5 µm.

Point Mutations in the ₄ Integrin SDL Impact Outside-in Signal Transduction—It has been established that ligand-induced clustering of ₄ integrin results in recruitment of the adapter protein Shc (28-30). Indeed, such outside-in signaling provides a measure of ₄ integrin/ligand interaction. Thus, to evaluate whether mutations in the SDL domain of the ₄ integrin subunit impact not only ligand interaction, as shown in Fig. 6, but, in so doing, interrupt outside-in signaling, we assayed the degree of Shc recruitment of wild type and mutated ₄ integrin when expressed in endothelial cells at 0 and 60 min after plating onto laminin-5-rich extracellular matrix. At each time point, ₄ integrin was precipitated from extracts of endothelial cells, and the precipitated protein was probed by immunoblotting using an antibody against Shc (Fig. 7A). GFP monoclonal antibody reactivity was used to confirm that tagged ₄ integrin was successfully precipitated. GFP-₄WT and GFP-₄V284E protein precipitated from transfected endothelial cells that had been maintained on a laminin-5-rich matrix for 60 min recruit the 66-kDa isoform of Shc (Fig. 7). In contrast, GFP-₄K150A or GFP-₄Q155L, which have been precipitated from transfected endothelial cells at 60 min after plating onto laminin-5-rich matrix do not do so. Moreover, during the course of these studies, we identified a 105-kDa endothelial cell protein that undergoes tyrosine phosphorylation only in the ₄ integrin precipitates derived from cells expressing GFP-₄WT and GFP-₄V284E but not from cells expressing GFP-₄K150A or GFP-₄Q155L (Fig. 7A). We have not yet determined the nature of this 105-kDa protein. Here we use its recognition by a phosphotyrosine antibody as a read-out of ₆₄ integrinligand interaction.

View larger version (59K): [in this window] [in a new window]   FIG. 7. Signal transduction in endothelial cells mediated by wild type and mutated 4 integrin subunit proteins. A, mock-transfected endothelial cells and endothelial cells expressing GFP-4WT, GFP-4V284E, GFP-4Q155L, and GFP-4K150A were plated onto the laminin-5-rich matrix of 804G cells. At 0 and 60 min after plating, extracts of the cells were made and then processed for immunoprecipitation (IP) using GFP antibodies. The precipitated proteins were then subjected to immunoblotting (IB) using antibodies against Shc and GFP (Ai) or antibodies against phosphotyrosine and GFP (Aii). The GFP blots were performed to confirm successful precipitation of tagged 4 integrin protein. In B, mock-transfected endothelial cells or endothelial cells express wild type, and the mutated 4 integrin subunits were plated for 15 min onto 4 antibody (3E1)-coated surfaces. Extracts of the cells were then subjected to immunoprecipitation (IP) using antibodies against GFP. The precipitates were then prepared for immunoblotting (IB) using antibodies against Shc and GFP (Bi) and antibodies against phosphotyrosine and GFP (Bii, as indicated).

We also assayed the ability of wild type and mutated ₄ integrin to recruit Shc when ₆₄ integrin was clustered with the ₄ integrin monoclonal antibody 3E1. The 66-kDa isoform of Shc is clearly immunoprecipitated from extracts of endothelial cells expressing wild type and all of the mutated ₄ integrin subunits we analyzed within 15 min of plating the transfected cells onto a 3E1 antibody-coated surface (Fig. 7B). In addition, the ₄ integrin precipitates derived from such cells contain a 105-kDa tyrosine phosphorylated protein (Fig. 7B). Together these results indicate that the point mutations have no secondary, inhibitory effect on the ability of the cytoplasmic domain of ₄ integrin subunits to bind Shc protein and mediate signaling.

	DISCUSSION

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 
Recent structural analyses of integrin heterodimers, primarily of the _v3 integrin, have provided new clues to the structural basis and regulation of integrin-ligand binding. For example, the N-terminal halves of both the and integrin subunits comprise the region that binds ligand (2, 31). Binding of this region to ligand is regulated by a series of amino acids, termed the SDL, within the extracellular domain of the integrin subunit (2, 31-33). In particular, Takagi et al. have reported that a motif, composed of CYDMKTTC, within the SDL of the ₃ integrin subunit sequence is critically involved in specifying ligand binding of integrin _v3 (8). Moreover, a series of eight residues (CPNKEKEC) within the SDL region of the ₂ integrin subunit regulates binding of the _L2 heterodimer to its ligand (22).

In this work, we studied the functions of the I-like region in the ₄ integrin SDL. To do so, we generated point mutations in the SDL and in the ₅ extracellular domain of the ₄ integrin subunit. Wild type and mutated ₄ integrin subunits were then expressed in 804G cells or an immortalized endothelial cell type. In both cell types, wild type and mutated ₄ integrin is expressed at the cell surface and partners with ₆ integrin. In addition, point mutations within the ₄ subunit SDL have no impact on ₆₄ integrin heterodimer assembly. This is consistent with previous work showing that the SDLs of ₄, ₁, and ₃ integrin are not required for formation of ₆₄, ₅₁, ₄₁, and _v3 integrin complexes (7). In contrast, the SDLs of the ₁ and ₂ integrin subunits do appear to play an essential role in heterodimer formation with their integrin partners (namely ₆₁, _v1, and _l2) (7).

We used endothelial cells to assess the ability of the ₄ integrin subunit-containing integrin complexes to interact with laminin-5 ligand. We did so by plating endothelial cells expressing wild type or mutated ₄ integrins onto the laminin-5-rich matrix secreted and organized by 804G cells into exquisite arrays on their substrate. Our analyses show that wild type ₄ integrin protein and ₄ integrin protein possessing a point mutation in a non-SDL region of the extracellular domain cluster in the endothelial cells in patterns that mirror the organized arrays of 804G cell laminin-5 to which they adhere. In sharp contrast, ₄ integrins that possess point mutations in their SDLs do not cluster and fail to organize in patterns that mimic the organization of laminin-5 ligand in the extracellular matrix. In other words, the SDL of ₄ integrin regulates ₆₄ integrin/laminin-5 interaction.

A number of mutations in the ₄ integrin extracellular domain have been linked to the pathogenesis of the blistering skin disease junctional epidermolysis bullosa. Most if not all of these mutations result in lack of expression of the protein. Interestingly, to date, no mutations in the SDL have been detailed. We suggest that expression of a ₄ subunit with mutations in its SDL may result in a more devastating phenotype than when no ₄ protein is produced at all. We provide some support for this, since we show that ₄ possessing mutations within its SDL act as dominant negatives in 804G cells.

Previous studies have shown that a chimeric ₄ integrin, whose extracellular domain has been replaced by the extracellular domain of the IL-2 receptor (i.e. a "headless" ₄ integrin), is able to cluster along sites of cell-substrate interaction and recruits plectin to such sites in a ligand-independent manner (34). Headless ₄ integrin also incorporates into formed hemidesmosome-like protein arrays in 804G cells and, unlike our mutated ₄ integrin, does not disrupt existing hemidesmosome-like structures (27, 34, 35). These and other results have led to a proposal that hemidesmosome assembly is driven primarily from within the cell (34, 35). These ideas, however, are not supported by the results we present here. Mutated ₄ integrin, which is incapable of binding ligand because of mutations in its SDL, destabilizes hemidesmosome protein arrays or prevents their assembly in 804G cells. Indeed, mutated ₄ integrin that does not interact with ligand acts as a "dominant negative" in transfected 804G cells and is not recruited into hemidesmosome-like protein arrays in either 804G cells or endothelial cells. How do we rationalize our results with those of Nievers et al. (34, 35)? We concur with the suggestion that headless ₄ integrin, which binds neither ligand nor ₆ integrin, is either "activated" via the action of intracellular regulators or is constitutively active and hence can both cluster and transduce signals when expressed as a chimeric or truncated protein at the cell surface (34-37). The data we present here, however, support the notion that "activation" of full-length wild type ₄ integrin by ligand is a necessary prerequisite to its incorporation into assembled and/or assembling hemidesmosome-like protein arrays, since mutated ₄ integrin (which fails to interact with ligand) does not cluster in endothelial cells. The latter provides support for the notion that ligand interaction is dominant in ₄ integrin activation, since intracellular regulators clearly fail to mediate clustering and "activation" of mutated ₄ integrin. That the cytoplasmic tail of the mutated ₄ integrin is in an "inactive" state of conformation is supported by those studies where we analyzed the ability of wild type and mutated ₄ integrin to mediate outside-in signaling. Mutated ₄ integrin only recruits the adaptor protein Shc to its cytoplasmic tail and mediates signaling that results in tyrosine phosphorylation of a 105-kDa protein when it is clustered by human ₄ integrin antibodies. Indeed, taken together, our results suggest that ₄ interaction with ligand on the outside of the cells has a dramatic impact on the binding properties of its cytoplasmic tail and is essential for outside-in signaling.

Since we also show that mutated ₄ integrin binds rat ₆ integrin, we suggest that mutated, "inactive" ₄ integrin partially or completely destabilizes hemidesmosome protein arrays in 804G cells by competing with endogenous wild type ₄ integrin for its ₆ partner. The degree of disruption induced by the mutated protein appears to reflect the amount of the protein product of the transgene expressed in the cells (not shown). In summary, our results support the idea that signals emanating from matrix on the outside of a cell predominate over cytoplasmic "cues" with regard to induction of hemidesmosome protein array assembly. This is consistent with the conclusions of some of our previous studies (18, 19, 38).

It is becoming clear that the diverse SDLs of integrin subunits possess an essential role in regulating integrin function. The ₄ integrin subunit is no exception, since our findings emphasize the importance of its SDL in specifying ligand interaction, integrin clustering, and downstream signaling. Our data also imply that the activation of the cytoplasmic domain of the ₄ integrin is tightly controlled by its interaction with ligand. This phenomenon is all the more remarkable because of the size of the ₄ cytoplasmic tail, which is over 1000 amino acids. How signals emanating in the matrix influence the activation/conformation of this tail remains unclear, but we have provided the first evidence that the SDL is involved in regulating such signaling events.

	FOOTNOTES

 
^* This work is supported by National Institutes of Health Grant RO1(24) DK60589 (to J. C. R. J.). The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

These two authors contributed equally to this work.

To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Cell and Molecular Biology, Morton 4-616, Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University, 303 E. Chicago Ave., Chicago, IL 60611. Tel.: 312-503-1412; Fax: 312-503-6475; E-mail: j-jones3{at}northwestern.edu.

¹ The abbreviations used are: SDL, specificity-determining loop; GFP, green fluorescent protein; TrHBMEC, transformed human bone marrow endothelial cells; PBS, phosphate-buffered saline; WT, wild type.

	ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

 
We thank Mary Paniagua (Flow Cytometry Core Facility, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center) for help and advice.

	REFERENCES

TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION MATERIALS AND METHODS RESULTS DISCUSSION REFERENCES

 

1. Hynes, R. O. (1992) Cell 69, 11-25[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
2. Hynes, R. O. (2002) Cell 110, 673-687[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
3. Martin, K. H., Slack, J. K., Boerner, S. A., Martin, C. C., and Parsons, J. T. (2002) Science 296, 1652-1653[Abstract/Free Full Text]
4. Schwartz, M. A., and Ginsberg, M. H. (2002) Nat Cell Biol. 4, E65-E68[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
5. Borradori, L., and Sonnenberg, A. (1999) J. Invest. Dermatol. 112, 411-418[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
6. Jones, J. C. R., Hopkinson, S. B., and Goldfinger, L. E. (1998) BioEssays 20, 488-494[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
7. Takagi, J., DeBottis, D. P., Erickson, H. P., and Springer, T. A. (2002) Biochemistry 41, 4339-4347[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
8. Takagi, J., Kamata, T., Meredith, J., Puzon-McLaughlin, W., and Takada, Y. (1997) J. Biol. Chem. 272, 19794-19800[Abstract/Free Full Text]
9. Jones, J. C. R., Kurpakus, M. A., Cooper, H. M., and Quaranta, V. (1991) Cell Regul. 2, 427-438[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
10. van der Neut, R., Krimpenfort, P., Calafat, J., Niessen, C. M., and Sonnenberg, A. (1996) Nat. Genet. 13, 366-369[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
11. Dowling, J., Yu, Q.-C., and Fuchs, E. (1996) J. Cell Biol. 134, 559-572[Abstract/Free Full Text]
12. Georges-Labouesse, E., Messaddeq, N., Yehia, G., Cadalbert, L., Dierich, A., and Le Meur, M. (1996) Nat. Genet. 13, 370-373[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
13. Riddelle, K. S., Hopkinson, S. B., and Jones, J. C. R. (1992) J. Cell Sci. 103, 475-490[Abstract]
14. Hopkinson, S. B., Baker, S. E., and Jones, J. C. (1995) J. Cell Biol. 130, 117-125[Abstract/Free Full Text]
15. Tsuruta, D., Hopkinson, S. B., and Jones, J. C. R. (2003) Cell Motil. Cytoskel. 54, 122-134[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
16. Schweitzer, K. M., Vicart, P., Delouis, C., Paulin, D., Drager, A. M., Langenhuijsen, M. M., and Weksler, B. B. (1997) Lab. Invest. 76, 25-36[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
17. Tsuruta, D., Gonzales, M., Hopkinson, S. B., Otey, C., Khuon, S., Goldman, R. D., and Jones, J. C. (2002) FASEB J. 16, 866-868[Abstract/Free Full Text]
18. Langhofer, M., Hopkinson, S. B., and Jones, J. C. R. (1993) J. Cell Sci. 105, 753-764[Abstract]
19. Baker, S. E., Hopkinson, S. B., Fitchmun, M., Andreason, G. L., Frasier, F., Plopper, G., Quaranta, V., and Jones, J. C. R. (1996) J. Cell Sci. 109, 2509-2520[Abstract]
20. Laemmli, U. K. (1970) Nature 227, 680-685[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
21. Harlow, E., and Lane, D. (1988) Antibodies: A Laboratory Manual, pp. 92-121, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, NY
22. Kamata, T., Tieu, K. K., Tarui, T., Puzon-McLaughlin, W., Hogg, N., and Takada, Y. (2002) J. Immunol. 168, 2296-2301[Abstract/Free Full Text]
23. Riddelle, K. S., Green, K. J., and Jones, J. C. (1991) J. Cell Biol. 112, 159-168[Abstract/Free Full Text]
24. Gonzalez, A. M., Gonzales, M., Herron, G. S., Nagavarapu, U., Hopkinson, S. B., Tsuruta, D., and Jones, J. C. (2002) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 99, 16075-16080[Abstract/Free Full Text]
25. Homan, S. M., Mercurio, A. M., and LaFlamme, S. E. (1998) J. Cell Sci. 111, 2717-2728[Abstract]
26. Homan, S. M., Martinez, R., Benware, A., and LaFlamme, S. E. (2002) Exp. Cell Res. 281, 107-114[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
27. Spinardi, L., Ren, Y.-L., Sanders, R., and Giancotti, F. G. (1993) Mol. Biol. Cell 4, 871-884[Abstract]
28. Giancotti, F. G. (1999) Nat. Cell Biol. 2, E13-E14
29. Mainiero, F., Pepe, A., Wary, K. K., Spinardi, L., Mohammadi, M., Schlessinger, J., and Giancotti, F. G. (1995) EMBO J. 14, 4470-4481[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
30. Mainiero, F., Pepe, A., Yeon, M., Ren, Y., and Giancotti, F. G. (1996) J. Cell Biol. 134, 241-253[Abstract/Free Full Text]
31. Xiong, J.-P., Stehle, T., Diefenbach, B., Zhang, R., Dunker, R., Scoll, D. L., Joachimiak, A., Goodman, S. L., and Arnaout, M. A. (2001) Science 294, 339-345[Abstract/Free Full Text]
32. Takagi, J., Petre, B. M., Walz, T., and Springer, T. A. (2002) Cell 110, 599-611[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
33. Tuckwell, D. S., Humphries, M. J. (1997) FEBS Lett. 400, 297-303[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
34. Nievers, M. G., Schaapveld, R. Q. J., Oomen, L. C. J. M., Fontao, L., Geerts, D., Sonnenberg, A. (1998) J. Cell Sci. 111, 1659-1672[Abstract]
35. Nievers, M. G., Kuikman, I., Geerts, D., Leigh, I. M., Sonnenberg, A. (2000) J. Cell Sci. 113, 963-973[Abstract]
36. Spinardi, L., Einheber, S., Cullen, T., Milner, T. A., Giancotti, F. G. (1995) J. Cell Biol. 129, 473-487[Abstract/Free Full Text]
37. Trusolino, L., Bertotti, A., and Comoglio, P. M. (2001) Cell 107, 643-654[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
38. Goldfinger, L. E., Stack, M. S., Jones, J. C. R. (1998) J. Cell Biol. 141, 255-265[Abstract/Free Full Text]