Advertisement
JBC

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M513095200 on May 16, 2006

J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 281, Issue 29, 19995-20002, July 21, 2006
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
281/29/19995    most recent
M513095200v1
Right arrow Submit a Letter to Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Park, H.-J.
Right arrow Articles by Galper, J. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Park, H.-J.
Right arrow Articles by Galper, J. B.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Transforming Growth Factor beta Regulates the Expression of the M2 Muscarinic Receptor in Atrial Myocytes via an Effect on RhoA and p190RhoGAP*

Ho-Jin Park{ddagger}12, Simone M. Ward§1, Jay S. Desgrosellier13, Serban P. Georgescu{ddagger}1, Alexander G. Papageorge||, Xiaoli Zhuang§, Joey V. Barnett, and Jonas B. Galper{ddagger}4

From the {ddagger}Molecular Cardiology Research Institute, Department of Medicine, Tufts New England Medical Center and Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts 02111, the §Cardiovascular Division, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, the Department of Pharmacology, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, Tennessee 37232, and the ||NCI, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892

Received for publication, December 8, 2005 , and in revised form, April 13, 2006.


   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Transforming growth factor beta (TGFbeta) signaling is involved in the development and regulation of multiple organ systems and cellular signaling pathways. We recently demonstrated that TGFbeta regulates the response of atrial myocytes to parasympathetic stimulation. Here, TGFbeta1 is shown to inhibit expression of the M2 muscarinic receptor (M2), which plays a critical role in the parasympathetic response of the heart. This effect is mimicked by overexpression of a dominant negative mutant of RhoA and by the RhoA kinase inhibitor Y27632, whereas adenoviral expression of a dominant activating-RhoA reverses TGFbeta inhibition of M2 expression. TGFbeta1 also mediates a decrease in GTP-bound RhoA and a reciprocal increase in the expression of the RhoA GTPase-activating protein, p190RhoGAP, whereas total RhoA is unchanged. Inhibition of M2 promoter activity by TGFbeta1 is mimicked by overexpression of p190RhoGAP, whereas a dominant negative mutant of p190RhoGAP reverses this effect of TGFbeta1. In contrast to atrial myocytes, in mink lung epithelial cells, in which TGFbeta signaling through activation of RhoA has been previously identified, TGFbeta1 stimulated an increase in GTP-bound RhoA in association with a reciprocal decrease in the expression of p190RhoGAP. Both effects demonstrated a similar dose dependence on TGFbeta1. Thus TGFbeta regulation of M2 muscarinic receptor expression is dependent on RhoA, and TGFbeta regulation of p190RhoGAP expression may be a cell type-specific mechanism for TGFbeta signaling through RhoA.


   INTRODUCTION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Control of the autonomic response of the heart is essential for the regulation of cardiac automaticity, heart rate, and contractile force (1). Autonomic regulation of the heart is determined by the balance between the response to stimuli from the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems. Much effort has focused on the regulation of sympathetic responsiveness and its role in cardiovascular diseases such as heart failure, cardiac hypertrophy, and the genesis of arrhythmias (2). Much less is known concerning the regulation of parasympathetic responsiveness despite its clear role in cardiovascular disease. Parasympathetic stimulation of the heart has been shown to play a role in the protection of the heart from the development of arrhythmias (3, 4), whereas parasympathetic dysfunction is associated with sudden death due to arrhythmias in patients with diabetic autonomic neuropathy (5). Parasympathetic stimulation of the heart decreases contractile rate via the binding of acetylcholine to atrial M2 muscarinic receptors (M2),5 which results in the dissociation of the heterotrimeric G-protein Gi2 into {alpha}i2 and beta{gamma} subunits (6). The latter activates the G-protein-dependent inward rectifying K+ channel, (GIRK1)2/(GIRK4)2, resulting in hyperpolarization of the atrial myocyte membrane and a decrease in the rate of contraction (6). The relationship between the control of expression of these proteins and the response of the heart to parasympathetic stimulation has been demonstrated in the porcine heart and in atrial myocytes (7, 8). Previously, we and others have demonstrated that TGFbeta regulates the response of atrial myocytes to parasympathetic stimulation via an effect on the expression of G{alpha}i2 and M2 (9–11). Here we demonstrate that TGFbeta regulates M2 expression by a novel mechanism involving alterations in RhoA activity.

TGFbeta signals by binding to the type II TGFbeta receptor, resulting in the phosphorylation of the type I receptor, activin receptor-like kinase (ALK) 5. Activated ALK5 then phosphorylates intracellular signaling molecules including members of the Smad family of transcription factors, Smad2/3, which bind to the common Smad4 to form a complex that is translocated to the nucleus. However, TGFbeta is also known to signal through small GTP-binding proteins such as Ras and RhoA (12). TGFbeta regulation of Ras has been shown to result in pleiotrophic effects that involve either the stimulation or the inhibition of Ras activity that is specific either for cell type or for the stage of embryonic development (9, 13–15). The Rho family of small GTP-binding proteins is involved in many cellular processes including cell adhesion, migration, and transformation (16). Bhowmick et al. (17) demonstrated that TGFbeta-dependent epithelial-to-mesenchymal transdifferentiation (EMT) in a nontransformed mouse mammary epithelial cell line was dependent on an increase in the level of GTP-bound RhoA. Active RhoA was also found to be increased downstream of TGFbeta in mink lung epithelial cells (Mv1Lu) (17). TGFbeta signaling via the inhibition of RhoA activity has not been demonstrated.

RhoA activation is regulated by cycling between the inactive GDP-bound form of RhoA to the active GTP-bound membrane-associated form. RhoA activity can be regulated by at least three different classes of molecules. Rho-GDP dissociation inhibitors (RhoGDIs) regulate RhoA activity by extracting the inactive GDP-bound form of RhoA from the membrane and forming inactive cytosolic complexes (18). The second class of molecules, RhoGEFs (guanine nucleotide exchange factors), stimulates the dissociation of Rho-GDP and enhance GTP binding, thereby increasing RhoA activity (19, 20). A third class of molecules, RhoGAPs (GTPase-activating proteins (GAPs)), bind to Rho-GTP and stimulate RhoGTPase activity, which decreases the level of GTP-bound RhoA, thereby decreasing RhoA signaling. Wolf et al. (21) and Arthur and Burridge (22) recently demonstrated that overexpression of p190RhoGAP inhibits Rho-dependent stimulation of cell signaling. Whether TGFbeta regulates RhoA activity through any of these molecules is unknown.

Here we present data that TGFbeta1 mediates a RhoA-dependent decrease in M2 muscarinic receptor protein, mRNA, and promoter activity in cultured embryonic chick atrial myocytes. This effect is mediated via a decrease in GTP-bound RhoA and is associated with the stimulation of p190RhoGAP expression by TGFbeta1. The importance of this mechanism for the regulation of the levels of RhoA activity in systems in which TGFbeta signaling is mediated via RhoA is further supported by the finding that TGFbeta1 increases GTP-bound RhoA and decreases p190RhoGAP expression in TGFbeta1-stimulated mink lung epithelial cells.


   EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Plasmids—The chicken M2 muscarinic receptor promoter-luciferase reporter was a gift of Dr. Neil Nathanson (23), pCDNA3-Myc-N19RhoA and pRK5 Myc-L63RhoA were gifts of Dr. Alan Hall, and WT p190RhoGAP and p190RhoGAPR1283A were gifts of Dr. Ian Macara. Y27632 was a gift from Dr. Y. Takae, Yoshitomi Pharmaceutical Industries, Osaka, Japan. The DN-Smad4 was a kind gift of Dr. Akiko Hata (24).

Cell Culture—Embryonic chick atrial myocyte cultures were prepared by a modification of the method of DeHaan (25) as described (26). Since we had previously demonstrated that culture of atrial myocytes in 6% lipoprotein-depleted serum, LPDS, stimulated the expression of the M2 muscarinic receptor, studies of the effects of TGFbeta were carried out in atrial myocytes cultured in LPDS or in 0.6% fetal bovine serum to maximize the signal. LPDS was prepared as described previously (26). Cell culture media and supplies were from Invitrogen. Mv1Lu were obtained from Dr. Harold Moses and cultured as described (17). Note that the effects of TGFbeta1 on M2 promoter activity in atrial myocytes were similar whether cells were incubated in LPDS or 0.6% fetal bovine serum (see Figs. 2 and 4).

RNase Protection Analysis—An M2 muscarinic receptor RNase protection probe was generated from an XbaI fragment derived from chicken M2 cDNA (nucleotides 97–1139) subcloned into pBluescript and linearized with BamHI (27). Using T7 RNA polymerase (Roche Applied Science) in the presence of [32P]UTP (800 Ci/mmol, PerkinElmer Life Sciences), this template gave a 449-nucleotide antisense riboprobe. The glyceraldehyde phosphate dehydrogenase RNase protection probe, used as a normalizing control to ensure equal sample loading, was generated from a cDNA template that was linearized with HindIII. Using T3 RNA polymerase, this template gave a 250-nucleotide antisense riboprobe. Probes were purified by PAGE on a 6% gel, and the major band corresponding to the predicted molecular weight for the riboprobe was excised and eluted overnight. Total RNA was isolated from primary cultures of embryonic chick atrial cells 14 days in ovo plated at 4 x 105cells/cm2 using guanidinium CsCl2 centrifugation as described (28). RNase protection was carried out as described previously (26). Riboprobes were hybridized to 15 µg of total RNA prepared from cells treated with either vehicle (4 mM HCl and 0.5 mg/ml bovine serum albumin) or TGFbeta1 (R&D systems Inc. Minneapolis, MN) as indicated. The samples were treated with RNase and analyzed by PAGE on 6% gels containing 8 M urea followed by autoradiography. Autoradiographic exposure was 8 h for the M2 muscarinic receptor and 2 h for glyceraldehyde phosphate dehydrogenase. The relative intensity of the bands was determined by densitometry scanning using NIH Image Pro.

Western Blotting Analysis—Embryonic chick atrial cells from hearts of embryos 14 days in ovo were grown for 3 days in LPDS at 4 x 105 cells/cm2 and then incubated with either vehicle or TGFbeta1 as indicated. On the fourth day, whole cell lysates were analyzed by SDS-PAGE using a 12% gel. Equal amounts of protein were loaded as determined by a DC protein assay (Bio-Rad). Equal loading was determined by Coomassie Blue staining. Western blot analysis was carried out as described (26). Immunodetection of the M2 receptor was performed using a rabbit polyclonal antibody from Research & Diagnostic Antibodies, Benicia, CA. Polyclonal goat anti-RhoGDI, antibody number A-20 (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Santa Cruz, CA), and monoclonal mouse anti-p190RhoGAP antibodies (BD Transduction Laboratories) were also used for immunodetection as indicated. The relative intensity of the bands was determined by densitometry scanning using NIH Image Pro.

Luciferase Assay—Embryonic chick atrial cells 14 days in ovo were plated on 6-well dishes at 4 x 105 cells/cm2 and grown in medium supplemented with 6% LPDS or 0.6% fetal bovine serum. On the second culture day, 0.5 µg of a 789-bp fragment of the chicken M2 promoter ligated to the 5' end of a firefly luciferase reporter gene in a pGL3 expression vector (M2-Luc) was transiently transfected into atrial myocytes with 0.2 µg of pCMV-beta-galactosidase (Clontech) using FuGENE 6 transfection reagent (Roche Applied Science) as recommended by the manufacturer. Total DNA was maintained at 2.1 µg/well by the addition of pBlueScript DNA. Sixteen hours prior to harvesting, cells were incubated with TGFbeta1 as indicated. On the fourth day, cells were washed in phosphate-buffered saline and solubilized in lysis buffer, 425 µl/plate (24 mM glycyl-glycine, 15 mM MgSO4, 4 mM EGTA, 1% Triton X-100, and 1 mM dithiothreitol). The cell extract was sonicated three times for 10 s and centrifuged at 13,000 x g for 3 min at 4 °C, and the supernatant assayed for luciferase and beta-galactosidase activity as described (29). In some experiments, cells were co-transfected with pCDNA3-Myc-N19RhoA (dominant negative, DN) or pRK5-Myc-L63RhoA (dominant activating, DA). In some experiments using 12-well dishes, cells were transfected with 150 ng of the M2 promoter-luciferase reporter construct using the Lipofectamine transfection reagent (Invitrogen). Where indicated, cells were co-transfected with either WT-p190RhoGAP or p190RhoGAPR1283A mutant or DN-Smad4 mutant constructs at the concentrations indicated. Total DNA was maintained at 1 µg/well using pBlueScript according to the manufacturer's recommendation. Twenty-four hours following transfection, cells were incubated with the indicated concentrations of TGFbeta1 in medium supplemented with 0.6% fetal bovine serum for an additional 24 h and harvested, and luciferase activity was determined as indicated above.

Measurement of GTP-bound RhoA—GTP-bound RhoA was determined as described (30). Chicken atrial myocytes 14 days in ovo were cultured at 4 x 105 cells/cm2 for 3 days in medium supplemented with either 6% LPDS plus vehicle or TGFbeta1 as indicated. Atrial myocytes were harvested on the fourth day, and whole cell lysates were precipitated with Rhotekin (Upstate%20Biotechnology">Upstate Biotechnology, Lake Placid, NY), a mouse glutathione S-transferase fusion protein with the Rho binding domain specific for the active GTP-bound RhoA (31). Rho binding domain precipitates were analyzed by SDS-PAGE using a 15% gel, and immunodetection of RhoA was carried out using a purified polyclonal rabbit anti-RhoA, antibody number 119 (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Santa Cruz, CA) (32, 33). For determination of total RhoA, 50 µg of whole cell lysate from each sample that had not been precipitated by Rhotekin was subjected to SDS-PAGE and Western blot analysis. TGFbeta1 inhibition of GTP-bound RhoA was calculated as -fold change normalized to total RhoA for each sample. Equal loading was determined by Coomassie Blue staining. For studies of GTP-bound RhoA in Mv1Lu, cells were washed and harvested, and GTP-bound RhoA and total RhoA were determined as described for atrial myocytes.

Adenoviral Infection of Atrial Myocytes with Ad-DA-RhoA—Recombinant adenovirus encoding a DA-L63RhoA under the control of a tetracycline-controlled transactivator has been described previously (34). Atrial myocytes were cultured to near confluence. Medium was removed, and cells were co-infected for 2 h with a virus encoding the transactivator and a virus expressing either GFP or a DA-RhoA under the positive control of the tetracycline-controlled transactivator at the indicated multiplicities of infection. Virus was removed, and cells were incubated for 24 h, after which they were treated with either TGFbeta or vehicle in medium containing 0.6% fetal bovine serum. Cells were harvested for Western blot analysis as described above.


Figure 1
View larger version (32K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 1.
Effect of TGFbeta1 on the expression of the M2 muscarinic receptor. Embryonic chick atrial myocytes 14 days in ovo were cultured in LPDS as described under "Experimental Procedures." On the third culture day, either 5 ng/ml TGFbeta1 or vehicle was added, incubation was continued for 16 h, and total cell lysates were prepared for protein and mRNA analysis. A, Western blot analysis of M2 muscarinic receptor protein. Gbeta is determined as a loading control. B, densitometry scanning of three experiments similar to that in A. C, RNase protection analysis of M2 receptor mRNA (upper panel) and glyceraldehyde phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH, lower panel). Lane P, undigested probe; lane –, vehicle; lane +, 5 ng/ml TGFbeta1. D, densitometry scanning of three experiments similar to that in C. (*, p < 0.05, **, p < 0.01.)

 
Statistical Analysis—All data are plotted as the mean ± S.E. Statistical significance was determined by a paired t test analysis. A value of p < 0.05 was considered significant.


   RESULTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Effect of TGFbeta1 on M2 Muscarinic Receptor Expression—To determine the mechanism by which TGFbeta1 inhibited the expression of the M2 muscarinic receptor in atrial myocytes, we chose growth conditions that would maximize M2 muscarinic receptor expression. We had previously demonstrated that growth of embryonic chick atrial myocytes in LPDS markedly increased both the expression of the M2 muscarinic receptor and the physiologic response of atrial myocytes to the muscarinic agonist carbamylcholine (32). For this reason, embryonic chick atrial cells 14 days in ovo were cultured in LPDS and subsequently incubated with either vehicle or 5 ng/ml TGFbeta1 for 16 h. Western blot analysis of cell lysates demonstrated that TGFbeta1 markedly decreased the level of total M2 receptor protein (Fig. 1A) by a mean of 46 ± 6.3% (n = 3, p < 0.01, Fig. 1B) when compared with control.

The effect of TGFbeta1 on M2 receptor mRNA expression and promoter activity was examined to determine whether the regulation of M2 muscarinic receptor by TGFbeta1 occurred at the level of transcription. RNase protection analysis of cells incubated with TGFbeta1 demonstrated that TGFbeta1 significantly decreased the level of M2 mRNA expression (Fig. 1, C and D) by a mean of 56 ± 8.3% (n = 3, p < 0.05) when compared with control. Finally, atrial myocytes were transfected with a construct expressing the chick M2 muscarinic receptor promoter ligated to a luciferase reporter (23) and incubated with either vehicle or TGFbeta1. TGFbeta1 decreased M2 promoter activity by 56 ± 4% (n = 5, p < 0.001) when compared with control, Fig. 2A.


Figure 2
View larger version (30K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 2.
Effect of TGFbeta1, Smad, and RhoA mutants on M2 muscarinic receptor promoter activity and the effect of Rho kinase inhibition on M2 expression. Chick atrial myocytes cultured in medium supplemented with LPDS were co-transfected with the M2 muscarinic receptor promoter ligated to a promoterless luciferase reporter (M2-Luc) and a construct expressing beta-galactosidase plus 0, 100, and 150 ng of a construct expressing a DN-Smad4 (A) or 0 or 150 ng of a construct expressing a DN-RhoA (N19-RhoA) (B). Following transfection, cells were incubated for 16 h with either 5 ng/ml TGFbeta1 or vehicle. Cells were harvested, and luciferase activity and beta-galactosidase activity was determined. A, n = 5, *, p < 0.01 when compared with sham control; **, p < 0.004 when compared with TGFbeta1 (B). **, p < 0.004, when compared with sham control. Data are normalized to the ratio of luciferase to beta-galactosidase activity in cells cultured with vehicle adjusted to 1. C, cells were incubated with vehicle, TGFbeta1, or the Rho Kinase inhibitor Y27632, 20 µM, and M2 receptor expression determined by Western blot analysis. Data are typical of three similar experiments.

 
The Smad family of transcription factors is an important mediator of many TGFbeta signaling events. To determine whether TGFbeta1 inhibition of M2 promoter activity was Smad-dependent, atrial myocytes were co-transfected with the M2 promoter luciferase reporter and increasing concentrations of a construct expressing a truncated Smad4 containing only the DNA binding domain, which behaves as a dominant negative mutant (24). Expression of the DN-Smad4 completely reversed the inhibition of M2 promoter activity by TGFbeta1 in a dose-dependent manner (Fig. 2A).

Role of RhoA in TGFbeta1 Inhibition of M2 Receptor Expression—In addition to Smads, RhoA has been implicated in several TGFbeta signaling pathways. To determine whether RhoA played a role in TGFbeta1-mediated inhibition of M2 promoter activity, atrial myocytes were co-transfected with the M2 promoter luciferase reporter and a construct expressing a dominant negative mutant of RhoA, N19-RhoA (35). N19-RhoA expression inhibited M2 promoter activity 74 ± 4% (n = 3, p < 0.004) when compared with control (Fig. 2B), demonstrating that N19-RhoA mimicked the effect of TGFbeta1 on M2 promoter activity. Y27632, a specific inhibitor of Rho kinase, also inhibited M2 promoter activity (data not shown). Furthermore, Western blot analysis of the expression of the M2 receptor in cells incubated with Y27632 demonstrated that Y27632 also mimicked the effect of TGFbeta1 by inhibiting M2 receptor expression (Fig. 2C). To further determine the role of Rho in the regulation of M2 receptor expression, atrial myocytes were co-transfected with the M2 promoter luciferase reporter and a construct expressing a dominant activating mutant of RhoA, L63-RhoA (35). DA-RhoA expression not only reversed the effect of TGFbeta on M2 promoter activity but also stimulated activity 1.35 ± 0.02 (n = 4, p < 0.01) -fold above control (Fig. 3A). Co-infection of atrial myocytes with adenoviruses expressing the tetracycline transactivator, and GFP had no effect on TGFbeta inhibition of M2 muscarinic receptor expression as determined by Western blot analysis (Fig. 3B). However, co-infection with the transactivator plus an adenovirus expressing the DA-L63RhoA completely reversed the effect of TGFbeta on M2 expression (Fig. 3B). These data support the conclusion that TGFbeta inhibition of M2 receptor expression is dependent on RhoA.

TGFbeta1 Inhibits RhoA Activity by Decreasing GTP-bound RhoA—To determine whether TGFbeta1 regulated RhoA activity in atrial myocytes, cells were cultured in medium supplemented with LPDS plus vehicle or LPDS plus increasing concentrations of TGFbeta1, and the level of GTP-bound RhoA determined. Whole cell lysates were precipitated with Rhotekin. Western blot analysis of Rhotekin precipitates using an anti-RhoA antibody revealed a marked dose-dependent decrease in GTP-bound RhoA, whereas total RhoA in unprecipitated aliquots of these extracts was unchanged (Fig. 4A). The mean of three experiments similar to that in Fig. 4A demonstrated that when compared with control, TGFbeta1 decreased GTP-bound RhoA by 42 ± 5% (n = 4, p < 0.01) at a concentration of 1 ng/ml and 64 ± 7% (n = 4, p < 0.01) at 5 ng/ml (Fig. 4B). TGFbeta1 incubation resulted in a small decrease in membrane-bound RhoA, which was not statistically significant (data not shown).

p190RhoGAP Expression Is Stimulated by TGFbeta1—A decrease in GTP-bound RhoA in response to TGFbeta1 might be explained in part by an increase in RhoGDI or RhoGAP. Western blot analysis of whole cell lysates of atrial myocytes cultured in LPDS and incubated with either vehicle or TGFbeta1 demonstrated that TGFbeta1 significantly increased the expression of p190RhoGAP by 2.18 ± 0.12-fold (n = 5, p < 0.01) with no effect on RhoGDI (Fig. 5, A and B).

p190RhoGAP Inhibits M2 Promoter Activity—We predicted that if M2 promoter activity is inhibited by a decrease in GTP-bound RhoA, then overexpression of p190RhoGAP should mimic the effect of TGFbeta1 on M2 promoter activity. Atrial myocytes were transfected with the M2 receptor luciferase reporter and incubated with either vehicle or TGFbeta1 or co-transfected either with p190RhoGAP or p190RhoGAPR1283A, a dominant negative mutant of p190RhoGAP that binds to GTP-bound Rho but lacks GAP activity (22, 36–39). As shown previously, TGFbeta1 decreased M2 promoter activity by 46 ± 5% (n = 3, p < 0.01), whereas p190RhoGAP decreased promoter activity by 36 ± 2% (n = 3, p < 0.01), Fig. 5C. Co-transfection of atrial myocytes with the M2 receptor luciferase reporter and p190RhoGAPR1283A had no effect on the basal M2 receptor promoter activity, Fig. 5C.


Figure 3
View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 3.
The effect of a DA-RhoA mutant on M2 muscarinic receptor expression. A, chick atrial myocytes incubated as described above were co-transfected with M2-Luc and a construct expressing GFP (left and middle columns) or a DA-L63RhoA mutant (right column) followed by a 16-h incubation with either sham or 5 ng/ml TGFbeta1 and luciferase activity determined as described under "Experimental Procedures." Values are the mean of four determinations, *, p < 0.1, when compared with sham control. B, chick atrial myocytes were co-infected with an adenovirus expressing a tetracycline-controlled transactivator at a multiplicity of infection of 50 plus an adenovirus expressing either GFP or a Myc-DA-RhoA under the positive control of a tetracycline-controlled transactivator at a multiplicity of infection of 20 as described under "Experimental Procedures." Cells were harvested, and M2 receptor expression was determined by Western blot analysis. Membranes were probed with an anti-Myc antibody indicating DA-RhoA expression, and beta-actin was determined as a loading control. C, the mean of three experiments carried out as described in panel B. **, p < 0.01 as compared with cells infected with Ad-GFP.

 
If TGFbeta inhibition of M2 promoter activity is mediated via increased expression of p190RhoGAP, then we predicted that overexpression of DN-p190RhoGAP should prevent TGFbeta-mediated inhibition of M2 receptor expression. Atrial myocytes co-transfected with the M2 receptor luciferase reporter and increasing concentrations of a construct expressing DN-p190RhoGAP were incubated with TGFbeta1. Although TGFbeta1 inhibited M2 receptor activity 56 ± 3% (n = 4) in the absence of DN-p190RhoGAP, expression of DN-p190RhoGAP completely reversed the effect of TGFbeta1 on M2 receptor promoter activity in a dose-dependent manner (Fig. 5D). These data demonstrate that p190RhoGAP is required for TGF1-mediated inhibition of M2 receptor expression.


Figure 4
View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 4.
The effect of TGFbeta1 on GTP-bound RhoA. A, cells were incubated for 16 h with 5 ng/ml TGFbeta1 or vehicle and harvested, and the cell lysates were divided for the measurement of GTP-bound RhoA by immunoprecipitation with Rhotekin (upper panel) or RhoA expression determined by Western blot analysis (lower panel). B, dose dependence of TGFbeta1 inhibition of GTP-bound RhoA at 0, 1, and 5 ng/ml TGFbeta1 (upper panel); lower panel, densitometry scanning of four experiments similar to that in the upper panel. **, p < 0.01.

 
TGFbeta1 Decreases p190RhoGAP Expression and Increases RhoA Activity in Mv1Lu—To determine whether the regulation of p190RhoGAP expression plays a role in TGFbeta-regulated RhoA activity in other cell types, we examined p190RhoGAP expression in Mv1Lu cells in which TGFbeta had previously been shown to stimulate RhoA-dependent EMT. Mv1Lu cells were incubated with increasing concentrations of TGFbeta1 for 16 h. Western blot analysis of whole cell extracts demonstrated that TGFbeta1 decreased p190RhoGAP expression in a dose-dependent manner (Fig. 6A), opposite to that shown in atrial myocytes (Fig. 5, A and B). Immunoprecipitation of whole cell extracts used for the determination of p190RhoGAP expression with Rhotekin followed by Western blot analysis with anti-RhoA antibody demonstrated that TGFbeta1 increased GTP-bound RhoA with a dose dependence similar to that for the inhibition of p190RhoGAP expression, (Fig. 6A). Analysis of three experiments similar to that in Fig. 6A demonstrated that TGFbeta1 decreased p190RhoGAP by 29 ± 9.8% (n = 3, p < 0.01) and 54 ± 9.7% (n = 3, p < 0.01) and increased GTP-bound RhoA by 2.5 ± 0.4-fold (n = 3, p < 0.05) and 3.17 ± 0.5-fold (n = 3, p < 0.05) at 0.5 ng/ml and 2 ng/ml TGFbeta1, respectively (Fig. 6B). Western blot analysis of replicate membranes demonstrated that TGFbeta1 had no effect on either total RhoA or RhoGDI (Fig. 6, A and B).


   DISCUSSION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
 
We had previously demonstrated that TGFbeta treatment of atrial myocytes decreased their response to parasympathetic stimulation (9, 15). Data presented here demonstrate that this decrease in parasympathetic response is due at least in part to the inhibition of M2 muscarinic receptor expression by TGFbeta1 and that this effect is dependent on RhoA. This conclusion is supported by the finding that TGFbeta1 inhibition of M2 muscarinic receptor expression and M2 promoter activity correlates with a decrease in GTP-bound RhoA. Furthermore, TGFbeta1 inhibition of M2 promoter activity is mimicked by co-expression of a dominant negative RhoA mutant, whereas co-expression of a dominant activating RhoA mutant reversed the effect of TGFbeta1 on M2 promoter activity. Finally, M2 muscarinic receptor expression is inhibited by the Rho kinase inhibitor Y27632, whereas TGFbeta1 inhibition of M2 expression is reversed by viral expression of a dominant activating mutant of RhoA.


Figure 5
View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 5.
Effect of TGFbeta1 on the expression of p190RhoGAP and the effect of expression of p190RhoGAP mutants on M2 promoter activity. A, embryonic chick atrial cells cultured in medium supplemented with LPDS were incubated for 16 h with vehicle or 5 ng/ml TGFbeta1. Cells were harvested, and p190RhoGAP (upper panel) and RhoGDI (lower panel) were determined by Western blot analysis of whole cell lysates. B, densitometry scanning of five experiments similar to that in panel A (**, p < 0.001). C, cells were transfected with the M2 promoter luciferase reporter alone or the M2 promoter-reporter plus 100 ng of a construct expressing either WT-p190RhoGAP or a p190RhoGAPR1283A GAP-deficient mutant and incubated for 24 h followed by the addition of 5 ng/ml TGFbeta1 or vehicle and incubation continued for 24 h. Cells were harvested, and promoter activity was determined as in Fig. 2A (n = 5, **, p < 0.01). D, experiment was carried out as in panel C except that cells were co-transfected with 0, 100, and 150 ng of the p190RhoGAPR1283A construct, respectively, and incubated with either vehicle or 5 ng/ml TGFbeta1 as indicated (n = 4). **, p < 0.01 when compared with TGFbeta1 without p190RhoGAPR1283A expression.

 
The mechanism by which TGFbeta regulates RhoA-dependent signaling is not known. RhoGDI has been shown to regulate RhoA activity by binding GDP-bound RhoA and transporting it from the membrane to the cytoplasm (18). However, we found no change in the levels of RhoGDI in response to TGFbeta. Recently, RhoA has been reported to be targeted for degradation by TGFbeta via ubiquitination involving Par6 and Smurf1 (40). However, we found no change in total RhoA after TGFbeta treatment, eliminating this possible mechanism. It has been well established that RhoGAP decreases RhoA activity by binding to GTP-bound RhoA at the membrane and stimulating RhoA GTPase activity, thus decreasing the level of GTP-bound RhoA (18, 19). The finding that the TGFbeta1-mediated decrease in GTP-bound RhoA is associated with a reciprocal increase in the level of expression of p190RhoGAP suggested that TGFbeta1 might regulate RhoA activity in atrial myocytes via an effect on p190RhoGAP expression. The finding that overexpression of wild type p190RhoGAP mimics the effect of TGFbeta1 on M2 promoter activity, whereas overexpression of a dominant negative p190RhoGAP reverses the effect of TGFbeta1 on M2 promoter activity, further supports this conclusion.


Figure 6
View larger version (36K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 6.
Dose dependence of TGFbeta1 regulation of GTP-bound RhoA and p190RhoGAP in mink lung epithelial cells. A, mink lung epithelial cells were cultured as described with the indicated concentrations of TGFbeta1. Whole cell lysates were prepared, and aliquots were analyzed for GTP-bound RhoA by immunoprecipitation and subjected to Western blot analysis for p190RhoGAP. Membranes were successively stripped and probed for total RhoA, RhoGDI, and {alpha}-tubulin for determination of equal loading of protein. B, densitometry scanning of three experiments similar to that in panel A.*, p < 0.05, **, p < 0.01.

 
Several studies have demonstrated that increased expression of p190RhoGAP or increased p190RhoGAP activity is associated with decreased RhoA activity. Arthur and Burridge (22) demonstrated that overexpression of p190RhoGAP decreased the ratio of GTP/GDP-bound RhoA and stimulated cell spreading and cell migration by promoting membrane protrusion. Wolf et al. (21) demonstrated that transfection of oligodendroglioma cells with p190RhoGAP resulted in a decrease in GTP-bound RhoA and a block in proliferation similar to that seen in cells treated with the Rho kinase inhibitor Y27632. Although our study is the first demonstration that cytokine signaling regulates the expression of p190RhoGAP, the conclusion that p190RhoGAP expression might be regulatable and that changes in p190RhoGAP activity might regulate RhoA activity is further supported by the finding that ouabain treatment of Madin-Darby canine kidney cells resulted in a decrease in GTP-bound RhoA accompanied by cell detachment and an increase in the level of p190RhoGAP expression (41). Epidermal growth factor stimulation of c-Src-dependent phosphorylation of p190RhoGAP increases the binding of a constitutively activated RhoA to p190RhoGAP, resulting in a decrease in RhoA signaling (38). Finally, integrin signaling and cadherin expression have been shown to stimulate the phosphorylation of p190RhoGAP and decrease the ratio of GTP/GDP-bound RhoA (42).


Figure 7
View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIGURE 7.
Schematic representation of the proposed mechanism for RhoA-dependent TGFbeta signaling in cardiomyocytes and mink lung epithelial cells. In cardiac myocytes, TGFbeta1 up-regulates p190RhoGAP expression, which decreases GTP-RhoA, resulting in a decrease in M2 muscarinic receptor expression. In epithelial cells, TGFbeta1 down-regulates p190RhoGAP expression, which increases GTP-RhoA resulting in EMT. The effects of TGFbeta1 in cardiac myocytes are Smad-dependent, whereas effects in epithelial cells are Smad-independent.

 
Comparison of the effects of TGFbeta on GTP-bound RhoA and the expression of p190RhoGAP in atrial myocytes and Mv1Lu cells suggests the conclusion that the regulation of p190RhoGAP expression might regulate RhoA activity and is consistent with the hypothesis that differences in the regulation of p190RhoGAP expression might account for these pleiotrophic effects of TGFbeta signaling on RhoA activity. TGFbeta has been shown to induce epithelial to mesenchymal transdifferentiation in Mv1Lu via stimulation of RhoA activity (17). TGFbeta stimulation of RhoA activity has been shown to be associated with an early phase peaking at 15 min and a late phase peaking at 12–16 h associated with the formation of stress fibers and actin filaments characteristic of epithelial to mesenchymal transdifferentiation (43). We demonstrated that the increase in GTP-bound RhoA in Mv1Lu was associated with a reciprocal decrease in the expression of p190RhoGAP and a late phase. Both the increase in GTP-bound RhoA and the decrease in p190RhoGAP expression demonstrated a similar dose dependence on TGFbeta1. Thus in two different cell systems, TGFbeta1 signaling was mediated via opposing effects on RhoA activity. Taken together with the studies cited above demonstrating that changes in the expression and activity of p190RhoGAP regulated RhoA activity, the demonstration of a reciprocal relationship between the expression of p190RhoGAP and RhoA activity in atrial myocytes and Mv1Lu cells suggests the conclusion that TGFbeta regulation of RhoA via the control of p190RhoGAP expression might constitute a cell type-specific mechanism for RhoA-dependent TGFbeta signaling (Fig. 7).

The role of small GTP-binding proteins in the pleiotrophic effects of TGFbeta is also supported by studies that demonstrate that TGFbeta regulation of the activity of Ras is specific either for cell type or for the stage of embryonic development. Thus TGFbeta increased the level of GTP-bound Ras in untransformed epithelial cells, and dominant negative mutant Ras inhibited TGFbeta stimulation of Smad1 phosphorylation (13). However, TGFbeta suppressed the transformed phenotype in Ras transformed hepatocytes (14). Our data demonstrate that TGFbeta1 exerts similar cell type-specific pleiotrophic effects on RhoA activity.

RhoA activity is also regulated by RhoA GEFs, which regulate the rate of release of GDP from GDP-bound RhoA (19, 20). Studies presented here do not rule out the possibility that changes in RhoA activity in atrial myocytes and Mv1Lu are in part due to TGFbeta regulation of RhoA GEFs.

Our data demonstrating that TGFbeta attenuates the parasympathetic response in atrial myocytes in association with decreased expression of the M2 muscarinic receptor and G{alpha}i2 (9) and the role of RhoA and p190RhoGAP in regulating TGFbeta signaling may have important implications in our understanding of cardiovascular disease. Parasympathetic dysfunction in diabetic autonomic neuropathy has been related to the increased incidence of life-threatening arrhythmias and sudden death in the diabetic population (44–46). Diabetes has been associated with increased TGFbeta signaling in peripheral tissues (47, 48). Based on our data demonstrating a decreased parasympathetic response in atrial myocytes treated with TGFbeta (15), parasympathetic dysfunction in diabetes might be secondary to increased TGFbeta signaling. In addition, TGFbeta signaling has been implicated in ventricular remodeling following myocardial infarction, in heart failure, and as a complication of hypertension (49–51). Increased TGFbeta signaling has also been implicated in the increased interstitial fibrosis associated with the cardiomyopathy and renal dysfunction in diabetes mellitus (44, 47). Therefore, understanding the role of specific signaling molecules downstream of TGFbeta may provide novel therapeutic opportunities for the treatment of cardiovascular disease.


   FOOTNOTES
 
* This work was supported in part by National Institutes of Health Grants HL54225 and HL66467 (to J. B. G.) and HL52922 (to J. V. B.). 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. Back

1 These authors contributed equally to this work. Back

3 Supported by a predoctoral fellowship from the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America Foundation. Back

2 A recipient of a Scientist Development Grant from the American Heart Association. To whom correspondence may be addressed. Tel.: 617-636-9005; E-mail: hpark{at}tufts-nemc.org. 4 To whom correspondence may be addressed. Tel.: 617-636-9004; E-mail: jgalper{at}tufts-nemc.org.

5 The abbreviations used are: M2, M2 muscarinic receptor; TGFbeta, transforming growth factor beta; LPDS, lipoprotein-depleted serum; EMT, epithelial-to-mesenchymal transdifferentiation; RhoGAP, Rho GTPase-activating protein; RhoGDI, Rho-GDP dissociation inhibitors; GEF, guanine nucleotide exchange factors; GFP, green fluorescent protein; mv1LU, mink lung epithelial cells; DN, dominant negative; DA, dominant activating. Back


   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
We thank Dr. Akiko Hata for kindly providing the DN-Smad4 construct and insightful discussions of the data.



   REFERENCES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Zipes, D. P., and Jalife, J. (2004) in Cardiac Electrophysiology from Cell to Bedside, 4th Ed., pp. 103–111, W. B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia, PA
  2. Opie, L. (2004) Mechanisms of Cardiac Contraction and Relaxation, W. B. Saunders Co., Philadelphia, PA
  3. Vanoli, E., De Ferrari, G. M., Stramba-Badiale, M., Hull, S. S., Jr., Foreman, R. D., and Schwartz, P. J. (1991) Circ. Res. 68, 1471–1481[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Schwartz, P. J., Billman, G. E., and Stone, H. L. (1984) Circulation 69, 790–800[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  5. Schwartz, P. J., La Rovere, M. T., and Vanoli, E. (1992) Circulation 85, Suppl. 1, I77–I91[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  6. Logothetis, D. E., Kurachi, Y., Galper, J., Neer, E. J., and Clapham, D. E. (1987) Nature 325, 321–326[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  7. Donahue, J. K., Heldman, A. W., Fraser, H., McDonald, A. D., Miller, J. M., Rade, J. J., Eschenhagen, T., and Marban, E. (2000) Nat. Med. 6, 1395–1398[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  8. Haigh, L. S., Leatherman, G. F., O'Hara, D. S., Smith, T. W., and Galper, J. B. (1988) J. Biol. Chem. 263, 15608–15618[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Ward, S. M., Gadbut, A. P., Tang, D., Papageorge, A. G., Wu, L., Li, G., Barnett, J. V., and Galper, J. B. (2002) J. Mol. Cell Cardiol. 34, 1217–1226[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  10. Barnes, P. J., Haddad, E. B., and Rousell, J. (1997) Life Sci. 60, 1015–1021[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  11. Jackson, D. A., and Nathanson, N. M. (1997) Biochem. Pharmacol. 54, 525–527[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  12. Mulder, K. M. (2000) Cytokine Growth Factor Rev. 11, 23–35[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  13. Yue, J., Frey, R. S., and Mulder, K. M. (1999) Oncogene 18, 2033–2037[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  14. Serra, R., Verderame, M. F., and Isom, H. C. (1992) Cell Growth & Differ. 3, 693–704[Abstract]
  15. Ward, S. M., Desgrosellier, J. S., Zhuang, X., Barnett, J. V., and Galper, J. B. (2002) J. Biol. Chem. 277, 50183–50189[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Bishop, A. L., and Hall, A. (2000) Biochem. J. 348, 241–255[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  17. Bhowmick, N. A., Ghiassi, M., Bakin, A., Aakre, M., Lundquist, C. A., Engel, M. E., Arteaga, C. L., and Moses, H. L. (2001) Mol. Biol. Cell 12, 27–36[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Olofsson, B. (1999) Cell. Signal. 11, 545–554[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  19. Moon, S. Y., and Zheng, Y. (2003) Trends Cell Biol. 13, 13–22[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  20. Rossman, K. L., Der, C. J., and Sondek, J. (2005) Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell. Biol. 6, 167–180[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  21. Wolf, R. M., Draghi, N., Liang, X., Dai, C., Uhrbom, L., Eklof, C., Westermark, B., Holland, E. C., and Resh, M. D. (2003) Genes Dev. 17, 476–487[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Arthur, W. T., and Burridge, K. (2001) Mol. Biol. Cell 12, 2711–2720[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Rosoff, M. L., Wei, J., and Nathanson, N. M. (1996) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 93, 14889–14894[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Lagna, G., Hata, A., Hemmati-Brivanlou, A., and Massague, J. (1996) Nature 383, 832–836[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  25. DeHaan, R. L. (1967) Circulation 35, 821–833[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Gadbut, A. P., Toupin, D. K., Kilbourne, E. J., and Galper, J. B. (1994) J. Biol. Chem. 269, 30707–30712[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  27. Kilbourne, E. J., and Galper, J. B. (1994) Gene (Amst.) 150, 341–344[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  28. Sambrook, J., Fritsh, E. F., and Maniatis, T. (1990) Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual, pp. 7.19–7.22, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, NY
  29. Holtzman, E. J., Soper, B. W., Stow, J. L., Ausiello, D. A., and Ercolani, L. (1991) J. Biol. Chem. 266, 1763–1771[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. Zhang, K., Papageorge, A. G., and Lowy, D. R. (1992) Science 257, 671–674[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  31. Ren, X. D., and Schwartz, M. A. (2000) Methods Enzymol. 325, 264–272[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  32. Gadbut, A. P., Wu, L., Tang, D., Papageorge, A., Watson, J. A., and Galper, J. B. (1997) EMBO J. 16, 7250–7260[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  33. Qiu, M. S., Pitts, A. F., Winters, T. R., and Green, S. H. (1991) J. Cell Biol. 115, 795–808[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  34. Kalman, D., Gomperts, S. N., Hardy, S., Kitamura, M., and Bishop, J. M. (1999) Mol. Biol. Cell 10, 1665–1683[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  35. Olson, M. F., Ashworth, A., and Hall, A. (1995) Science 269, 1270–1272[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  36. Tatsis, N., Lannigan, D. A., and Macara, I. G. (1998) J. Biol. Chem. 273, 34631–34638[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  37. Li, R., Zhang, B., and Zheng, Y. (1997) J. Biol. Chem. 272, 32830–32835[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  38. Haskell, M. D., Nickles, A. L., Agati, J. M., Su, L., Dukes, B. D., and Parsons, S. J. (2001) J. Cell Sci. 114, 1699–1708[Abstract]
  39. Arthur, W. T., Petch, L. A., and Burridge, K. (2000) Curr. Biol. 10, 719–722[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  40. Ozdamar, B., Bose, R., Barrios-Rodiles, M., Wang, H. R., Zhang, Y., and Wrana, J. L. (2005) Science 307, 1603–1609[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  41. Contreras, R. G., Shoshani, L., Flores-Maldonado, C., Lazaro, A., and Cereijido, M. (1999) J. Cell Sci. 112, 4223–4232[Abstract]
  42. Noren, N. K., Arthur, W. T., and Burridge, K. (2003) J. Biol. Chem. 278, 13615–13618[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  43. Edlund, S., Landstrom, M., Heldin, C. H., and Aspenstrom, P. (2002) Mol. Biol. Cell 13, 902–914[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  44. O'Brien, I. A., McFadden, J. P., and Corrall, R. J. (1991) Q. J. Med. 79, 495–502[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  45. Orchard, T. J., CE, L. L., Maser, R. E., and Kuller, L. H. (1996) Diabetes Res. Clin. Pract. 34, (suppl.) S165–S171[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  46. Curb, J. D., Rodriguez, B. L., Burchfiel, C. M., Abbott, R. D., Chiu, D., and Yano, K. (1995) Circulation 91, 2591–2595[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  47. McGowan, T. A., Zhu, Y., and Sharma, K. (2004) Curr. Diab. Rep. 4, 447–454[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  48. Martin, J., Kelly, D. J., Mifsud, S. A., Zhang, Y., Cox, A. J., See, F., Krum, H., Wilkinson-Berka, J., and Gilbert, R. E. (2005) Cardiovasc Res. 65, 694–701[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  49. Rosenkranz, S. (2004) Cardiovasc Res. 63, 423–432[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  50. Weber, K. T. (2000) Curr. Opin. Cardiol. 15, 264–272[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  51. MacKenna, D., Summerour, S. R., and Villarreal, F. J. (2000) Cardiovasc Res. 46, 257–263[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?



This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
281/29/19995    most recent
M513095200v1
Right arrow Submit a Letter to Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Park, H.-J.
Right arrow Articles by Galper, J. B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Park, H.-J.
Right arrow Articles by Galper, J. B.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 All ASBMB Journals   Molecular and Cellular Proteomics 
 Journal of Lipid Research   ASBMB Today 
Copyright © 2006 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
Advertisement
spacer
Advertisement
Advertisement