Regulation of Rac and Cdc42 Pathways by Gi during Lysophosphatidic Acid-induced Cell Spreading*

Hiroshi UedaDagger , Rika MorishitaDagger , Junji Yamauchi§, Hiroshi Itoh§||, Kanefusa KatoDagger , and Tomiko AsanoDagger **

From the Dagger  Department of Biochemistry, Institute for Developmental Research, Aichi Human Service Center, Kasugai, Aichi 480-0392 and the § Faculty of Bioscience and Biotechnology, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Midori-ku, Yokohama 226-8501, Japan

Received for publication, August 18, 2000, and in revised form, November 17, 2000



    ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

The pertussis toxin-sensitive G protein, Gi, has been implicated in lysophosphatidic acid-induced cell mitogenesis and migration, but the mechanisms remain to be detailed. In the present study, we found that pertussis toxin blocks lysophosphatidic acid-induced cell spreading of NIH 3T3 fibroblasts on fibronectin. This prevention of cell spreading was eliminated by the expression of constitutively active mutants of Rho family small GTP-binding proteins, Rac and Cdc42, but not by Rho. In addition, activation of the endogenous forms was suppressed by pertussis toxin, indicating that Gi-induced cell spreading is mediated through the Rac and Cdc42 pathway. Transfection of constitutively active mutants of Galpha i and Galpha 11 and Gbeta gamma subunits enhanced spreading of pertussis toxin-treated cells. Gbeta 1 with Ggamma 12, a major Ggamma form in fibroblasts, was more effective for increasing cell spreading than Gbeta 1gamma 2 or Gbeta 1 plus Ggamma 12S2A, a mutant in which Ser-2, a phosphorylation site for protein kinase C, is replaced with alanine. In addition, a protein kinase C inhibitor diminished Gbeta 1gamma 12-induced cell spreading, suggesting a role for phosphorylation of the protein. These findings indicate that both Galpha i and Gbeta gamma stimulate Rac and Cdc42 pathways with lysophosphatidic acid-induced cell spreading on fibronectin.



    INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

Most cell types respond to extracellular matrix proteins by adhering and then spreading out to acquire a flattened morphology. The cell spreading is also regulated by soluble factors from serum such as lysophosphatidic acid (LPA)1 and platelet-derived growth factor, which then induce cell growth and migration (1, 2). The process is accomplished by complex dynamic rearrangements of the actin cytoskeleton, and the dynamics appear to be coordinated in space and time by intracellular signaling pathways involving Rho family small GTP-binding proteins (3, 4), although the precise mechanisms are poorly understood.

Rho family members such as Rho, Rac, and Cdc42 are part of the Ras superfamily of small GTP-binding proteins that act as guanine nucleotide-regulated switches (3). Their activity is regulated primarily by two groups of proteins: guanine nucleotide exchange factors (GEF), which catalyze exchange of GDP for GTP; and GTPase-activating proteins, which stimulate hydrolysis of GTP to GDP. Upon binding to GTP, Rho family GTP-binding proteins interact with and activate various downstream effector proteins such as Rho kinases and p21-activated kinases (PAK). Rho stimulates the formation of actin stress fibers and focal adhesions, whereas Cdc42 activation triggers the extension of filopodia and Rac controls growth factor-stimulated membrane ruffling and formation of lamellipodia (3). It has been defined how soluble extracellular factors induce the assembly of focal adhesions and actin filaments in serum-starved adherent fibroblasts through activation of Rho. However, there are several reports that Rho family small GTP-binding proteins are also involved in the generation of intracellular morphological structures during cell spreading on an extracellular matrix (5-7). Activation of Rac and Cdc42 and consequent stimulation of PAK have been observed in NIH 3T3 cells in response to plating cells on fibronectin (5). With Rat1 cells, cell spreading was significantly reduced by expression of dominant negative mutants of Rac, Cdc42, and Rho (6). More recently, it was shown that plating Swiss 3T3 cells on fibronectin-coated dishes elicited a transient inhibition of Rho activation, suggesting the existence of an adhesion-dependent negative feedback loop (7).

LPA induces multiple cellular responses through a G protein-coupled receptor and activates Ras and Rho family GTP-binding proteins via different pathways (1). In fibroblasts, LPA stimulates cell growth and lowers cAMP levels in a pertussis toxin (PTX)-sensitive manner, suggesting coupling of the LPA receptor to Gi family G proteins (8). LPA-induced activation of the Ras/mitogen-activated protein kinase cascade also occurs in a PTX-sensitive fashion, and Gbeta gamma subunits of G proteins transduce this effect (9, 10). In contrast, in a variety of cells, stimulation of phospholipase C by LPA was shown to be PTX-insensitive, so that LPA receptor coupling to Gq family G proteins may also be important (11). LPA induces the Rho-dependent formation of actin stress fibers and focal adhesions in quiescent Swiss 3T3 fibroblasts (12, 13). Galpha 12 and Galpha 13 probably mediate this action, because microinjection of constitutively active mutants of Galpha 12 and Galpha 13 into fibroblasts triggers actin polymerization in a Rho-dependent manner (12, 13).

It is well known that LPA induces cell migration, which is blocked by PTX, suggesting the involvement of Gi. However, regulation of Rho family GTP-binding proteins by Gi has not been clearly shown to date. In the present study, we found that PTX blocks LPA-induced cell spreading of NIH 3T3 fibroblasts on fibronectin. We show here Gi stimulation via the LPA receptor leads to Rac and Cdc42 activation during cell spreading.


    EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

Materials-- pCMV5-Galpha i2Q205L, pCMV5-Galpha 11Q209L, pCMV5-Galpha sQ227L, pCMV5-Galpha 12Q229L, pCMV5-Ggamma 2, pCMV5-Ggamma 12, pCMV5-Ggamma 12S2A, pCMV5-Gbeta 1, the pCMV5 carboxyl terminus of beta -adrenergic receptor kinase 1 (beta ARKct), pCMV5-FLAG-RhoAT19N, pCMV5-FLAG-Rac1T17N, pCMV5-FLAG-Cdc42HsT17N, pCMV5-FLAG-RhoAG14V, pCMV5-FLAG-Rac1G12V, and pCMV5-FLAG-Cdc42HsG12V were constructed as detailed previously (14-20). Antibodies against Galpha i2, Ggamma 7, Ggamma 12, phospho-Ggamma 12, and Gbeta subunits, generated by ourselves, have been described previously (21-24). Rabbit polyclonal antibodies against phosphotyrosine, Galpha q/11, Galpha s, and Galpha 12 were purchased from Santa Cruz Biotechnology and mouse monoclonal antibodies against human Rac1 and Cdc42 from Transduction Laboratories. Mouse monoclonal antibodies against the FLAG and Myc epitopes were purchased from Sigma and Roche Molecular Biochemicals, respectively. Tetramethylrhodamine isothiocyanate-phalloidin was obtained from Molecular Probe, PTX from Seikagaku Kogyo, bisindolylmaleimide I (BIM) from Calbiochem-Novabiochem Co., LPA from Avanti Polar Lipids Inc., platelet-derived growth factor and epidermal growth factor from Immunobiological Laboratories, glutathione-coupled Sepharose 4B beads from Amersham Pharmacia Biotech, and isopropyl-1-thio-beta -D-galactopyranoside and fibronectin from Wako Pure Chemical Industries.

Production of GST-CRIB-- PAK1 cDNA was a generous gift from L. Lim (National University of Singapore). The Cdc42/Rac interactive binding domain (CRIB) of PAK1 (amino acids 67-150) (25) was amplified by polymerase chain reaction using PAK1 cDNA as a template, ligated into pCMV-Myc, and confirmed by DNA sequencing (20). The cDNA of Myc-CRIB was cloned into a pGEX-2T vector (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). Expression and purification of GST fusion protein were performed in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions and published protocols (26). Escherichia coli BL21 cells transformed with the GST-Myc-CRIB construct were grown at 37 °C, and expression of recombinant protein was induced by addition of 0.1 mM isopropyl-1-thio-beta -D-galactopyranoside for 4 h. Cells were harvested, resuspended in buffer A (50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.2, 2 mM MgCl2, 0.2 mM Na2S2O3, 10% glycerol, 20% sucrose, 1 µg/ml trypsin inhibitor, 0.2 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride), then sonicated on ice, and mixed gently for 30 min after addition of 10% Triton X-100 to a final concentration of 1%. Cell lysates were centrifuged at 4 °C for 10 min at 12,000 × g, and the supernatant was incubated with glutathione-coupled Sepharose 4B beads for 30 min at room temperature followed by further incubation at 4 °C for 30 min. The beads were washed three times in lysis buffer A and once with phosphate-buffered saline. GST-Myc-CRIB fusion protein-bound beads were suspended in phosphate-buffered saline, and glycerol was added to a final concentration of 50% and stored at -20 °C.

Transfection and the Cell Spreading Assay-- NIH 3T3 cells were grown in Dulbecco's modified essential medium supplemented with 10% calf serum. For transient transfections, cells were plated at a density of 6 × 105 cells/10-cm dish 24 h before transfection with LipofectAMINE Plus reagent according to the manufacturer's instructions (Life Technologies, Inc.). The final amount of the transfected DNA for a 10-cm dish was adjusted to 4 µg containing 3.6 µg of plasmid of interest or empty vector pCMV5 and 0.4 µg of pEGFP-C3 (CLONTECH). Medium replacement with serum-free medium was performed after 24 h, and the cells were incubated for another 24 h, in the presence or absence of 20 ng/ml PTX for the last 16 h. They were then washed with phosphate-buffered saline, detached with trypsin-EDTA, and washed with Dulbecco's modified essential medium containing 0.3 mg/ml trypsin inhibitor and 1 mg/ml fatty acid-free bovine serum albumin. Cells were then resuspended in Dulbecco's modified essential medium, replated on fibronectin-coated glass coverslips or dishes, and incubated for 1 h, unless otherwise specified, in the absence or presence of 10 µM LPA, 10 ng/ml platelet-derived growth factor, 10 ng/ml epidermal growth factor, and 5 µM BIM. After incubation, cells were fixed in 4% paraformaldehyde in phosphate-buffered saline for immunocytochemistry or lysed with 1% SDS in 20 mM Tris-HCl, pH 8.0, 1 mM EDTA for immunoblot analyses. Untransfected cells were stained for F-actin with tetramethylrhodamine isothiocyanate-phalloidin. To quantitate cell spreading, images of cells were obtained using a laser scanning microscope (Fluoview, Olympus), and the areas of fluorescence-positive or GFP-positive cells were measured using Fluoview image analysis software. For each experiment, the areas of 50 cells were quantitated. All results shown represent the mean ± S.D. of at least three independent experiments. Data were analyzed by performing unpaired Student's t test. For immunoblotting, cell lysates were subjected to SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (27) or Tricine/SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (28) for immunoblotting with various antibodies.

GTPase Pull-down Assay-- This was performed essentially as described previously (26). After replating on fibronectin-coated dishes, cells were washed with phosphate-buffered saline, incubated for 5 min at 0 °C in buffer B (50 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.5, 100 mM NaCl, 2 mM MgCl2, 10% glycerol, 0.2 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride, and 2 µg/ml trypsin inhibitor) containing 1% Nonidet P-40, and centrifuged at 21,000 × g for 5 min at 4 °C. Aliquots were taken from the supernatant to compare protein amounts. For this purpose, incubation with bacterially produced GST-Myc-CRIB fusion proteins bound to glutathione-coupled Sepharose 4B beads at 4 °C for 60 min was followed by washing three times in an excess of buffer B containing 0.5% Nonidet P-40. Proteins bound to the beads were eluted in Laemmli sample buffer (27) and then analyzed for bound Rac and Cdc42 by immunoblotting using monoclonal mouse antibodies against human Rac1 and Cdc42, respectively. Detection was with a chemiluminescence reagent (PerkinElmer Life Sciences) and densitometry analysis was performed using the LAS-1000 system (Fujifilm).


    RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

To investigate the role of Gi signaling during cell spreading, serum-starved NIH 3T3 fibroblasts were incubated for 16 h in the absence or presence of PTX, replated on fibronectin-coated plastic dishes, then exposed to 10 µM LPA for various times, and stained with rhodamine-phalloidin to label F-actin (Fig. 1). Cells incubated in the absence of PTX spread over a period of 60 min. This was markedly diminished with PTX treatment. To confirm that PTX abolishes only the function of Gi, we examined the effects of PTX with induction by other stimulants known to enhance cell spreading or cell migration. Fibronectin alone (none), platelet-derived growth factor, and epidermal growth factor induced cell spreading, although the staining of F-actin in cell cortex was much weaker than that observed in LPA-stimulated cells, and this was not affected by PTX (Fig. 2). These results suggest that PTX specifically blocks Gi activation via the LPA receptor. The apparently paradoxical result that spreading occurs equally on fibronectin in the presence or absence of LPA, but is inhibited by PTX only in the presence of LPA will be explained later (see "Discussion").



View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1.   Effects of PTX on LPA-induced spreading of NIH 3T3 fibroblasts on fibronectin. NIH 3T3 cells were cultured in the absence (left) or presence (right) of 20 ng/ml PTX for 16 h, trypsinized, and replated on fibronectin-coated coverslips in the presence of 10 µM LPA. A, cells were fixed at the indicated times after plating and stained for F-actin with tetramethylrhodamine isothiocyanate-phalloidin. Scale bar, 50 µm. B, quantification of spreading by measuring of cell areas. Open circles, PTX-untreated; solid circles, PTX-treated. Values are means ± S.D. from three experiments. *, p < 0.01 compared with PTX-untreated cells.



View larger version (52K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 2.   Effects of PTX on cell spreading induced by LPA, platelet-derived growth factor, and epidermal growth factor. NIH 3T3 cells were cultured in the absence (left) or presence (right) of 20 ng/ml PTX for 16 h, trypsinized, replated on fibronectin-coated coverslips in the absence (none) or presence of 10 µM LPA, 10 ng/ml platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) or 10 ng/ml epidermal growth factor (EGF) and stained for F-actin after 60 min. Scale bar, 50 µm.

To examine which subtypes of Rho family GTP-binding proteins contribute to cell spreading induced by LPA, we transfected plasmids with various Rho family mutants into NIH 3T3 cells. Cells expressing dominant negative mutants of Rac (RacT17N) and Cdc42 (Cdc42T17N) were rounded, whereas dominant negative Rho (RhoT19N) was without effect (Fig. 3, A and B). On the other hand, constitutively active mutants of Rac (RacG12V) and Cdc42 (Cdc42G12V) enhanced spreading of PTX-treated cells (Fig. 3, A and C). In contrast, the expression of the constitutively active form of Rho (RhoG14V) rather caused rounding of both PTX-treated and untreated cells (Fig. 3). The LPA receptor activates not only Gi, but also other G proteins such as Gq/11 and G12/13, which are PTX-insensitive, and G12/13 is involved in Rho-dependent stress fiber formation (12). Therefore, it is possible that Rho is also activated during spreading. In fact, transfection of a dominant negative mutant of Rho restored cell spreading when the cells were treated by PTX (Fig. 3C). These observations suggest that the LPA receptor induces activation of Rac/Cdc42 and Rho through Gi and probably G12/13, respectively. Rho-mediated cell rounding appears with inhibition of Gi pathway by PTX.



View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 3.   Effects of expression of various mutants of Rho family GTP-binding proteins on cell spreading. A, NIH 3T3 cells were cotransfected with pEGFP-C3 and pCMV5 (Mock), dominant negative mutants or constitutively active mutants of Rho family GTP-binding proteins, incubated in the absence (left) or presence (right) of 20 ng/ml PTX for 16 h, trypsinized, replated on coverslips that were coated with fibronectin in the presence of 10 µM LPA, and fixed after 60 min. Scale bar, 50 µm. B and C, quantification of spreading by GFP-positive cells in the absence (B) or presence (C) of PTX. Values are means ± S.D. from three experiments. *, p < 0.01 compared with Mock cells.

To examine whether PTX indeed affected the activation of endogenous Rac and Cdc42 during cell spreading, we performed pull-down assays of Rac and Cdc42 using GST-Myc-CRIB-bound Sepharose beads. First, to confirm that GST-Myc-CRIB specifically binds to active forms of Rac and Cdc42 (29), GST-Myc-CRIB Sepharose beads were incubated with lysates from NIH 3T3 cells expressing FLAG epitope-tagged mutants of Rho family GTP-binding proteins. GST-Myc-CRIB beads retained constitutively active forms of Rac and Cdc42 but not dominant negative forms of Rac and Cdc42, indicating a high specificity for the GTP-bound state. Neither constitutively active nor dominant negative mutants of Rho were retained by GST-Myc-CRIB beads, consistent with published data (29) (Fig. 4A).



View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 4.   Binding of Rac and Cdc42 to GST-CRIB and effects of PTX on activation of endogenous Rac and Cdc42 during cell spreading. A, NIH 3T3 cells were transiently transfected with FLAG-tagged RhoG14V (RhoV14), Rac1G12V (RacV12), Cdc42G12V (Cdc42V12), RhoT19N (RhoN19), RacT17N (RacN17), and Cdc42T17N (Cdc42N17); and cell extracts were incubated with GST-Myc-CRIB-glutathione beads. After washing, the bound proteins were analyzed by immunoblotting using anti-FLAG antibody. B and C, NIH 3T3 cells were incubated in the absence or presence of 20 ng/ml PTX for 16 h, trypsinized, and replated on fibronectin-coated dishes or coverslips in the presence of 10 µM LPA. At the indicated times, cells were lysed and the supernatants were incubated with GST-Myc-CRIB glutathione beads. The bound proteins were analyzed by immunoblotting using antibodies against Rac (B) and Cdc42 (C). Rac and Cdc42 activities are indicated by amounts of Myc-CRIB-bound Rac and Cdc42, relative to serum-starved cells at time 0. Results are means ± S.D. from four of more experiments. *, p < 0.05, **p < 0.01 compared with the activity at time 0. ppt, precipitating; IB, immunoblotting.

To determine whether Rac and Cdc42 were activated during LPA-stimulated cell spreading on fibronectin, cell lysates were incubated with GST-Myc-CRIB beads and the retained proteins were analyzed by immunoblotting with antibodies against Rac and Cdc42 (Fig. 4, B and C). In the control cells, Rac activity was increased 1.9-fold (Fig. 4B), and Cdc42 activity 1.7-fold (Fig. 4C). In contrast, Rac and Cdc42 activities did not significantly increase within 120 min in PTX-treated cells (Fig. 4, B and C). These results also indicate that Rac and Cdc42 activation is mediated by the Gi pathway during LPA-induced cell spreading.

To examine further the involvement of Rac and Cdc42 activation in LPA-induced cell spreading, we transfected Myc-CRIB into NIH 3T3 cells and replated on fibronectin-coated coverslips in the presence of LPA. Expression of Myc-CRIB strongly inhibited cell spreading (control, 1592 ± 156 µm2; Myc-CRIB, 461 ± 43 µm2).

Next we determined which G protein subunit, Galpha or Gbeta gamma , is responsible for cell spreading. First we transfected plasmids with several constitutively active mutants of alpha  subunits of G proteins and tested the restoration of spreading of PTX-treated cells in the presence of LPA (Fig. 5B). Constitutively active mutants of Galpha i2 (Galpha i2Q205L) and unexpectedly Galpha 11 (Galpha 11Q209L) restored cell spreading to the levels observed in Mock cells in the absence of PTX. Other active mutants, Galpha 12 and Galpha s (Galpha 12Q229L and Galpha sQ227L), were not effective in PTX-treated cells (Fig. 5B). These active mutants, however, decreased cell spreading in the absence of PTX (Fig. 5A), suggesting that Galpha 12 and Galpha s cause cell rounding in these conditions. Then, we cotransfected Gbeta 1 with various Ggamma forms into NIH 3T3 cells. Gbeta gamma expression also restored spreading of PTX-treated cells (Fig. 6). To further test its involvement, we transfected beta ARKct, which binds and sequesters free Gbeta gamma , and showed this to reduce the LPA-induced cell spreading (Fig. 6).



View larger version (36K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 5.   Effects of expression of various constitutively active mutants of alpha  subunits of G protein on cell spreading. NIH 3T3 cells were cotransfected with pEGFP-C3 and pCMV5 (Mock), Galpha i2Q205L (alpha iQL), Galpha 11Q209L (alpha 11QL), Galpha 12Q229L (alpha 12QL), or Galpha sQ227L (alpha sQL), then incubated in the absence (A) or presence (B) of 20 ng/ml PTX for 16 h, trypsinized, and replated on fibronectin-coated dishes or coverslips in the presence of 10 µM LPA. After 60 min, GFP-positive cells were fixed and quantified for spreading. Lysates were immunoblotted with antibodies against Galpha i2, Galpha q/11, Galpha 12, and Galpha s. Values are means ± S.D. from three experiments. *, p < 0.01 compared with Mock cells.



View larger version (41K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 6.   Effects of expression of beta gamma subunits and beta ARKct on cell spreading. NIH 3T3 cells were cotransfected with pEGFP-C3 and pCMV5 (Mock), Gbeta 1gamma 2, Gbeta 1gamma 12, Gbeta 1gamma 12S2A, or beta ARKct, incubated in the absence or presence of 20 ng/ml PTX for 16 h, trypsinized, and replated on fibronectin-coated dishes or coverslips in the presence of 10 µM LPA. After 60 min, GFP-positive cells were fixed and quantified for spreading. Lysates were immunoblotted with antibodies against Gbeta , Ggamma 7 (gamma ), phospho-Ggamma 12 (p-gamma 12), and Myc. Because the antibody against Ggamma 7 reacts with Ggamma 2, Ggamma 3, Ggamma 7 and Ggamma 12 (22), it was used to detect Ggamma 2 and Ggamma 12 together. Values are means ± S.D. from three experiments. *, p < 0.01 compared with PTX-treated Mock cells. Dagger, p < 0.01 compared with PTX-untreated Mock cells. Double dagger, p < 0.01 compared with Gbeta 1gamma 12-transfected cells.

We previously reported that the Ser-2 of the Ggamma 12 subunit, a major Ggamma in fibroblasts, is specifically phosphorylated by PKC and that this is blocked by PTX (23, 24), as shown in Fig. 6. We have also demonstrated that phosphorylation of Ggamma 12 enhances migration of NIH 3T3 cells (16). Expression of Gbeta 1gamma 12 was more effective at inducing cell spreading than that of Gbeta 1gamma 2 or Gbeta 1 with the mutant Ggamma 12S2A, in which a phosphorylation site is replaced with alanine (Fig. 6). To examine whether phosphorylation of Ggamma 12 by PKC is involved in cell spreading, we tested the effect of the PKC inhibitor BIM (30) (Fig. 7). It significantly decreased cell spreading induced by Gbeta 1gamma 12 as well as phosphorylation of Ggamma 12, while being essentially without effect on Gbeta 1gamma 2-induced cell spreading. It should be note that Gbeta 1gamma 12-induced cell spreading in the presence of BIM is comparable to Gbeta 1gamma 2-induced cell spreading. In PTX-untreated Mock cells, BIM suppressed LPA-induced cell spreading and phosphorylation of Ggamma 12. Gq/11 is known to stimulate phospholipase C, which produces diacylglycerol, then activates PKC. Expression of Galpha 11Q209L increased phosphorylation of Ggamma 12 in PTX-treated cells (Fig. 7), and the treatment with BIM diminished cell spreading induced by Galpha 11Q209L, but not by Galpha i2Q205L (Fig. 7). Thus PKC-dependent phosphorylated Ggamma 12 may partially contribute to Galpha 11Q209L-induced cell spreading.



View larger version (31K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 7.   Effect of a protein kinase C inhibitor on cell spreading induced by Galpha i2Q205L, Galpha 11Q209L, Gbeta 1gamma 2, and Gbeta 1gamma 12. NIH 3T3 cells were cotransfected with pEGFP-C3 and pCMV5 (Mock), Galpha i2Q205L (alpha iQL), Galpha 11Q209L (alpha 11QL), Gbeta 1gamma 2 (beta 1gamma 2), or Gbeta 1gamma 12 (beta 1gamma 12). Then the cells were incubated in the absence or presence of 20 ng/ml PTX for 16 h, trypsinized, and replated on fibronectin-coated dishes or coverslips in the presence of 10 µM LPA plus or minus 5 µM BIM. After 60 min, GFP-positive cells were fixed and quantified for spreading. Lysates were immunoblotted with the antibody against phospho-Ggamma 12 (p-gamma 12). Values are means ± S.D. from three experiments. *, p < 0.01 compared with BIM-untreated cells in each condition.

To examine whether cell spreading with Galpha i2Q205L, Galpha 11Q209L, and Gbeta gamma is mediated through Rac and Cdc42 pathways, we cotransfected dominant negative mutants of Rac and Cdc42 with Galpha i2Q205L, Galpha 11Q209L, and Gbeta gamma into cells (Fig. 8). The dominant negative mutant of Rac inhibited cell spreading induced by Galpha i2Q205L, Galpha 11Q209L, and Gbeta gamma . However, the dominant negative form of Cdc42 appeared to be less effective, especially with Galpha 11Q209L-induced cell spreading.



View larger version (41K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 8.   Effects of expression of dominant negative mutants of Rac and Cdc42 on cell spreading induced by Galpha and beta gamma subunits. NIH 3T3 cells were cotransfected with pEGFP-C3 plus pCMV5 (Mock), Galpha i2Q205L (alpha iQL), Galpha 11Q209L (alpha 11QL), Gbeta 1gamma 2 (beta 1gamma 2), or Gbeta 1gamma 12 (beta 1gamma 12) and RacT17N (RacN17) or Cdc42T17N (Cdc42N17), incubated in the absence or presence of 20 ng/ml PTX for 16 h, trypsinized, and replated on fibronectin-coated dishes or coverslips in the presence of 10 µM LPA. After 60 min, GFP-positive cells were fixed and quantified for spreading. Lysates were immunoblotted with antibodies against Galpha i2, Galpha q/11, Gbeta , Ggamma 7 (gamma ), and FLAG. Values are means ± S.D. from three experiments. *, p < 0.05; and **, p < 0.01 compared with cells that were not transfected with a dominant negative mutant of Rac or Cdc42.



    DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

It has been reported that PTX blocks cell growth and migration induced by LPA (1, 31). In the present study, we demonstrated that Gi mediates LPA-induced cell spreading, one of important steps of growth and migration processes. LPA receptor is coupled not only with Gi but also with Gq and G12 family G proteins. Galpha 12 and Galpha 13, which activate Rho, induce the formation of actin stress fibers and focal adhesions (12, 13). The present investigation indicated that Gi activates Rac and Cdc42 during cell spreading stimulated by LPA. The evidence that the dominant negative mutant of Rho enhanced spreading of PTX-treated cells (Fig. 3C) suggests that this signal protein is also activated with LPA stimulation. Previous reports indicated that Rac down-regulates Rho activity in NIH 3T3 cells (32), or Rac may counteract Rho (33). In the latter case, PAK, which is activated by Rac and Cdc42, was found to block the phosphorylation of myosin light chain induced by Rho. Ren et al. (7) have described that plating Swiss 3T3 cells on fibronectin-coated dishes elicits a transient inhibition of Rho, followed by an activation phase, suggesting the existence of an adhesion-dependent negative feedback loop. In addition, cell rounding observed by expression of Galpha 12Q229L (Fig. 5A) suggests that Galpha 12-mediated Rho activation caused cell rounding in these conditions. Taken together, the available information indicates that activation of Rac and Cdc42 by Gi promotes cell spreading and probably interferes with Rho-mediated cell rounding in LPA-stimulated cells (Fig. 9). On the other hand, it has been shown that Rac, Cdc42, and Rho were activated during cell spreading on fibronectin (5-7), and cells also tend to spread probably due to the down-regulation of Rho by Rac activation (Fig. 9). The degree of spreading may be determined by a balance between Rac/Cdc42 activation and Rho activation. The evidence that blockage of Gi by PTX leads to cell rounding on fibronectin in the presence of LPA suggests that activation of Rho by G12/13 and fibronectin is much larger than activation of Rac/Cdc42 by fibronectin (Fig. 9). This scheme explains the apparently paradoxical result (Fig. 2) that spreading occurs equally on fibronectin in the presence or absence of LPA, but is inhibited by PTX only in the presence of LPA.



View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 9.   Schematic model for LPA- and integrin-dependent activation of Rho family GTP-binding proteins during cell spreading. LPA receptors stimulate both Gi and G12/13, which lead to the activation of Rac and Cdc42 and Rho, respectively. Activated Rac and Cdc42 then induce cell spreading, whereas activated Rho induces cell rounding. Engagement of integrins with fibronectin leads to the activation of Rac, Cdc42, and Rho. In both cases, cells are spreading because Rac counteract Rho. A balance between Rac/Cdc42 activation and Rho activation may thus determine the degree of cell spreading. Blockage of Gi pathway by PTX leads to cell rounding due to activation of Rho mediated by G12/13.

It has been shown that Galpha i and Gbeta gamma released from Gi by receptor stimulation regulate adenylyl cyclase and potassium channels (34). The present study demonstrated that they both contribute to LPA-induced cell spreading. The fact that expression of beta ARKct partially inhibited cell spreading (Fig. 6) supported an involvement of Galpha i in addition to Gbeta gamma . We have demonstrated previously that cotransfection of Gbeta 1 with various Ggamma forms into NIH 3T3 cells increases cell migration (16). Cell motility of Ggamma 12-expressing cells was much greater than those of Ggamma 2-, Ggamma 5-, and Ggamma 7-expressed cells. Because the effect of Ggamma 12 was decreased by replacement of Ser2 by alanine, we concluded that protein phosphorylation enhances cell migration (16). The present study demonstrated Gbeta 1gamma 12 to be more efficient at stimulating cell spreading than Gbeta 1gamma 2 or Gbeta 1gamma 12S2A, consistent with results obtained for Gbeta gamma -induced motility.

In addition to Galpha i2Q205L, the expression of Galpha 11Q209L restored cell spreading in PTX-treated cells (Fig. 5, 7, and 8). Since this was partially blocked by an PKC inhibitor, the existence of PKC-dependent and -independent pathways in Galpha 11-induced cell spreading can be speculated. Phosphorylation of Ggamma 12 in Galpha 11Q209L-expressing cells points to an involvement in a PKC-dependent pathway. Although PTX-insensitive Gq family G proteins would be expected to be activated by LPA in PTX-treated cells, cell spreading did not occur. The physiological significance of Galpha 11-induced cell spreading remains uncertain.

A previous study demonstrated that increase of intracellular cAMP contents by forskolin or a cAMP phosphodiesterase inhibitor blocked LPA-induced cell spreading and migration of carcinoma cells (35). High levels of intracellular cAMP induced by forskolin also block chemotaxis of human embryonic kidney cells expressing the interleukin-8 receptor (36), and Galpha i and Gbeta gamma inhibit several types of adenylyl cyclase (34). It has, furthermore, been reported that LPA decreases cAMP levels in Swiss 3T3 cells in a PTX-sensitive manner (8). Therefore, suppression of cAMP levels by Gi may be important in LPA-induced cell spreading. In fact, the expression of the constitutively active mutant Galpha sQ227L decreased cell spreading (Fig. 5A).

Small GTP-binding proteins are regulated by GEF and GTPase-activating proteins (3, 37), and recent reports have indicated that Galpha 12 and Galpha 13 are able to bind directly to p115-RhoGEF (38, 39) or PDZ-RhoGEF (40). Galpha 13 but not Galpha 12 stimulates the GDP-GTP exchange reaction of p115-RhoGEF. Gbeta gamma may also be associated with the NH2-terminal of Dbl, a kind of RhoGEF (41), but its GEF activity toward Rho is not influenced by Gbeta gamma binding. With respect to GTPase-activating proteins, Galpha i specifically binds to that for Rap1, a member of the Ras family. Stimulation of the Gi-coupled m2-muscarinic receptor translocates rap1GAPII from cytosol to the membrane and decreases the amount of GTP-bound Rap1 (42). Our finding that Galpha i and Gbeta gamma induce cell spreading in a Rac/Cdc42-dependent manner suggests the existence of GEF or GTPase-activating proteins, which directly interact with Galpha i or Gbeta gamma subunits.


    ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We thank Drs. M. I. Simon, T. Nukada, R. A. Cerione, K. Kaibuchi, and L. Lim for supplying the plasmids. We are also grateful to Dr. Y. Kaziro for encouragement.


    FOOTNOTES

* This work was supported in part by grants-in-aid for scientific research from the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports, and Culture of Japan, and by a grant from CREST of Japan Science and Technology.The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.

Present address: Dept. of Molecular Cell Pharmacology, National Children's Medical Research Center, Tokyo 154-8509, Japan.

|| Present address: Graduate School of Agriculture and Life Science, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113-8657, Japan.

** To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Biochemistry, Inst. for Developmental Research, Aichi Human Service Center, Kamiya-cho, Kasugai, Aichi 480-0392, Japan. Tel.: 81-568-88-0811; Fax: 81-568-88-0829; E-mail: toasano@inst-hsc.pref.aichi.jp.

Published, JBC Papers in Press, November 30, 2000, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M007541200


    ABBREVIATIONS

The abbreviations used are: LPA, lysophosphatidic acid; G protein, heterotrimeric guanine nucleotide-binding regulatory protein; PTX, pertussis toxin; BIM, bisindolylmaleimide I; GST, glutathione S-transferase; GEF, guanine nucleotide exchange factor; PAK, p21-activated kinase; CRIB, Cdc42/Rac interactive binding domain; PKC, protein kinase C; Tricine, N-tris(hydroxymethyl)methylglycine.


    REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES


1. Moolenaar, W. H. (1995) J. Biol. Chem. 270, 12949-12952[Free Full Text]
2. Anand-Apte, B., and Zetter, B. R. (1997) Stem Cells 15, 259-267[Abstract/Free Full Text]
3. Hall, A. (1998) Science 279, 509-514[Abstract/Free Full Text]
4. Howe, A., Aplin, A. E., Alahari, S. K., and Juliano, R. L. (1998) Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 10, 220-231[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
5. Price, L. S., Leng, J., Schwartz, M. A., and Bokoch, G. M. (1998) Mol. Biol. Cell 9, 1863-1871[Abstract/Free Full Text]
6. Clark, E. A., King, W. G., Brugge, J. S., Symons, M., and Hynes, R. O. (1998) J. Cell Biol. 142, 573-586[Abstract/Free Full Text]
7. Ren, X. D., Kiosses, W. B., and Schwartz, M. A. (1999) EMBO J. 18, 578-585[Abstract/Free Full Text]
8. van Corven, E. J., Groenink, A., Jalink, K., Eichholtz, T., and Moolenaar, W. H. (1989) Cell 59, 45-54[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
9. van Corven, E. J., Hordijk, P. L., Medema, R. H., Bos, J. L., and Moolenaar, W. H. (1993) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 90, 1257-1261[Abstract]
10. Cook, S. J., Rubinfeld, B., Albert, I., and McCormick, F. (1993) EMBO J. 12, 3475-3485[Abstract]
11. Seufferlein, T., and Rozengurt, E. (1994) J. Biol. Chem. 269, 9345-9351[Abstract/Free Full Text]
12. Buhl, A. M., Johnson, N. L., Dhanasekaran, N., and Johnson, G. L. (1995) J. Biol. Chem. 270, 24631-24634[Abstract/Free Full Text]
13. Gohla, A., Harhammer, R., and Schultz, G. (1998) J. Biol. Chem. 273, 4653-4659[Abstract/Free Full Text]
14. Yamauchi, J., Nagao, M., Kaziro, Y., and Itoh, H. (1997) J. Biol. Chem. 272, 27771-27777[Abstract/Free Full Text]
15. Yamauchi, J., Kaziro, Y., and Itoh, H. (1997) J. Biol. Chem. 272, 7602-7607[Abstract/Free Full Text]
16. Ueda, H., Yamauchi, J., Itoh, H., Morishita, R., Kaziro, Y., Kato, K., and Asano, T. (1999) J. Biol. Chem. 274, 12124-12128[Abstract/Free Full Text]
17. Nagao, M., Kaziro, Y., and Itoh, H. (1999) Oncogene 18, 4425-4434[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
18. Kato, J., Kaziro, Y., and Satoh, T. (2000) Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 268, 141-147[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
19. Ueda, H., Itoh, H., Yamauchi, J., Morishita, R., Kaziro, Y., Kato, K., and Asano, T. (2000) J. Biol. Chem. 275, 2098-2102[Abstract/Free Full Text]
20. Yamauchi, J., Kawano, T., Nagao, M., Kaziro, Y., and Itoh, H. (2000) J. Biol. Chem. 275, 7633-7640[Abstract/Free Full Text]
21. Morishita, R., Kato, K., and Asano, T. (1988) Eur. J. Biochem. 174, 87-94[Abstract]
22. Asano, T., Morishita, R., Ohashi, K., Nagahama, M., Miyake, T., and Kato, K. (1995) J. Neurochem. 64, 1267-1273[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
23. Morishita, R., Nakayama, H., Isobe, T., Matsuda, T., Hashimoto, Y., Okano, T., Fukada, Y., Mizuno, K., Ohno, S., Kozawa, O., Kato, K., and Asano, T. (1995) J. Biol. Chem. 270, 29469-29475[Abstract/Free Full Text]
24. Asano, T., Morishita, R., Ueda, H., Asano, M., and Kato, K. (1998) Eur. J. Biochem. 251, 314-319[Abstract]
25. Burbelo, P. D., Drechsel, D., and Hall, A. (1995) J. Biol. Chem. 270, 29071-29074[Abstract/Free Full Text]
26. Sander, E. E., van Delft, S., ten Klooster, J. P., Reid, T., van der Kammen, R. A., Michiels, F., and Collard, J. G. (1998) J. Cell Biol. 143, 1385-1398[Abstract/Free Full Text]
27. Laemmli, U. K. (1970) Nature 227, 680-685[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
28. Schägger, H., and von Jagow, G. (1987) Anal. Biochem. 166, 368-379[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
29. Benard, V., Bohl, B. P., and Bokoch, G. M. (1999) J. Biol. Chem. 274, 13198-13204[Abstract/Free Full Text]
30. Yeo, E. J., and Exton, J. H. (1995) J. Biol. Chem. 270, 3980-3988[Abstract/Free Full Text]
31. Sakai, T., de la Pena, J. M., and Mosher, D. F. (1999) J. Biol. Chem. 274, 15480-15486[Abstract/Free Full Text]
32. Sander, E. E., ten Klooster, J. P., van Delft, S., van der Kammen, R. A., and Collard, J. G. (1999) J. Cell Biol. 147, 1009-1022[Abstract/Free Full Text]
33. Sanders, L. C., Matsumura, F., Bokoch, G. M., and de Lanerolle, P. (1999) Science 283, 2083-2085[Abstract/Free Full Text]
34. Clapham, D. E., and Neer, E. J. (1997) Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 37, 167-203[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
35. O'Connor, K. L., Shaw, L. M., and Mercurio, A. M. (1998) J. Cell Biol. 143, 1749-1760[Abstract/Free Full Text]
36. Neptune, E. R., Iiri, T., and Bourne, H. R. (1999) J. Biol. Chem. 274, 2824-2828[Abstract/Free Full Text]
37. Whitehead, I. P., Campbell, S., Rossman, K. L., and Der, C. J. (1997) Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1332, 1-23
38. Hart, M. J., Jiang, X., Kozasa, T., Roscoe, W., Singer, W. D., Gilman, A. G., Sternweis, P. C., and Bollag, G. (1998) Science 280, 2112-2114[Abstract/Free Full Text]
39. Kozasa, T., Jiang, X., Hart, M. J., Sternweis, P. M., Singer, W. D., Gilman, A. G., Bollag, G., and Sternweis, P. C. (1998) Science 280, 2109-2111[Abstract/Free Full Text]
40. Fukuhara, S., Murga, C., Zohar, M., Igishi, T., and Gutkind, J. S. (1999) J. Biol. Chem. 274, 5868-5879[Abstract/Free Full Text]
41. Nishida, K., Kaziro, Y., and Satoh, T. (1999) FEBS Lett. 459, 186-190[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
42. Mochizuki, N., Ohba, Y., Kiyokawa, E., Kurata, T., Murakami, T., Ozaki, T., Kitabatake, A., Nagashima, K., and Matsuda, M. (1999) Nature 400, 891-894[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]


Copyright © 2001 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.