From the Center for Vascular Biology, Department of
Physiology, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington,
Connecticut 06030-3501 and the § Chemical Genetics
Laboratory, RIKEN, Hirosawa 2-1, Wako, Saitama 351-0198, Japan
Received for publication, November 6, 2002, and in revised form, December 2, 2002
![]() |
ABSTRACT |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Cyclooxygenase (COX)-2, the inducible
prostaglandin synthase, is overexpressed in cancer and chronic
inflammatory diseases. Post-transcriptional regulation of
COX-2 mRNA is important in controlling the expression
of the COX-2 gene. Here, we report that leptomycin B (LMB), a specific
inhibitor of the nuclear export factor CRM1 potently inhibits the
stabilization of COX-2 mRNA in MDA-MB-231 human mammary cancer
cells. However, COX-2 promoter-driven reporter gene expression is not
inhibited by LMB, suggesting that LMB acts at the post-transcriptional
level. Subcellular fractionation experiments indicate that LMB
inhibited the time-dependent export of COX-2 mRNA into
the membrane-bound polysomal compartment at the endoplasmic reticulum.
LMB suppressed COX-2 expression by interleukin-1 Cyclooxygenase (COX),1
also known as prostaglandin (PG) H synthase, is the rate-limiting
enzyme in the biosynthesis of PGs from arachidonic acid (1). PGs are
implicated in various physiological and pathophysiological events,
including in inflammatory and neoplastic diseases (2-4).
Two isoforms of COX have been identified and cloned in eukaryotic
cells. COX-1, the constitutively expressed isoform, is involved in the
maintenance of physiological functions. In contrast, COX-2 is inducible
by extracellular stimuli such as tumor promoters, pro-inflammatory
cytokines, mitogens, oncogenes, and growth factors in a variety of
cells (1). Overexpression of COX-2 is observed in human cancers such as
colon and breast (4). Gene deletion of COX-2 suppressed the
developmental of intestinal polyps in APC gene deleted mice, suggesting
that COX-2 expression is critical for tumorigenesis (5). In addition,
overexpression of COX-2 in the mammary glands of transgenic mice
results in enhanced tumorigenesis in multiparous mice (6). These data
strongly suggest that unregulated expression of COX-2 is an important
event in tumorgenesis. The control of COX-2 gene expression
is regulated at the level of transcriptional and post-transcriptional
mechanisms (1, 3, 7). However, the mechanisms by which COX-2 expression
is controlled are not fully understood.
Leptomycin B (LMB) was originally discovered as a potent anti-fungal
antibiotic from Streptomyces sp. (8). However, recent data
showed that LMB causes G1 cell cycle arrest in mammalian cells and is a potent anti-tumor agent against murine experimental tumors (9, 10). Studies in Scizosaccharomyces pombe
identified the cellular target of LMB as the CRM1 (chromosomal region
maintenance)/exportin 1 protein (11), which is critical for the export
of RNA and proteins containing a nuclear export sequence (NES). In the
case of RNA export, CRM1 binds to ribonuclear proteins containing the NES motif (12-15). For example, the export of Rev-response
element-containing human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) RNA is inhibited
by LMB (13). Studies from Steitz and co-workers (16) indicated
that LMB disrupted the interaction of the RNA binding protein HuR with
its protein partners, resulting in blockage of nuclear export of
c-Fos mRNA and perhaps other immediate-early gene mRNAs that
bind to HuR (16, 17). We and others have recently showed that the COX-2 mRNA binds specifically to HuR at the 3'-untranslated region
(18).2 Based on these
observations, we speculated that LMB might regulate COX-2 gene
expression by controlling nuclear export of its mRNA.
In the present study, we investigated whether LMB can regulate the
expression of COX-2 by modulating the nuclear export of COX-2 mRNA.
Cell Culture--
MDA-MB-231 cells (ATCC HTB-26) were cultured
in Leibovitz's L-15 medium supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum
(FBS, Hyclone). HT-29 cells (ATCC HTB38), a human colon cancer cell
line, and THP-1 (ATCC TIB202), a human monocytic cell line, were
cultured in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium supplemented
with 10% FBS. Human umbilical vein endothelial cells (HUVEC,
Clonetics) were cultured in M199 medium (Cellgro, Inc.) supplemented
with 10% FBS and heparin-stabilized endothelial cell growth factor as
described previously (19).
Preparation of Whole Cell Lysates--
Cells were washed twice
with ice-cold phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) and lysed in modified
RIPA lysis buffer (50 mM Tris-Cl (pH 7.4), 150 mM NaCl, 1% Triton X-100, 1% Nonidet P-40, 1 mM EDTA, 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl
fluoride, and protease inhibitor mixtures (1×, Roche Molecular
Biochemicals)). After 10-min incubation on ice, cells were collected by
cell scraper and centrifuged at 14,000 × g for 15 min
at 4 °C.
Western Blot Analysis--
Whole cell lysates (40 µg/lane)
were resolved by 10% SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis
(SDS-PAGE). Proteins were then transblotted onto nitrocellulose
membrane (Protran; Schleicher & Schuell). Western blot analysis using
the anti-COX-2 and Northern Blot Analysis--
Total RNA was isolated using the
RNA-STAT60 reagent (Tel-test) according to the instructions provided by
the manufacturer. Northern blot analysis was done as described
previously (20).
In Situ Hybridization--
MDA-MB-231 cells were fixed in
4%(w/v) formaldehyde, 5%(v/v) acetic acid, and 0.9%(w/v) NaCl and
dehydrated in 70%, 90%, and 100% ethanol (EtOH). For in
situ hybridization, digoxygenin (DIG)-labeled DNA probes (5 ng/µl) (DIG-HIGH primer labeling system, Roche Molecular Biochemicals) were added to the hybridization solution (60%
deionized formamide, 300 mM NaCl, 30 mM sodium
citrate, 10 mM EDTA, 25 mM NaH2PO4 (pH 7.4), 5% dextran sulfate, and 250 ng/µl sheared salmon DNA). Fifty microliters of the hybridization
mixture were added to the fixed cells. After 16-h hybridization, cells
were washed under high stringency at 37 °C. For immunofluorescence
detection, cells were blocked in a blocking solution (100 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 150 mM NaCl, 0.5% (w/v)
blocking reagent (Roche Molecular Biochemicals)). After blocking, the
slides were incubated with anti-DIG fluorescein (1:500). Slides were
washed (100 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.5), 150 mM NaCl,
0.05% Tween 20) and dehydrated in 70%, 90%, and 100% EtOH. Finally,
slides were embeded in the anti-fading solution with DAPI (50 ng/µl)
as counter-staining, and cells were imaged by a Zeiss Axiovert
fluorescence microscope or a Zeiss 410 Confocal microscope.
Luciferase Assay--
MDA-MB-231 cells grown in 24-well plates
were transfected for 4 h with luciferase DNA construct containing
a COX-2 promoter (21, 22). After 48-h post-transfection, cells were
grown for 6 h in the presence or absence of serum along with or
without LMB. Cell lysates were assayed with the luciferase assay system (Promega) using a TD 20/20 luminometer (Turner Designs Instruments, Sunnyvale, CA).
RNA Isolation from Subcellular Fractions--
Cells were then
washed in PBS and successively extracted as described. First, cells
were extracted with the Nonidet P-40 buffer (10 mM Tris-Cl,
(pH 7.5), 10 mM NaCl, 3 mM MgCl2,
0.5% (v/v) Nonidet P-40, 40 units/ml RNasin, 1 mM DTT).
The remaining pellet (rough endoplasmic reticulum (RER) and nucleus)
was washed in the same buffer and extracted in buffer B (10 mM Tris-Cl (pH 7.5), 10 mM NaCl, 0.5%(v/v)
Nonidet P-40, 40 mM EDTA, 40 units/ml RNasin, 1 mM DTT). The remaining nuclear pellet was washed in the
same buffer and extracted with high salt buffer (10 mM
Tris-Cl (pH 7.5), 0.5 M NaCl, 3 mM
MgCl2, 0.5%(v/v) Nonidet P-40, 40 units/ml RNasin, 1 mM DTT). RNA was purified from each fraction by the RNA
STAT solution as described above.
RNase Protection Assay--
The RNase protection assay was
performed according to the instructions provided by the manufacturer
(Ambion) with some modifications. Briefly, RNA (10 µg) was hybridized
with 32P-labeled antisense riboprobes of human COX-2 (500 bp) and human GAPDH (100 bp). The hybridization reaction was then
treated with RNases A and T to remove unhybridized probes. The
protected and hybridized mRNA was resolved in 6% polyacrylamide
gel containing 8 M urea. The gel was dried and exposed on a
Kodak film at Leptomycin B Potently Inhibits the Expression of COX-2 mRNA and
Protein Induced by Serum Withdrawal in MDA-MB-231
Cells--
Previously we showed that COX-2 mRNA and protein were
induced by serum withdrawal in MDA-MB-231 human breast carcinoma cells (20). We recently found that the interaction of COX-2 mRNA with the
RNA-binding protein HuR is critical for stabilization of COX-2 mRNA.2 Steitz and co-workers (16) have shown that one
of the functions of HuR is to facilitate the nuclear export of
immediate-early mRNAs into the cytoplasm. Furthermore, they showed
that HuR ligands bind to CRM1 and that HuR-binding mRNA export is
inhibited by LMB, a specific inhibitor of CRM1-dependent
nuclear export (16). We determined the effect of LMB to see if COX-2
mRNA export is critical in the regulation of expression. Northern
and Western analysis showed that LMB potently and effectively
suppressed the expression of COX-2 mRNA and protein in a
concentration-dependent manner (Fig.
1, A and B).
Extremely low concentrations of LMB, 10 ng/ml (18 nM), were
sufficient to completely inhibit the serum withdrawal-induced COX-2
mRNA (Fig. 1A).
Leptomycin B Does Not Inhibit the Transcription of the COX-2
Gene--
Serum withdrawal-induced expression of COX-2 gene in
MDA-MB-231 cells were previously characterized to require the
stabilization of the COX-2 mRNA via signaling of the p38
stress-activated kinase pathway (20). Nuclear run-on analysis did not
indicate changes in transcription rate of the COX-2 gene (20). Thus,
the effect of LMB most likely is at the post-transcriptional level. To
confirm this point, we measured the expression of COX-2 promoter-driven luciferase expression in transiently transfected cells. As shown in
Fig. 2, LMB had no effect on COX-2
transcription. Neither serum addition nor withdrawal modulated COX-2
transcription, suggesting that LMB inhibits COX-2 expression by an
effect at the post-transcriptional level.
Subcellular Localization of COX-2 mRNA--
To better define
the subcellular localization of the COX-2 mRNA, we conducted
biochemical fractionation and in situ hybridization experiments. Cells were extracted with Nonidet P-40 buffer to isolate
the cytosolic fraction. The remaining nuclear/RER pellet was extracted
with EDTA to remove the membrane-bound polysomal RNA. The
EDTA-resistant fraction was extracted with high salt to isolate nuclear
RNA. As shown in Fig. 3A, U6
RNA was found predominantly in the nuclear fraction and GAPDH RNA was
found in the cytosolic and RER compartments. This validates the
biochemical extraction scheme that was employed. As expected, COX-2
mRNA was induced only when cells were serum-deprived. In contrast
to the fractionation of U6 and GAPDH mRNAs, COX-2 mRNA showed a
predominantly RER/polysomal distribution, consistent with the fact that
COX-2 is a protein located in the lumen of the ER. A significant
proportion of the COX-2 mRNA was also found in the nuclear
fraction. Since transcription rates are similar in 10 and 0% serum
treated cells, these data suggest that both nuclear and ER-associated
COX-2 mRNA species accumulate under serum-deprivation induced
condition.
To further validate the biochemical fractionation data, we conducted an
in situ hybridization experiment with COX-2 and GAPDH probes
to detect the respective transcripts. As shown in Fig. 3B,
GAPDH signals were diffusely localized throughout the cytoplasm of
MDA-MB-231 cells regardless of treatment of the cells with 10% or 0%
serum. However, COX-2 mRNA showed a dramatic change when cells were
treated with 0% serum for 24 h. A strong signal around the
nuclear membrane and ER was observed only under 0% serum treatment,
whereas background signals were seen in cells cultured with 10% serum.
These data confirm the biochemical fractionation experiments that COX-2
mRNA accumulates in membrane-bound polysomal (ER-associated) and
nuclear compartments. Predominant accumulation of the COX-2 mRNA at
the nuclear membrane (both EDTA-extractable and high salt-extractable)
suggest that nuclear transport of COX-2 mRNA may be
rate-limiting.
Effect of LMB Treatment on Subcellular Localization of COX-2
mRNA--
To determine whether the LMB effect on the suppression
of the COX-2 mRNA occurs in the nuclear compartment or ER
compartment or both, MDA-MB-231 cells were treated with LMB, and at
various times thereafter COX-2 and GAPDH mRNAs were analyzed by
biochemical fractionation followed by RNase protection experiments. As
shown in Fig. 4A, 24-h serum
starvation induced significant levels of COX-2 mRNA in both
ER-associated and nuclear compartments (lanes 3 and
4). Continued treatment with 0% FBS further induced COX-2 mRNA, and at 24 h thereafter, maximal levels of COX-2 mRNA
accumulated at the membrane-bound ER fraction, whereas a smaller
fraction was found in the nucleus. Treatment with LMB from 0-24 h
resulted in pronounced suppression of COX-2 mRNA (but not the GAPDH
mRNA), especially at the 24-h time point (lanes 15 and
16). Interestingly, both membrane-bound ER and nuclear COX-2
mRNA species were suppressed.
To further confirm the time-dependent effect of LMB, cells
were treated with 0% FBS at time 0 h and subsequently treated or not with LMB from 8-24 h (Fig. 4B). As it can be seen, LMB
treatment from 8-24 h suppressed both nuclear and RER-localized COX-2
transcript levels. However, membrane-bound ER-localized COX-2
transcripts were profoundly suppressed by LMB. Although nuclear COX-2
mRNA was suppressed by LMB, it was not suppressed to the same
degree as the cytosolic counterpart. These data suggest that COX-2
mRNAs accumulate at the nuclear pore complex in MDA-MB-231 cells
and that inhibition of the CRM1 pathway with LMB results in degradation of COX-2 mRNA in both the intranuclear and extranuclear
(membrane-bound ER) compartments of the nuclear pore complex. Indeed,
time course analysis of COX-2 mRNA in membrane-bound ER and nuclear
compartments after LMB treatment indicates that COX-2 mRNAs in both
compartments decay with similar rates (data not shown). Thus, LMB
appears to decouple the COX-2 mRNA from the nuclear export pathway
and target it for degradation in both cytosolic and membrane-bound ER compartments.
Cell-type and Stimuli-specific Inhibition of COX-2 Expression by
LMB--
We also tested whether LMB can inhibit the expression of
COX-2 by known COX-2 inducers such as IL-1
In summary the data presented here demonstrate for the first time that
LMB potently inhibits COX-2 expression induced by serum withdrawal in a
human breast cancer cell line MDA-MB-231. Furthermore, our data suggest
a possible mechanism by which LMB inhibits COX-2 expression by showing
that LMB blocks nuclear export of COX-2 mRNA, which may be an
important control point of COX-2 gene expression. Finally we
provide some evidence that LMB may be a new and potent inhibitor of
COX-2 expression with a cell- and/or agonist-type specificity.
in HT-29
human colon cancer cells and in human umbilical vein endothelial cells
but had no effect on COX-2 expression induced by Escherichia
coli lipopolysaccharide in monocytic THP-1 cells. These data
suggest that the nuclear export of COX-2 mRNA may be rate-liming in
a cell-specific manner. LMB may be useful to control COX-2 expression
in various human diseases in which COX-2 plays a pathogenetic role.
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
-actin mouse monoclonal antibodies were conducted
as described previously (20).
80 °C. The bands were visualized by autoradiography
or PhosphoImager (Amersham Biosciences).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
View larger version (69K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Leptomycin B strongly inhibits the expression
of COX-2 mRNA and protein induced by serum withdrawal in MDA-MB-231
cells. A, MDA-MB-231 cells were grown in culture medium
containing 10% FBS without LMB (none or vehicle (v)) or in
culture medium containing 0% FBS along with LMB in different
concentrations (0, 2.5, 5, 10, and 20 ng/ml) for 24 h. Total RNA
was isolated and analyzed for the COX-2 mRNA expression by Northern
blot analysis. GAPDH mRNA was used as an internal control.
B, MDA-MB-231 cells were treated the same as in
A. Whole cell lysates were prepared and analyzed for
expression of the COX-2 protein by Western blot analysis.
View larger version (23K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Lack of effect of LMB on COX-2
transcription. MDA-MB-231 cells were transiently transfected with
the COX-2 promoter luciferase DNA construct. At 48 h
post-transfection, cells were treated with or without LMB for 6 h
in the presence or absence of serum. Cell lysates were prepared and
assayed for reporter gene activity. Data represent mean ± S.E. of
triplicate determinations.
View larger version (69K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Subcellular localization of COX-2 mRNA in
MDA-MB-231 cells. A, MDA-MB-231 cells were grown in the
presence or absence of serum for 24 h. Nuclear (high salt
nuc), cytoplasmic (Nonidet P-40 (NP40)
cyto), and RER (EDTA RER) RNA fractions were
purified as described and analyzed for the presence of COX-2 and GAPDH
mRNA by RNase protection assay or for U6 small nuclear RNA
detection by Northern analysis. Lane 9 contains probe alone
without extract. B, MDA-MB-231 cells were analyzed by
in situ hybridization with DIG-labeled hCOX-2 or hGAPDH DNA
probes as described. Imaging was conducted by a Zeiss Axiovert
fluorescent microscope (inset) or by a Zeiss 410 confocal
microscope. The inset shows a high power (×60)
magnification.
View larger version (45K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Effect of nuclear export of COX-2 mRNA by
LMB. A, MDA-MB-231 cells grown in 10% or 0% FBS for
24 h were further incubated in the absence of serum with or
without LMB (10 ng/ml) for the additional times (4, 8, and 24 h).
At each time point, cells were sequentially treated with Nonidet
P-40/ETDA buffer to extract the RNA from cytosolic and RER fractions
(C) and high salt buffer (N) for extraction of
nuclear RNA. Each RNA fraction was analyzed for COX-2 and GAPDH
mRNA by RNase protection assay. B, MDA-MB-231 cells were
grown in either 10% or 0% FBS for initial 8 h and further
incubated in the absence of serum with or without LMB (10 ng/ml) for
the additional 16 h. Cytosolic/RER (C) and nuclear
(N) RNAs were analyzed for COX-2 and GAPDH as described
above.
or LPS in other cell types including HT-29, a human colon carcinoma cell line, HUVEC, or
THP1, a human monocytic cell line. The data showed that the expression
of COX-2 induced by IL-1
in HT-29 cells is inhibited by LMB in a
concentration-dependent manner (Fig.
5A). The COX-2 expression
induced by IL-1 in HUVEC was also partially inhibited by LMB at 10 ng/ml concentration (Fig. 5B). However, LPS-stimulated COX-2
expression in THP1 cells was not inhibited by LMB at even 20 ng/ml
(Fig. 5C). COX-2 regulation in various cell systems is regulated at both transcriptional as well as post-transcriptional levels (1, 3, 7). Since LMB is a specific regulator of CRM1-dependent nuclear export, it is likely that it would
only block expression of genes that are controlled by
CRM1-dependent export of mRNA. These data suggest that
LMB inhibits COX-2 expression in a cell-type and agonist-specific
manner.
View larger version (39K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 5.
Effect of LMB on COX-2 expression in various
cell types. A, HT-29 cells were stimulated with 20 ng/ml IL-1 in the absence or presence of LMB in different
concentrations (0, 10, 20, and 40 ng/ml) for 24 h. B,
HUVEC were stimulated with 20 ng/ml of IL-1
in the absence or
presence of LMB (10 ng/ml) for 24 h. C, THP-1 cells
were treated with LPS (1 µg/ml) in the absence or presence of LMB in
different concentrations (0, 10, and 20 ng/ml) for 24 h. In all
cases (A-C), after 24 h, whole cell lysates were
prepared and analyzed for the expression of the COX-2 protein by
Western blot analysis.
![]() |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
---|
We thank Drs. Henry Furneaux and Gordon Carmichael for helpful discussions and the gift of reagents. We also thank Mingtao Wu for technical assistance.
![]() |
FOOTNOTES |
---|
* This work was supported by National Institutes of Health Grants HL49094 and CA95181 and an Established Investigator Grant from the American Heart Association.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.
¶ To whom correspondence should be addressed: Center for Vascular Biology, Dept. of Physiology, University of Connecticut Health Center, 263 Farmington Ave., Farmington, CT 06030-3501. E-mail: hla@sun.uchc.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, December 4, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.C200620200
2 S. Sengupta, B.-C. Jang, and T. Hla, unpublished observations.
![]() |
ABBREVIATIONS |
---|
The abbreviations used are:
COX, cyclooxygenase;
GAPDH, glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase;
LMB, leptomycin B;
PG, prostaglandin;
HUVEC, human umbilical vein
endothelial cells;
CRM, chromosomal region maintenance;
NES, a nuclear
export sequence;
IL-1, interleukin-1
;
LPS, lipopolysaccharide;
PBS, phosphate-buffered saline;
ER, endoplasmic reticulum;
RER, rough
endoplasmic reticulum;
DIG, digoxygenin.
![]() |
REFERENCES |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
1. | Smith, W. L., DeWitt, D. L., and Garavito, R. M. (2000) Annu. Rev. Biochem. 69, 145-182[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
2. | Marnett, L. J., and DuBois, R. N. (2002) Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 42, 55-80[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
3. | Hla, T., Bishop-Bailey, D., Liu, C. H., Schaefers, H. J., and Trifan, O. C. (1999) Int. J. Biochem. Cell Biol. 31, 551-557[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
4. |
Hawk, E. T.,
Viner, J. L.,
Dannenberg, A.,
and DuBois, R. N.
(2002)
J. Natl. Cancer Inst.
94,
545-546 |
5. | Oshima, M., Dinchuk, J. E., Kargman, S. L., Oshima, H., Hancock, B., Kwong, E., Trzaskos, J. M., Evans, J. F., and Taketo, M. M. (1996) Cell 87, 803-809[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
6. |
Liu, C. H.,
Chang, S. H.,
Narko, K.,
Trifan, O. C., Wu, M. T.,
Smith, E.,
Haudenschild, C.,
Lane, T. F.,
and Hla, T.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
18563-18569 |
7. |
Ristimaki, A.,
Garfinkel, S.,
Wessendorf, J.,
Maciag, T.,
and Hla, T.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
11769-11775 |
8. | Hamamoto, T., Gunji, S., Tsuji, H., and Beppu, T. (1983) J. Antibiot. (Tokyo) 36, 639-645[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
9. | Yoshida, M., Nishikawa, M., Nishi, K., Abe, K., Horinouchi, S., and Beppu, T. (1990) Exp. Cell Res. 187, 150-156[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
10. | Komiyama, K., Okada, K., Tomisaka, S., Umezawa, I., Hamamoto, T., and Beppu, T. (1985) J. Antibiot. (Tokyo) 38, 427-429[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
11. |
Nishi, K.,
Yoshida, M.,
Fujiwara, D.,
Nishikawa, M.,
Horinouchi, S.,
and Beppu, T.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
6320-6324 |
12. |
Watanabe, M.,
Fukuda, M.,
Yoshida, M.,
Yanagida, M.,
and Nishida, E.
(1999)
Genes Cells
4,
291-297 |
13. | Wolff, B., Sanglier, J. J., and Wang, Y. (1997) Chem. Biol. 4, 139-147[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
14. | Fornerod, M., Ohno, M., Yoshida, M., and Mattaj, I. W. (1997) Cell 90, 1051-1060[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
15. | Kuersten, S., Ohno, M., and Mattaj, I. W. (2001) Trends Cell Biol. 11, 497-503[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
16. |
Brennan, C. M.,
Gallouzi, I. E.,
and Steitz, J. A.
(2000)
J. Cell Biol.
151,
1-14 |
17. |
Moore, M. J.,
and Rosbash, M.
(2001)
Science
294,
1841-1842 |
18. |
Dixon, D. A.,
Tolley, N. D.,
King, P. H.,
Nabors, L. B.,
McIntyre, T. M.,
Zimmerman, G. A.,
and Prescott, S. M.
(2001)
J. Clin. Invest.
108,
1657-1665 |
19. | Hla, T., and Neilson, K. (1992) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 89, 7384-7388[Abstract] |
20. |
Jang, B. C.,
Sanchez, T.,
Schaefers, H. J.,
Trifan, O. C.,
Liu, C. H.,
Creminon, C.,
Huang, C. K.,
and Hla, T.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
39507-39515 |
21. | Appleby, S. B., Ristimaki, A., Neilson, K., Narko, K., and Hla, T. (1994) Biochem. J. 302, 723-727[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
22. | Gou, Q., Liu, C. H., Ben-Av, P., and Hla, T. (1998) Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 242, 508-512[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |