Loss of Phosphatidylinositol 3-Phosphate Binding by the C-terminal Tiam-1 Pleckstrin Homology Domain Prevents in Vivo Rac1 Activation without Affecting Membrane Targeting*

Mark A. BaumeisterDagger §, Lenka Martinu, Kent L. Rossman||, John Sondek||, Mark A. LemmonDagger **, and Margaret M. ChouDaggerDagger

From the Dagger  Department of Biochemistry & Biophysics, the § Graduate Group in Immunology, and the  Department of Cell & Developmental Biology, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104 and the || Department of Biochemistry & Biophysics, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599

Received for publication, November 21, 2002, and in revised form, January 12, 2003

    ABSTRACT
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

Dbl family guanine nucleotide exchange factors (GEFs) for Rho family small GTPases invariably contain a pleckstrin homology (PH) domain that immediately follows their Dbl homology (DH) domain. Although the DH domain is responsible for GEF activity, the role of the PH domain is less clear. We previously reported that PH domains from several Dbl family members bind phosphoinositides with very low affinity (Kd values in the 10 µM range). This suggests that, unlike several other PH domains, those from Dbl proteins will not function as independent membrane-targeting modules. To determine the functional relevance of low affinity phosphoinositide binding, we mutated the corresponding PH domain from Tiam-1 to abolish its weak, specific binding to phosphatidylinositol 3-phosphate. We first confirmed in vitro that phosphoinositide binding by the isolated DH/PH domain was impaired by the mutations but that intrinsic GEF activity was unaffected. We then introduced the PH domain mutations into full-length Tiam-1 and found that its ability to activate Rac1 or serum response factor in vivo was abolished. Immunofluorescence studies showed that membrane targeting of Tiam-1 was essentially unaffected by mutations in the C-terminal PH domain. Our studies therefore indicate that low affinity phosphatidylinositol 3-phosphate binding by the C-terminal PH domain may be critical for in vivo regulation and activity of Tiam-1 but that the PH domain exerts its regulatory effects without altering membrane targeting. We suggest instead that ligand binding to the PH domain induces conformational and/or orientational changes at the membrane surface that are required for maximum exchange activity of its adjacent DH domain.

    INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

Tiam-1 (T-lymphoma invasion and metastasis 1) was first identified in a screen for genes that, when amplified, can induce invasiveness of normally noninvasive lymphoma cells (1). Its 1591-amino acid protein product, Tiam-1, is myristoylated at the N terminus (2) and contains two N-terminal PEST sequences (3), a PDZ (postsynaptic density-96/Discs large/Zona occludens-1) domain (4), a Ras-binding domain (5), two pleckstrin homology (PH)1 domains (6), plus a Dbl (diffuse B-cell lymphoma) homology (DH) domain (7) (Fig. 1). Tiam-1 is a member of the Dbl family of guanine nucleotide exchange factors (GEFs) for Rho-like small GTPases (7) and is a specific activator of Rac1 in vivo (8, 9). By activating Rac1, Tiam-1 can influence a plethora of cellular processes including actin cytoskeleton dynamics, cell proliferation, gene transcription, cell survival, and the phagocytic NADPH oxidase complex, as reviewed by Bishop and Hall (10).


View larger version (8K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 1.   Domain architecture of Tiam-1 and N-terminally truncated C1199 protein. Schematic representations of FL Tiam-1 and C1199 are given, with known domains marked with shaded rectangles and amino acid numbers. The N-terminal myristoylation site (myr) is indicated for FL Tiam-1. P, PEST sequence; N-PH, N-terminal PH domain; RBD, Ras-binding domain; PDZ, PDZ domain; DH, Dbl homology domain; C-PH, C-terminal PH domain.

The 200-amino acid DH domain is both necessary and sufficient for the GEF activity of Dbl family proteins (7, 11-13). However, in all 46 or more Dbl family GEFs, a approx 120-amino acid PH domain immediately follows the DH domain (7). Dbl family GEFs account for some 18% of all known human PH domains. Deletion of the PH domain that follows the DH domain has been shown to either inhibit or stimulate the in vivo function of several Dbl family GEFs (7, 12, 14). Together with their invariable linkage, this has been taken to suggest a regulatory coupling of DH and PH domains, although the molecular basis for this remains unclear. In general, PH domains have been implicated in directing the subcellular localization of proteins that contain them (6), by binding to phosphoinositides and/or membrane-associated protein targets. Several reports have suggested that DH-associated PH domains function in targeting Dbl family members to membrane and/or cytoskeletal compartments in vivo (15-21). Studies of Tiam-1, however, indicate that the primary determinants of subcellular localization lie elsewhere in the molecule (2, 22), and most Dbl family members contain one or more additional potential targeting domains (7).

Several experimental observations indicate that PH domains of Dbl family proteins have specific roles in addition to (or instead of) the commonly assumed membrane targeting function. For example, the in vitro GEF activity of DH/PH fragments is far greater that that of isolated DH domains (11, 13, 23). Crystallographic studies of the Dbs (Dbl's big sister) DH/PH fragment (23) showed that the PH domain makes direct contacts with Cdc42 that are important for exchange activity, providing one explanation for this observation. However, no contacts between the PH domain and the small GTPase were seen in the structure of the Tiam-1 DH/PH complex with Rac1 (24), suggesting that the PH domain may play a different role in this case. One proposal, stimulated by in vivo studies of Sos (son-of-sevenless) (25) and Vav (26, 27), is that the PH domain exerts an inhibitory effect upon its adjacent DH domain. A crystal structure of the Sos DH/PH fragment (28) suggested that this might be achieved by the PH domain sterically blocking access of the small GTPase to the relevant DH domain surface. Binding of the PH domain to phosphoinositides, such as PI 3-kinase products, has been suggested to reverse this inhibition (25-27).

We previously showed that the DH/PH fragments of intersectin, Dbs, and Tiam-1 bind phosphoinositides with only low affinity (Kd values in the 10 µM range) (29). The intersectin and Dbs DH/PH fragments were relatively promiscuous in their phosphoinositide binding, although PtdIns(4,5)P2 (because it is most abundant) is likely to be the most relevant ligand in vivo. The Tiam-1 DH/PH fragment, by contrast, showed clear selectivity (but still only low affinity) for PtdIns-3-P (29), a phosphoinositide that is enriched in endosomal compartments (30) and is generated in phagosomal membranes (31-33). The phosphoinositides that bind these DH/PH fragments did not influence their GEF activity when studied using in vitro assays with nonprenylated small GTPases (29). There is significant difference of opinion in the literature as to whether phosphoinositides affect in vitro GEF activity directly, with some studies reporting effects (positive or negative) (20, 27, 34-36) and others reporting no effect (29). Where an effect has been observed it is not always clear whether it can necessarily be ascribed to the PH domain that follows the DH domain. To investigate whether low affinity phosphoinositide binding by DH-associated PH domains of Dbl family members is important in vivo, we have mutated the C-terminal Tiam-1 PH domain (C-PH) to abolish its PtdIns-3-P binding. We first established that PtdIns-3-P binding by the DH/PH fragment (but not GEF activity) was lost in vitro and then introduced the same mutations into full-length Tiam-1. The ability of C-PH mutated Tiam-1 to activate Rac1 when overexpressed was essentially abolished, although membrane association of the mutated protein was unaffected. We therefore propose that PtdIns-3-P binding by this PH domain is critical for in vivo regulation and activity of Tiam-1 but that the PH domain exerts its regulatory effect through a mechanism other than membrane targeting. One possibility is that the PH domain induces conformational and/or orientational changes at the membrane surface that are required for maximum exchange activity of the adjacent DH domain.

    EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

Plasmid Constructs and Mutagenesis-- The coding region for the murine Tiam-1 DH/PH fragment (amino acids 1033-1406) was amplified by polymerase chain reaction and subcloned into the EcoRI site of pGEX-2TK (Amersham Biosciences) to express a GST fusion protein that could be labeled with 32P at the protein kinase A site between the GST moiety and the DH/PH fragment. A plasmid expressing Myc-tagged full-length (human) Tiam-1 driven by a cytomegalovirus promoter (in pCANmyc) was kindly provided by Anne Crompton (34). A construct expressing the C-terminal 1199 amino acids of murine Tiam-1 (C1199) was kindly provided by John Collard (8), and C1199 was resubcloned into a pcDNA3 derivative to incorporate an hemagglutinin tag as described (37). The p21-binding domain (amino acids 70-117) from human p21-activated kinase 1, fused to GST (GST-PBD), was kindly provided by Dr. Jonathan Chernoff (Fox Chase Cancer Center).

PH domain mutations were made in the human FL Tiam-1 and murine C1199 (and GST-DH/PH) backgrounds using the QuikChangeTM site-directed mutagenesis kit (Stratagene) as recommended by the manufacturers and making amino acid substitutions in the beta 1/beta 2 and beta 3/beta 4 loops of the PH domain as depicted in Fig. 2. Details are available upon request.

Dot-blot Analysis of Phosphoinositide Binding-- GST-DH/PH fusion proteins were expressed in Escherichia coli, purified, and labeled with 32P (while bound to glutathione-agarose) exactly as described (38). 15 µg of mutated and wild type protein were labeled in parallel for each experiment to match specific activities as closely as possible, and 12 µg of eluted 32P-labeled protein was used to probe a nitrocellulose filter on which had been spotted 1.25 µl of serial 2-fold dilutions of the lipids listed in Fig. 2 (starting with a 2 mg/ml solution in 1:1 chloroform:methanol containing 0.1% HCl). Dot-blots for wild type and mutated protein were then processed in parallel as described (39). As an exposure control with which to normalize blots to one another, an identical spot (containing ~6 ng) of 32P-labeled GST-DH/PH protein was applied to each filter prior to exposure to the PhosphorImager plate (Molecular Dynamics Inc., Sunnyvale, CA).

Activated Rac Pull-down Assay-- This was performed essentially as described (37). COS1 cells were seeded at 2 × 105/35-mm well and were transfected the next day with wild type or PH domain-mutated versions of FL Tiam-1 or C1199 Tiam-1, using LipofectAMINE (Invitrogen) as directed by the manufacturers. After recovery in growth medium following transfection, the cells were starved for 24 h in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium containing 0.5% fetal bovine serum. The cells were then lysed in 300 µl of G protein lysis buffer (20 mM Tris, pH 7.4, 150 mM NaCl, 5 mM MgCl2, 5 mM beta -glycerophosphate, 0.5% Nonidet P-40, 1 mM dithiothreitol, plus 0.7 µg/ml pepstatin, 0.5 µg/ml leupeptin, and 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride), containing 25 µg of a GST fusion protein of the PBD from human p21-activated kinase 1 (amino acids 70-117). The cell lysates were immediately clarified by centrifugation at 13,000 × g in a microcentrifuge for 10 min at 4 °C. An aliquot (30 µl) of the clarified lysate was removed for Western blot analysis; the remainder was precipitated using glutathione-Sepharose beads (Amersham Biosciences; 30-µl bead volume) for 30 min at 4 °C. The beads were washed three times in G protein lysis buffer, boiled in sample buffer, resolved on 12% SDS-PAGE gels, and transferred to nitrocellulose. The top portion of the blot was probed with anti-Tiam-1 (Santa Cruz Biotechnologies, Inc. number sc-872; 1:1000); the bottom portion was probed with anti-Rac (Upstate Biotechnologies, Inc. number 05-389; 1:5000) to detect endogenous Rac and detected using Enhanced Chemiluminescence (Amersham Biosciences).

SRE Luciferase Reporter Assay-- NIH 3T3 cells were seeded at 3.4 × 105 cells/35-mm dish. The following day, the cells were co-transfected (using LipofectAMINE) with the FL Tiam-1 mutant (or wild type) constructs and a luciferase reporter whose expression is driven by a mutated SRE that no longer binds ternary complex factor (40). Following transfection, the cells were allowed to recover overnight in 5% calf serum with Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium and were then starved in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium containing 0.5% fetal bovine serum. After 24 h of serum deprivation, the cells were harvested for luciferase assays using the Luciferase Assay System (Promega Corporation), following the manufacturer's instructions. An aliquot of each cell lysate was also taken for SDS-PAGE and immunoblotting with anti-Tiam-1 antibody, to allow normalization of luciferase activity to Tiam-1 expression levels.

Nucleotide Exchange Assay-- Nucleotide exchange assays were performed in vitro as described (23), monitoring incorporation of N-methylanthraniloyl (mant)-GTP into Rac1 expressed and purified from E. coli. Exchange reaction assay mixtures containing 20 mM Tris, pH 7.5, 150 mM NaCl, 5 mM MgCl2, 1 mM dithiothreitol, and 100 µM mant-GTP (Biomol), plus 2 µM Rac1 were prepared and allowed to equilibrate (with continuous stirring) in a Perkin-Elmer LS 50B spectrofluorimeter at 25 °C. After equilibration, the Tiam-1 GST-DH/PH protein (mutant or wild type) was added to 400 nM, and the rate of nucleotide loading was determined by monitoring the decrease in Rac1 tryptophan fluorescence lambda ex = 295 nm, lambda em = 335 nm) upon binding of mant-GTP (41, 42). The rates of nucleotide exchange were determined by fitting the data as single exponential decays. The data were normalized to wild type curves to yield the percentage of GDP released.

Immunofluorescence Microscopy-- NIH 3T3 cells (3.0 × 105) were seeded on UV-irradiated glass coverslips in 35-mm dishes. The following day, the cells were transfected with 2 µg of plasmid encoding (Myc-tagged) FL wild type or PH*L1/L2 Tiam-1, using LipofectAMINE. The cells were then starved in 0.5% fetal bovine serum with Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium for 24 h, stimulated for 10 min with platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) at a final concentration of 10 ng/ml (Invitrogen), and fixed in 3.7% formaldehyde in phosphate-buffered saline. To localize Tiam-1, the cells were stained with anti-Myc antibody (9E10; 0.1 µg/ml) and visualized using Cy3-labeled donkey anti-mouse IgG (Jackson ImmunoResearch) diluted at 1:1000. F-actin localization was simultaneously visualized using fluorescein isothiocyanate-labeled phalloidin (Molecular Probes, Eugene, OR) diluted at 1:25 from a methanolic solution at 300 units/ml. The coverslips were mounted with SloFade (Molecular Probes) and viewed on a Zeiss confocal microscope with LSM510 software, using excitation wavelengths of 488 nm (for fluorescein isothiocyanate) or 546 nm (for Cy3).

    RESULTS
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

Mutation of Tiam-1 C-PH to Impair PtdIns-3-P Binding-- To investigate the in vivo importance of low affinity PtdIns-3-P binding by the C-PH of Tiam-1, our first aim was to make mutations that would abolish this interaction. By contrast with PH domains that have specific, high affinity, phosphoinositide ligands, PH domains from Dbl family members do not contain clear sequence motifs at which mutations can be guaranteed to abolish phosphoinositide binding. For example, the critical arginine that can be mutated to prevent phosphoinositide binding by the phospholipase C-delta 1, Bruton's tyrosine kinase, or protein kinase B PH domains (6) is not conserved in Tiam-1 C-PH. Therefore, assuming that phosphoinositides bind to the same face of Tiam-1 C-PH as they do to other PH domains, we substituted lysines in the beta 1/beta 2 (variable loop 1) and beta 3/beta 4 (variable loop 2) loops of Tiam-1 C-PH with glutamine (Fig. 2A) and evaluated the effects of these mutations on PtdIns-3-P binding in vitro. Because PtdIns-3-P binding by Tiam-1 C-PH is so weak (Kd >=  10 µM), we used a semi-quantitative dot-blot approach to compare phosphoinositide binding by the mutated and wild type proteins. Identical quantities of 32P-labeled GST-DH/PH fusion proteins were used in parallel to probe nitrocellulose filters onto which PtdIns-3-P had been spotted (with PtdIns(4,5)P2 as a control) as described under "Experimental Procedures." As shown in Fig. 2B, a GST fusion protein containing the wild type DH/PH fragment gives a significant binding signal with PtdIns-3-P that only falls to background levels after three or four serial 2-fold dilutions of lipid. A weak signal is also seen with PtdIns(4,5)P2 but not with phosphatidylserine, confirming the phosphoinositide binding specificity of this DH/PH fragment that we reported previously (29).


View larger version (37K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 2.   Mutation of Tiam-1 C-PH domain. A, the sequence from strand beta 1 to beta 4 of Tiam-1 C-PH is listed, with strands beta 1, beta 2, and beta 3 marked. Lysine to glutamine mutations in PH*L2 and PH*L1/L2 are in bold type. B, 12 µg of 32P-labeled GST-DH/PH was used to probe nitrocellulose onto which had been spotted serial 2-fold dilutions of PtdIns-3-P, PtdIns(4,5)P2, and phosphatidylserine (beginning at 2 mg/ml) as described under "Experimental Procedures." The experiment was repeated for wild type DH/PH and mutated forms as labeled (see text). Dot-blots are representative of more than three independent experiments. A fixed amount (approximately 6 ng) of 32P-labeled protein was also spotted at the bottom left of each blot to serve as an exposure control. C, Coomassie Blue-stained SDS-PAGE gel of wild type and mutated forms of GST-DH/PH proteins loaded at 1 mg/ml. WT, wild type.

Mutation of four lysines in variable loop 2 to glutamine (PH*L2; Fig. 2A) substantially reduced PtdIns-3-P binding by the DH/PH fragment (dropping to background after a single 2-fold lipid dilution) and gave no detectable signal with PtdIns(4,5)P2. Additional mutation of three lysines in variable loop 1, to give the PH*L1/L2 mutant, appeared to reduce PtdIns-3-P binding further, so that it could barely be detected. The residues mutated are all solvent-accessible in the crystal structure of the Tiam-1 DH/PH fragment (24), and Fig. 2C shows that the mutations described here have no influence on the abundant soluble expression of the GST fusion proteins in E. coli at 37 °C or upon their integrity. Each of the lysines mutated in the Tiam-1 DH/PH fragment contributes to the characteristic positively charged face of the C-terminal Tiam-1 PH domain. Therefore, in addition to any possible effect on a specific PtdIns-3-P-binding site, mutating these lysines to glutamine will reduce the strength of delocalized (and nonspecific) electrostatic interactions between the positively charged face of the PH domain and negatively charged phosphoinositide-containing membranes.

Loss of Phosphoinositide Binding by C-PH Impairs the Ability of Tiam-1 to Activate Rac1 in Vivo-- Tiam-1 serves as a Rac-specific GEF in vivo. To determine whether the loss of PtdIns-3-P binding affects Tiam-1 function, Rac activity was assessed in cells expressing either wild type (full-length) Tiam-1 or a form containing the C-PH mutations described above. Rac1 activation can be monitored by selectively precipitating the active, GTP-bound form from cell lysates with the PBD of p21-activated kinase, a physiological target of activated Rac (43). As shown in Fig. 3A, overexpression of FL wild type Tiam-1 in COS cells caused a substantial increase in the amount of activated Rac that can be precipitated by GST-PBD from lysates of serum-starved cells. By contrast, very little activated Rac could be seen in cells overexpressing the FL PH*L1/L2 or PH*L2 mutants or in the vector control. Western blots of whole cell lysates confirmed that the total levels of Rac and of the Tiam-1 proteins were comparable in all samples.


View larger version (33K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 3.   C-PH mutated Tiam-1 fails to activate Rac in vivo. COS cells were transfected with the indicated Tiam-1 constructs and then serum-starved. The active pool of Rac was specifically isolated by affinity chromatography using GST-PBD, as described under "Experimental Procedures." A, full-length Tiam-1 (FL wt) potently activates Rac when compared with vector control samples (vector), whereas mutated forms of FL Tiam-1 with C-PH mutations that abrogate PtdIns-3-P binding (FL PH*L1/L2 and FL PH*L2) do not. The top and middle panels were immunoblotted with anti-Rac antibodies. The top panel represents the protein precipitated with GST-PBD (activated Rac), whereas the middle panel represents whole cell lysate (total Rac). The bottom panel represents an immunoblot of whole cell lysate with anti-Tiam-1 antibodies. B, overexpression of wild type C1199 Tiam-1 (C1199 wt; first and second lanes) leads to robust Rac activation, whereas overexpression of the PH*L1/L2 mutant (third and fourth lanes) does not. The panels were probed as described for A.

Identical results were obtained with a widely used form of Tiam-1 that removes the two PEST sequences at the N terminus, leaving only C1199 (Fig. 1), which is believed to lead to stabilization of the protein. As seen in Fig. 3B, C1199 potently activated Rac in COS cells, and mutation of the C-PH domain completely abrogated these effects (C1199 PH*L1/L2). These results therefore argue that loss of PtdIns-3-P binding by the C-terminal PH domain significantly impairs the ability of Tiam-1 to activate Rac in living cells.

Mutations in the C-terminal PH Domain of Tiam-1 Also Impair Its Ability to Activate Serum Response Factor (SRF)-- One consequence of Rac activation in vivo is stimulation of SRF, which induces transcription of target genes by binding to SREs in their promoters (44). SRF activation can be monitored using an SRE-luciferase reporter gene. As shown in Fig. 4, transient overexpression of wild type FL Tiam-1 in NIH 3T3 cells resulted in robust SRE-dependent luciferase production to levels ~22-fold above background. By contrast, transfection with vectors encoding FL Tiam-1 bearing either the PH*L2 or PH*L1/L2 mutations resulted in only background levels of luciferase activity, no higher than induced with reporter plasmid alone. Although the C-PH mutants were expressed at slightly lower levels than the wild type protein (Fig. 4), it is highly unlikely that this modest difference can account for the complete loss of luciferase activation. Thus, this experiment supports the data described above and strengthens the argument that loss of PtdIns-3-P binding by C-PH of Tiam-1 abrogates its activation of Rac signaling pathways in vivo.


View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 4.   SRF activation by wild type (WT) but not C-PH mutated Tiam-1. SRF activation in serum-starved NIH 3T3 cells was monitored using a luciferase assay as described under "Experimental Procedures." The cells were transfected with full-length wild type and PH-mutated Tiam-1 constructs as indicated. Only wild type Tiam-1 led to significant SRF activation. An anti-Tiam-1 immunoblot is provided at the foot of the graph to confirm expression of the mutants. The error bars represent standard deviations for results from three independent experiments, each performed in triplicate.

Inherent in Vitro Exchange Activity of DH/PH Fragments Is Unaffected by PH Domain Mutations-- The inability of Tiam-1 with C-PH mutations to activate Rac and SRF could have at least two origins. The loss of function could reflect a misfolding or stability artifact, or it could reflect a real requirement for phosphoinositide binding by the C-PH domain for Tiam-1 to exert its in vivo effects. The lack of any effect of the PH*L2 or PH*L1/L2 mutations on expression of the DH/PH fragment in E. coli (Fig. 2C) argues against a misfolding or stability artifact. Indeed, the wild type and both mutated proteins were readily expressed and purified. Similarly, the C-PH mutations did not significantly impair expression levels of FL or C1199 Tiam-1 (Figs. 3 and 4). We also tested the possibility that C-PH mutations might directly impair the GEF activity of the DH domain, which could explain the in vivo results. We employed an in vitro nucleotide exchange assay using N-mant-GTP. When mant-GTP binds to Rac, the intrinsic tryptophan fluorescence of the small GTPase is quenched by energy transfer to the mant moiety, and this effect can be monitored in a spectrofluorimeter to follow GTP loading in real time (23). As shown in Fig. 5, the rate of guanine nucleotide exchange on unprenylated Rac1 is indistinguishable for the wild type and PH domain-mutated DH/PH fragments and was unaffected by the addition of PtdIns-3-P (29). Each curve fit well to a single exponential, with observed rates that differed by less 10%, as listed in the legend to Fig. 5. It is therefore clear that the PH*L2 and PH*L1/L2 mutations studied here do not affect the intrinsic GEF activity of Tiam-1, so this cannot explain their failure to activate Rac1 and SRF in vivo.


View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 5.   C-PH mutations do not affect intrinsic in vitro exchange activity of Tiam-1 DH/PH fragment. GTP/GDP exchange was measured for wild type (wt) and mutated GST-DH/PH proteins (as used in Fig. 2) as described under "Experimental Procedures." The data were fit as single exponential decays, giving observed rates (kobs) of 0.12 × 10-3 s-1 (no GEF), 1.64 × 10-3 s-1 (wild type), 1.46 × 10-3 s-1 (PH*L2), and 1.65 × 10-3 s-1 (PH*L1/L2). The experiments were performed twice with identical results.

C-PH Mutations Do Not Influence Membrane Targeting of Tiam-1-- Previous studies have indicated that recruitment of Tiam-1 to the plasma membrane is essential for its ability to activate Rac in vivo. Because mutations that prevent PtdIns-3-P binding by Tiam-1 C-PH impair cellular function without affecting intrinsic GEF activity, we next tested the hypothesis that these mutations might alter the membrane targeting of Tiam-1. We first generated a green fluorescent protein fusion protein of the Tiam-1 DH/PH fragment and examined its subcellular location. Only diffuse green fluorescence was observed, regardless of growth factor stimulation of the cells, arguing that the DH/PH fragment alone is not a primary determinant of Tiam-1 localization to the plasma membrane (data not shown). This finding is consistent with multiple other studies demonstrating that the N-terminal but not the C-terminal PH domain of Tiam-1 is necessary and sufficient for efficient membrane association (2, 22, 35).

We next examined the consequences of mutating Tiam-1 C-PH on membrane localization in the context of the FL Tiam-1 protein. Previous work has shown that PDGF can induce recruitment of Tiam-1 to the plasma membrane (45). Therefore, FL wild type or PH*L1/L2 Tiam-1 were transfected into NIH 3T3 cells, and their localization was monitored by confocal microscopy following stimulation of cells with PDGF. Both proteins were found predominantly in the cytoplasm and in a perinuclear region (Fig. 6). Strong plasma membrane localization of wild type Tiam-1 was additionally evident in ~5% of transfected cells. This low percentage may be due to the transient nature of Tiam-1 membrane recruitment in response to ligand, as suggested by previous studies (2), and/or the difficulty of clearly discerning membrane targeting at higher expression levels (when cytoplasmic staining is more intense). Neither the percentage of cells displaying strong plasma membrane localization of Tiam-1 nor the extent of membrane localization was affected by the PH domain mutations. A representative image demonstrating membrane localization of wild type versus PH*L1/L2 is shown in Fig. 6. When either form of Tiam-1 was plasma membrane associated, it appeared to co-localize with F-actin at sites of membrane ruffling. This result suggests that the inability of PH*L1/L2 to activate Rac in vivo does not derive from its aberrant subcellular localization and further confirms that the C-PH domain of Tiam-1 is dispensable for membrane recruitment.


View larger version (64K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Fig. 6.   Mutation of C-PH of FL Tiam-1 does not affect subcellular localization. NIH 3T3 cells were transfected with the indicated Tiam-1 construct, starved, and then stimulated with PDGF (10 ng/ml) for 10 min. the cells were fixed and co-stained for Tiam-1 (using anti-Myc antibody) and F-actin (using fluorescein isothiocyanate-labeled phalloidin) as described under "Experimental Procedures." Significant membrane localization of Tiam-1 was observed in only ~5% of cells but was seen with an equivalent frequency for both wild type and PH*L1/L2 Tiam-1. Micrographs shown are representative of Tiam-1 staining when membrane localization was observed. As depicted in the merged images, Tiam-1 co-localized with F-actin at membrane ruffles.


    DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

In the relatively few cases where their function is clear, PH domains are known to target their host proteins to cellular membranes by binding phosphoinositides, sometimes in cooperation with other binding targets (6, 46). However, the function of most PH domains is not well understood, and the majority binds phosphoinositides with low affinity and with little if any specificity (6). The PH domains that invariably follow DH domains exhibit low affinity and usually promiscuous phosphoinositide binding in all cases studied (27, 29, 47). Thus, DH-associated PH domains do not share the characteristics (i.e. specificity and high affinity) of PH domains that can drive membrane targeting directly, such as the phospholipase C-delta 1, Grp1, and protein kinase B PH domains.

In earlier studies (29) we found that the C-terminal PH domain of Tiam-1 binds with low affinity but with high apparent specificity to PtdIns-3-P in vitro. In this paper we show that mutations that abolish this low affinity PtdIns-3-P binding also greatly impair the ability of Tiam-1 to activate Rac in vivo. Because the C-PH mutations that abolish PtdIns-3-P binding do not influence the intrinsic exchange activity of the DH domain in vitro (Fig. 5), this interaction must be required for stimulating (or localizing) Tiam-1 exchange activity in vivo. Our subcellular localization studies showed no influence of C-PH mutations on membrane association of Tiam-1, arguing against a role for this PH domain in phosphoinositide-dependent membrane targeting. Others have also reported that C-PH deletion does not impair membrane targeting of Tiam-1 (2, 35) but can abolish its activity (34). These results suggest that ligand binding to C-PH may activate the adjacent DH domain by promoting a conformation (or orientation) at the membrane surface that directly enhances Rac GEF activity of Tiam-1 in vivo.

Several reports have shown that plasma membrane targeting of Tiam-1 is driven primarily by its N-terminal PH domain (Fig. 1), together with an adjacent 300-amino acid "protein interaction region" (2, 22, 35). The requirement for this region in Tiam-1 activity is nicely illustrated by the observation that its removal, by caspase-mediated cleavage at residue 993, inactivates Tiam-1 (37). Under normal circumstances, Tiam-1 translocation to the plasma membrane is promoted by serum (2). In NIH 3T3 cells, membrane translocation can be induced by PDGF or lysophosphatidic acid (LPA) (45). Membrane translocation is required (but is not sufficient) for Tiam-1 to activate Rac and downstream signals. Despite the fact that both PDGF and LPA induce Tiam-1 translocation to membrane fractions, only PDGF stimulates Tiam-1 exchange activity in vivo (45). This difference could indicate that PDGF and LPA target Tiam-1 to distinct membrane fractions. An equally plausible hypothesis is that PDGF engages additional signaling pathway(s) not induced by LPA that are also needed for Tiam-1 activation. It is tempting to speculate that one such pathway might involve phosphoinositides, which could exert their effects by binding to the C-terminal PH domain of Tiam-1.

There is no clear consensus on the role of PI 3-kinase in Tiam-1 activation. Tiam-1 translocation to the plasma membrane, mediated by its N-terminal region, does not appear to require PI 3-kinase activity (35, 45). The ability of Tiam-1 to activate Rac-dependent processes has been reported to be stimulated by PI 3-kinase products (35, 48), although other studies disagree (5, 45). If PI 3-kinase were able to regulate Tiam-1 through its C-terminal PH domain without affecting Tiam-1 localization, this would resemble the situation reported for P-Rex1, a phosphatidylinositol 3,4,5-trisphosphate-regulated Rac-GEF (36). P-Rex1 is regulated by PI 3-kinase in vivo and in vitro. However, this activation does not involve its translocation to the plasma membrane. Instead, a fraction of P-Rex1 that is membrane-targeted through other means is activated while present at that location by binding to phosphatidylinositol 3,4,5-trisphosphate (36), probably through its PH domain.

The fact that PtdIns-3-P is the preferred ligand for Tiam-1 C-PH merits discussion. This phosphoinositide is primarily considered as a marker for endosomal compartments in the cell (30). Interestingly, Michiels et al. (2) have observed localization of myristoylated Tiam-1 to intracellular vesicle-like structures. PtdIns-3-P is not generally considered to be a signaling phosphoinositide in the normal sense, because its levels remain quite constant with different stimuli (49). However, recent studies have implicated PtdIns-3-P in certain acute responses. There is clear evidence for acute de novo synthesis of PtdIns-3-P on phagosomal membranes during particle ingestion (31, 32) and for PtdIns-3-P accumulation at plasma membrane ruffles induced by invading Salmonella (33). It is therefore possible that PtdIns-3-P generation (or redistribution) could play a role in C-PH-mediated activation of Tiam-1. Indeed, a similar proposal has been made for the cytokine-independent survival kinase, which has an N-terminal (PtdIns-3-P-specific) phox homology domain that must bind PtdIns-3-P for cytokine-independent survival kinase activity (50). One output for which the presence of PtdIns-3-P and activated Rac must coincide is in the assembly and activation of the neutrophil NADPH oxidase complex. PtdIns-3-P promotes assembly of this complex through the phox homology domain of p40phox (51), and activated Rac is known to be required for oxidase activity (52). However, Tiam-1 has not been directly implicated in this process to our knowledge.

An important implication of our findings is that binding of phosphoinositides (or other ligands) to the C-PH domain of Tiam-1 must occur once the protein is already membrane-targeted. The effective local concentration of phosphoinositides in the vicinity of membrane-targeted Tiam-1 will be very high. Therefore, an interaction that is weak (Kd > 10 µM) when the two components are free in solution (such as between Tiam-1 DH/PH fragment and PtdIns-3-P in vitro) would be rather strong in the context of membrane-targeted Tiam-1. A local concentration effect of this sort presents complications for interpreting lipid binding specificity from in vitro studies. Whereas we found that C-PH of Tiam-1 is PtdIns-3-P-specific in vitro (29), Fleming et al. (35) have reported that it also binds phosphatidylinositol 3,4-bisphosphate and phosphatidylinositol 3,4,5-trisphosphate (although we are unable to detect this). Depending on the relative Kd levels for these lipids and the relationship of these values to effective local concentrations in vivo, it is possible that Tiam-1 C-PH binds physiologically to all three 3-phosphoinositides. If true, this could provide a partial explanation for the variably observed PI 3-kinase dependence of Tiam-1 activity.

Recent studies by Eva and co-workers (20, 53) have provided a slightly different picture for the role of the DH domain-associated PH domain in Dbl. Loss of phosphoinositide binding by the Dbl PH domain actually enhanced in vivo GEF activity of a Dbl DH/PH fragment (20) and FL proto-Dbl (53). However, this enhancement was only seen for Cdc42 exchange. Interestingly, the same PH domain mutations instead inhibited RhoA activation by Dbl. If only RhoA activation is considered, these studies therefore mirror our findings with Tiam-1. Der and co-workers have also reported similar results for Vav (54). The PH domain of Vav was found to be critical for its transforming activity but appeared to contribute little (if at all) to membrane association of the protein.

PH domains that immediately follow DH domains in Dbl family GEFs do not appear to play a key role in membrane targeting of their host proteins. In this sense, they seem to represent a different class of PH domains from that constituted by the Bruton's tyrosine kinase, protein kinase B, Grp1, phospholipase C-delta 1, and other PH domains that function as independent membrane-targeting modules (6). The fact that Dbl family GEFs are primarily membrane-targeted by other domains restricts the number of mechanisms that should be considered for their regulation by DH-associated PH domains. One possibility is that the PH domain directs the GEF to specific regions of the membrane that are enriched in a particular lipid (such as PtdIns-3-P). No evidence exists for such "lateral targeting," although it may simply be beyond the resolution of approaches used to study localization. The second, more favored possibility is that binding of membrane phosphoinositide (or other ligand) to the PH domain optimizes the relationship between the DH and PH domains of the GEF and the lipid-anchored small GTPase to maximize exchange activity. This could simply involve promotion of an ideal orientation of the DH domain with respect to the GTPase. Alternatively, as suggested for Sos (28), ligand binding by the PH domain may disfavor an auto-inhibitory relationship between the DH and PH domains. Another mode, suggested by crystallographic studies of the Dbs DH/PH fragment bound to Cdc42 (23), involves promotion of critical contacts between the PH domain and the small GTPase at the membrane surface. The different relationships between DH domain, PH domain, and small GTPase in the structures determined to date (23, 24, 28, 55) suggest that the precise mode of regulation by PH domain ligand binding may differ between subclasses of Dbl family GEF.

We have suggested several hypotheses for how low affinity phosphoinositide binding by C-PH could play a critical role in Tiam-1 regulation without being required for membrane targeting. However, we cannot exclude the possibility that our C-PH mutations abolish binding to Tiam-1 of some other regulatory component, such as another lipid or a protein that is required for Tiam-1 to be able to activate Rac in vivo. Indeed, an accumulating body of data (6, 46, 56) suggests that PH domains that bind phosphoinositides with low affinity may often have additional (or alternative) binding targets. Regardless of whether such an additional target exists for Tiam-1 C-PH, the data presented here support the idea that this PH domain plays a regulatory role that is quite different from that seen in Bruton's tyrosine kinase, protein kinase B, and other examples. Understanding the diverse ways in which such PH domains can regulate their host proteins will be an interesting future challenge.

    ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We thank Anne Crompton, John Collard, and Jonathan Chernoff for constructs and members of the Chou and Lemmon laboratories for discussion and comments on the manuscript.

    FOOTNOTES

* This work was supported in part by National Institutes of Health Grants R01-GM56846 (to M. A. L.), F31-GM65066 (to M. A. B.), R01-GM62299 (to J. S.), and R01-CA81415 (to M. M. C.).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: Dept. of Biochemistry & Biophysics, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, 809C Stellar-Chance Laboratories, 422 Curie Blvd., Philadelphia, PA 19104-6059. Tel.: 215-898-3072; Fax: 215-573-4764; E-mail: mlemmon@mail.med.upenn.edu.

Dagger Dagger To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Cell & Developmental Biology, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, 1011 BRB II/III, 421 Curie Blvd., Philadelphia, PA 19104-6058. Tel.: 215-573-4126; Fax: 215-898-9871; E-mail: mmc@mail.med.upenn.edu.

Published, JBC Papers in Press, January 13, 2003, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M211901200

    ABBREVIATIONS

The abbreviations used are: PH, pleckstrin homology; C1199, C-terminal 1199 amino acids of Tiam-1; C-PH, C-terminal PH domain; GEF, guanine nucleotide exchange factor; GST, glutathione-S-transferase; LPA, lysophosphatidic acid; mant, N-methylanthraniloyl; PBD, p21-binding domain; PDGF, platelet-derived growth factor; PH*L2, Tiam-1 mutated in the beta 3/beta 4 loop (variable loop 2) of C-PH; PH*L1/L2, Tiam-1 mutated in the beta 1/beta 2 and beta 3/beta 4 loops (variable loops 1 and 2) of C-PH; PI, phosphoinositide; PtdIns-3-P, phosphatidylinositol 3-phosphate; PtdIns(4, 5)P2, phosphatidylinositol 4,5-bisphosphate; SRE, serum response element; SRF, serum response factor; DH, Dbl homology; FL, full-length.

    REFERENCES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

1. Habets, G. G., Scholtes, E. H., Zuydgeest, D., van der Kammen, R. A., Stam, J. C., Berns, A., and Collard, J. G. (1994) Cell 77, 537-549[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
2. Michiels, F., Stam, J. C., Hordijk, P. L., van der Kammen, R. A., Ruuls-Van Stalle, L., Feltkamp, C. A., and Collard, J. G. (1997) J. Cell Biol. 137, 387-398[Abstract/Free Full Text]
3. Rogers, S., Wells, R., and Rechsteiner, M. (1986) Science 234, 364-368[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
4. Harris, B. Z., and Lim, W. A. (2001) J. Cell Science 114, 3219-3231[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
5. Lambert, J. M., Lambert, Q. T., Reuther, G. W., Malliri, A., Siderovski, D. P., Sondek, J., Collard, J. G., and Der, C. J. (2002) Nat. Cell Biol. 4, 621-625[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
6. Lemmon, M. A., and Ferguson, K. M. (2000) Biochem. J. 350, 1-18[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
7. Zheng, Y. (2001) Trends Biochem. Sci. 26, 724-732[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
8. Michiels, F., Habets, G. G., Stam, J. C., van der Kammen, R. A., and Collard, J. G. (1995) Nature 375, 338-340[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
9. Hordijk, P. L., ten Klooster, J. P., van der Kammen, R. A., Michiels, F., Oomen, L. C., and Collard, J. G. (1997) Science 278, 1464-1466[Abstract/Free Full Text]
10. Bishop, A. L., and Hall, A. (2000) Biochem. J. 348, 241-255[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
11. Hart, M. J., Eva, A., Zangrilli, D., Aaronson, S. A., Evans, T., Cerione, R. A., and Zheng, Y. (1994) J. Biol. Chem. 269, 62-65[Abstract/Free Full Text]
12. Whitehead, I. P., Campbell, S., Rossman, K. L., and Der, C. J. (1997) Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1332, 1-23
13. Liu, X., Wang, H., Eberstadt, M., Schnuchel, A., Olejniczak, E. T., Meadows, R. P., Schkeryantz, J. M., Janowick, D. A., Harlan, J. E., Harris, E. A., Staunton, D. E., and Fesik, S. W. (1998) Cell 95, 269-277[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
14. Cerione, R. A., and Zheng, Y. (1996) Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 8, 216-222[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
15. Whitehead, I., Kirk, H., Tognon, C., Trigo-Gonzalez, G., and Kay, R. (1995) J. Biol. Chem. 270, 18388-18395[Abstract/Free Full Text]
16. Zheng, Y., Zangrilli, D., Cerione, R. A., and Eva, A. (1996) J. Biol. Chem. 271, 19017-19020[Abstract/Free Full Text]
17. Wang, D. S., Deng, T., and Shaw, G. (1997) Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 234, 183-189[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
18. Olson, M. F., Sterpetti, P., Nagata, K., Toksoz, D., and Hall, A. (1997) Oncogene 15, 2827-2831[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
19. Glaven, J. A., Whitehead, I., Bagrodia, S., Kay, R., and Cerione, R. A. (1999) J. Biol. Chem. 274, 2279-2285[Abstract/Free Full Text]
20. Russo, C., Gao, Y., Mancini, P., Vanni, C., Porotto, M., Falasca, M., Torrisi, M. R., Zheng, Y., and Eva, A. (2001) J. Biol. Chem. 276, 19524-19531[Abstract/Free Full Text]
21. Booden, M. A., Campbell, S. L., and Der, C. J. (2002) Mol. Cell. Biol. 22, 2487-2497[Abstract/Free Full Text]
22. Stam, J. C., Sander, E. E., Michiels, F., van Leeuwen, F. N., Kain, H. E. T., van der Kammen, R. A., and Collard, J. G. (1997) J. Biol. Chem. 272, 28447-28454[Abstract/Free Full Text]
23. Rossman, K. L., Worthylake, D. K., Snyder, J. T., Siderovski, D. P., Campbell, S. L., and Sondek, J. (2002) EMBO J. 21, 1315-1326[Abstract/Free Full Text]
24. Worthylake, D. K., Rossman, K. L., and Sondek, J. (2000) Nature 408, 682-688[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
25. Nimnual, A. S., Yatsula, B. A., and Bar-Sagi, D. (1998) Science 279, 560-563[Abstract/Free Full Text]
26. Ma, A. D., Metjian, B., S., Taylor, S., and Abrams, C. S. (1998) Mol. Cell. Biol. 18, 4744-4751[Abstract/Free Full Text]
27. Han, J., Luby-Phelps, K., Das, B., Shu, X., Xi, Y., Mosteller, R. D., Krishna, U. M., Falck, J. R., White, M. A., and Broek, D. (1998) Science 279, 558-560[Abstract/Free Full Text]
28. Soisson, S. M., Nimnual, A. S., Uy, M., Bar-Sagi, D., and Kuriyan, J. (1998) Cell 95, 259-268[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
29. Snyder, J. T., Rossman, K. L., Baumeister, M. A., Pruitt, W. M., Siderovski, D. P., Der, C. J., Lemmon, M. A., and Sondek, J. (2001) J. Biol. Chem. 276, 45868-45875[Abstract/Free Full Text]
30. Gillooly, D. J., Simonsen, A., and Stenmark, H. (2001) Biochem. J. 355, 249-258[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
31. Vieira, O. V., Botelho, R. J., Rameh, L., Brachmann, S. M., Matsuo, T., Davidson, H. W., Schreiber, A., Backer, J. M., Cantley, L. C., and Grinstein, S. (2002) J. Cell Biol. 155, 19-25
32. Ellson, C. D., Anderson, K. E., Morgan, G., Chilvers, E. R., Lipp, P., Stephens, L. R., and Hawkins, P. T. (2001) Curr. Biol. 11, 1631-1635[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
33. Pattni, K., Jepson, M., Stenmark, H., and Banting, G. (2001) Curr. Biol. 11, 1636-1642[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
34. Crompton, A. M., Foley, L. H., Wood, A., Roscoe, W., Stokoe, D., McCormick, F., Symons, M., and Bollag, G. (2000) J. Biol. Chem. 275, 25751-25759[Abstract/Free Full Text]
35. Fleming, I. N., Gray, A., and Downes, C. P. (2000) Biochem. J. 351, 173-182[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
36. Welch, H. C. E., Coadwell, W. J., Ellson, C. D., Ferguson, G. J., Andrews, S. R., Erdjument-Bromage, H., Tempst, P., Hawkins, P. T., and Stephens, L. R. (2002) Cell 108, 809-821[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
37. Qi, H., Juo, P., Masuda-Robens, J., Caloca, M. J., Zhou, H., Stone, N., Kazanietz, M. G., and Chou, M. M. (2001) Cell Growth Differ. 12, 603-611[Abstract/Free Full Text]
38. Lee, A., and Lemmon, M. A. (2001) Methods Enzymol. 329, 457-468[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
39. Kavran, J. M., Klein, D. E., Lee, A., Falasca, M., Isakoff, S. J., Skolnik, E. Y., and Lemmon, M. A. (1998) J. Biol. Chem. 273, 30497-30508[Abstract/Free Full Text]
40. Westwick, J. K., Lambert, Q. T., Clark, G. J., Symons, M., Van Aelst, L., Pestell, R. G., and Der, C. J. (1997) Mol. Biol. Cell 17, 1324-1335
41. Klebe, C., Bischoff, F. R., and Ponstingl, H. (1995) Biochemistry 34, 639-647[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
42. Leonard, D. A., Evans, T., Hart, M., Cerione, R. A., and Manor, D. (1994) Biochemistry 33, 12323-12328[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
43. Manser, E., Leung, T., Salihuddin, H., Zhao, Z. S., and Lim, L. (1994) Nature 367, 40-46[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
44. Hill, C. S., Wynne, J., and Treisman, R. (1995) Cell 81, 1159-1170[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
45. Buchanan, F. G., Elliot, C. M., Gibbs, M., and Exton, J. H. (2000) J. Biol. Chem. 275, 9742-9748[Abstract/Free Full Text]
46. Maffucci, T., and Falasca, M. (2001) FEBS Lett. 506, 173-179[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
47. Zheng, J., Chen, R.-H., Corbalan-Garcia, S., Cahill, S. M., Bar-Sagi, D., and Cowburn, D. (1997) J. Biol. Chem. 272, 30340-30344[Abstract/Free Full Text]
48. 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]
49. Stephens, L. R., Jackson, T. R., and Hawkins, P. T. (1993) Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1179, 27-75[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
50. Virbasius, J. V., Song, X., Pomerleau, D. P., Zhan, Y., Zhou, G. W., and Czech, M. P. (2001) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 98, 12908-12913[Abstract/Free Full Text]
51. Ellson, C. D., Gobert-Gosse, S., Anderson, K. E., Davidson, K., Erdjument-Bromage, H., Tempst, P., Thuring, J. W., Cooper, M. A., Lim, Z. Y., Holmes, A. B., Gaffney, P. R., Coadwell, J., Chilvers, E. R., Hawkins, P. T., and Stephens, L. R. (2001) Nat. Cell Biol. 3, 679-682[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
52. Ridley, A. J. (1995) Curr. Biol. 5, 710-712[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
53. Vanni, C., Mancini, P., Gao, Y., Ottaviano, C., Guo, F., Salani, B., Torrisi, M. R., Zheng, Y., and Eva, A. (2002) J. Biol. Chem. 277, 19745-19753[Abstract/Free Full Text]
54. Palmby, T. R., Abe, K., and Der, C. J. (2002) J. Biol. Chem. 277, 39350-39359[Abstract/Free Full Text]
55. Snyder, J. T., Worthylake, D. K., Rossman, K. L., Betts, L., Pruitt, W. M., Siderovski, D. P., Der, C. J., and Sondek, J. (2002) Nat. Struct. Biol. 9, 468-475[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
56. Levine, T. P., and Munro, S. (2002) Curr. Biol. 12, 695-704[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]


Copyright © 2003 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.