* Department of Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309, and the
Walther Cancer Institute, Indianapolis, Indiana 47238; Department of Biological Sciences, § Department of Basic Medical
Sciences, and
Department of Biochemistry, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907
![]() |
Abstract |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Ligand-stimulated activation of FGF receptors (FGFRs) in skeletal muscle cells represses terminal
myogenic differentiation. Skeletal muscle cell lines and
subsets of primary cells are dependent on FGFs to repress myogenesis and maintain growth. To understand the intracellular events that transduce these signals,
MM14 skeletal muscle cells were transfected with expression vectors encoding chimeric receptors. The
chimeras are comprised of the PDGF receptor (PDGF
R) extracellular domain, the FGFR-1 intracellular domain, and either the PDGF
R or FGFR-1
transmembrane domain. The chimeric receptors were
autophosphorylated upon PDGF-BB stimulation and are capable of stimulating mitogen-activated protein kinase activity. Activation of the tyrosine kinase domain
of either chimera repressed myogenesis, suggesting intracellular responses regulating skeletal muscle differentiation are transduced by activation of the FGFR-1 tyrosine kinase. Unexpectedly, we found that activation
of either chimeric receptor failed to stimulate cellular
proliferation. Thus, it appears that regulation of skeletal
muscle differentiation by FGFs requires only activation
of the FGFR tyrosine kinase. In contrast, stimulation of
proliferation may require additional, as yet unidentified,
signals involving the receptor ectodomain, the FGF
ligand, and heparan sulfate either alone, or in combination.
![]() |
Introduction |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
SKELETAL muscle differentiation is regulated by FGFs in most skeletal muscle cell lines and in skeletal muscle primary cultures (11, 19, 20, 25). In the developing chick, a population of muscle cells appears to be dependent on FGFs, consistent with a requirement for FGFs in regulating either the growth or differentiation of skeletal muscle cells (unpublished data). As a model system for investigating FGF-dependent skeletal muscle cells, we study FGF signaling in the MM14 skeletal muscle cell line, which is dependent on addition of exogenous FGFs for maintenance of growth and repression of terminal differentiation (20, 24). We have used the MM14 cell line to demonstrate that FGF-mediated signals cannot be replaced by endogenous receptors, other growth factors, or ectopically expressed growth factor receptors (16, 18, 20; our unpublished data). To examine further the intracellular signals transduced upon stimulation of FGF receptor (FGFR)-11 in MM14 cells, we tested the capacity of two receptor chimeras to repress myogenesis and to maintain proliferation.
Numerous studies using receptor chimeras comprised of extracellular and intracellular domains from different receptors have demonstrated that the intracellular and extracellular domains function independently of each other. Intracellular signaling events mediated by orphan receptors have been elucidated by constructing receptor chimeras containing a known ligand binding domains. Thus, chimeric receptors have proven useful for examining the contribution of the intracellular domains of receptor tyrosine kinases to signaling events. Receptor chimeras retain the ligand binding and kinase activity of the extracellular and cytoplasmic domains of the respective receptors from which they were derived. For example, fusion of the EGF receptor extracellular domain to the intracellular domains of either the erbB receptor (30), the HER2 receptor (17), or the insulin receptor (29), results in hybrid receptors with tyrosine kinase activity that is upregulated by EGF. These extensive studies suggest that signals initiated by ligand binding are transduced from the extracellular domain to the intracellular domain by similar mechanisms for all receptor tyrosine kinases (36).
We previously demonstrated that the full-length PDGFR
could not replace the requirement of FGF for repression of
skeletal muscle cell differentiation, despite the fact that cells
expressing the ectopic receptor activated intracellular signaling pathways in response to PDGF-BB (16). To identify
FGFR domains involved in regulating skeletal muscle growth
and differentiation, we used two chimeras containing the
PDGF
R extracellular domain, the FGFR-1 intracellular domain, and a transmembrane domain from either FGFR-1 or
PDGF
R. Although both chimeras repressed skeletal muscle differentiation, we were surprised to find that neither receptor chimera could support proliferation of skeletal muscle
cells. These data suggest that signaling pathways required
for proliferation cannot be activated by the hybrid receptors
and indicate that activation of the intracellular domain of
FGFR-1 at least in the context of the hybrid receptors is
capable of regulating differentiation of skeletal muscle cells, but is insufficient to support proliferation.
![]() |
Materials and Methods |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Reverse Transcription (RT)-PCR Analysis of FGFRs
Total RNA was isolated from proliferating MM14 cells as previously described (6). 5 µg of total RNA was added to reverse transcriptase buffer (GIBCO-BRL, Gaithersburg, MD) containing 0.025 µg/µl Oligo (dT)12-18 (GIBCO-BRL), 0.01 M DTT (GIBCO-BRL), 0.5 mM dNTP mix (GIBCO-BRL), and 200 U of Superscript II reverse transcriptase (GIBCO-BRL). The reaction was incubated at 42°C for 50 min. Non-reverse transcriptase controls were carried out as described above with the exception of reverse transcriptase addition. Mouse total RNA from an embryonic stem cell mouse tumor was provided by Dr. J. Lee (University of Colorado, Boulder, CO).
PCR amplification was carried out by adding 2 µl of cDNA (or 0.5 µg of plasmid DNA) to PCR buffer containing 0.25 mM each dNTP, 1.5 mM MgCl2, 0.5 µM each of both forward and reverse primers for FGF receptors 1, 2, 3, and 4 as previously described (9), and 5 U of Taq DNA polymerase (GIBCO-BRL). Each reaction was amplified for 35 cycles using the following cycling parameters: denaturation at 94°C for 1 min, annealing at 50°C for 1 min, and elongation at 72°C for 1 min. After amplification, each reaction was resolved on a 0.8% agarose gel containing ethidium bromide and visualized with a UV transilluminator.
Cell Culture and Stable Transfection
Mouse MM14 skeletal muscle cells were cultured as described previously
(24). The pcDNA I expression vector (Invitrogen, San Diego, CA) encoding a chimeric receptor consisting of the PDGFR extracellular and transmembrane domains and the FGFR-1 intracellular domain (pcPRtm/FR1)
was obtained from Dr. M. Welsh (Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden)
(21). pcPRtm/FR1 was co-transfected into MM14 cells with a vector containing the neomycin resistance gene (pKO-neo) by calcium phosphate-
mediated transfection (16). Cells expressing the highest level of chimeric
receptor were selected from neomycin-resistant cells by fluorescence-activated cell sorting using anti-PDGF
R mAb PR7212 (14), biotinylated
goat anti-mouse IgG, and FITC-avidin. The selected cells were subcloned
to derive cell lines that proliferated and differentiated in a manner similar to parental MM14 cells.
MM14 cells overexpressing FGFR-1 were generated by co-transfecting with a full-length mouse FGFR-1 cDNA under the control of a Moloney SV-40 promoter and a hygromycin resistance gene under the control of a cytomegalovirus (CMV) promoter (pHyg) at a 20:1 molar ratio (4 pmol/ 0.2 pmol), respectively. After 24 h, 75 µg/ml hygromycin was added and the cells were incubated for 12 d. Colonies resistant to hygromycin were selected and pooled for analysis. The pooled clones were analyzed for growth in FGF-2 and their differentiation capacity.
Transient Transfection Assay
All transient transfections used a calcium phosphate precipitation method
(31). Briefly, MM14 cells stably expressing PRtm/FR1 were transiently
transfected with 1 µg of CMV-LacZ, 0.5 µg of an -cardiac actin luciferase reporter construct, and cultured without growth factor or with
FGF-2 or PDGF-BB for 36 h. The cells were harvested and assayed for luciferase and
-galactosidase activities using the Tropix Dual Light assay,
using an Optocomp luminometer (MGM Instruments, Inc., Hamden, CT)
(16). Luciferase values were normalized to
-galactosidase values to correct for variations in transfection efficiencies.
Parental MM14 cells were co-transfected with -cardiac actin luciferase, CMV-LacZ, and either pcPRtm/FR1, pBJ5PR/FR1tm, or a control
vector. pBJ5PR/FR1tm is an expression construct containing the second
chimeric receptor gene (PR/FR1tm; provided by Dr. R. Bradshaw [University of California, Irvine, CA]; see Fig. 1 A) that encodes the extracellular
domain of the human PDGF
R fused to the transmembrane and intracellular domains of the rat FGFR-1. The coding sequence was cloned into
the EcoRI site of pBJ5 in the sense orientation relative to the Sra promoter (32). Cells were cultured with the indicated growth factor for 36 h
after osmotic shock, harvested, and then assayed for luciferase and
-galactosidase expression as described above.
|
Immunoblot Analysis
Anti-phosphotyrosine Blots. Proliferating MM14 cells were washed and incubated in Ham's F10C containing 2 mM CaCl2, supplemented with 2% horse serum without FGF-2 for 3.5 h (proliferating cells) or 57.5 h (differentiated cells). Cells were then stimulated with 2 nM PDGF-BB for 10 min where indicated. Cells were lysed in 25 mM Tris, pH 7.4, 50 mM NaCl, 5 mM EDTA, 2 mM EGTA, 50 mM sodium pyrophosphate, 50 mM NaF, 0.1 mM sodium orthovanadate, 1% Triton X-100, 2 µg/ml leupeptin, 2 µg/ml aprotinin, and 1 mM PMSF. Insoluble material was removed by centrifugation and the protein content of each cell lysate measured using the BCA protein assay (Pierce Chemical Co., Rockford, IL). Samples of lysate containing 18 µg total protein were separated by SDS-PAGE on 7.5% acrylamide gels, and then transferred to an Immobilon membrane (Millipore Corp., Bedford, MA). Tyrosine-phosphorylated proteins were detected using the RC20-conjugated anti-phosphotyrosine mAb coupled to HRP, and then developed for chemiluminescence according to the manufacturer's instructions (Transduction Laboratories, Lexington, KY).
Anti-PDGFR Blots.
For detection of expressed PRtm/FR1 chimeras,
cells were treated as described in the legend and cell lysates containing
60 µg total protein were loaded to each lane. The transferred protein blots
were incubated with an affinity-purified anti-PDGF
R mAb (2.5 µg/ml),
washed three times for 10 min, and then incubated with an anti-mouse
IgG conjugated to HRP. The blots were then developed for chemiluminescent detection as described by the manufacturer (Amersham Corp.,
Arlington Heights, IL).
Cell Growth and Differentiation Assays
Immunohistochemical Assay for Myosin Heavy Chain (MHC). MM14 cells stably expressing PRtm/FR1 were grown for 12 h in growth media (contains F10C, 2 mM CaCl2, 15% horse serum) and increasing amounts of FGF-2 (200 pM to 1.5 nM), incubated for 48 h, and then stained for MHC as previously described (16).
DNA Synthesis Assay. DNA synthesis was assayed by [3H]thymidine incorporation into MM14 cells stably expressing PRtm/FR1 cells as previously described (24). Briefly, cells were plated in 24-well plates at 2,000 cells/well in growth media, with the indicated growth factor(s) for 18 h. The cells were then incubated for 10 h with 2 mCi/ml [3H]thymidine (Dupont-NEN, Boston, MA), and the amount of [3H]thymidine incorporated into DNA was quantitated by liquid scintillation counting.
Immunohistochemical Staining
MM14 cells were transiently transfected as described (13). 24 h after the
osmotic shock, 5-bromo-2 deoxyuridine (BrdU; Amersham Corp.) was
added to each plate to a final concentration of 10 µM. After 12 h of additional incubation, cells were fixed with 100% methanol and then treated
with 2 N HCl for 1 h at 37°C. Fixed cells were blocked in PBS containing
5% goat serum for 1 h at room temperature. The BrdU incorporated into
DNA was detected by staining with an anti-BrdU mAb (1:100; Developmental Hybridoma Bank, Iowa City, IA). -Galactosidase was detected
by staining with an anti-
-galactosidase antibody (1:1,000; Boehringer
Mannheim Corp., Indianapolis, IN). Bound primary antibodies were visualized with the appropriate immunoglobulin chain-specific goat anti- mouse secondary antibodies (1:500; Southern Biotechnology Associates, Inc., Birmingham, AL) conjugated to either Texas red (for BrdU) or
FITC (for
-galactosidase).
MAPK Assays
Immune Complex Kinase Assay.
MM14 cells stably expressing FGFR-1 or
the PRtm/FR1 chimera, at a density of 5 × 105 cells per plate, were washed
three times with 5 ml of PBS, and then grown for 4 h in F10C containing
2 mM CaCl2, 2% horse serum without FGF-2. Cells were stimulated with either 0.1 nM FGF-2, 2 nM PDGF BB, or 100 nM 12-O-tetra-decnoylphorbol-13-acetate (TPA) for 10 min. Cell lysates were prepared by washing the
plates in 4°C TBS, scraping the cells in homogenization buffer (50 mM Tris, pH 7.4, 150 mM NaCl, 5 mM EDTA, 5 mM para-nitrophenyl phosphate, 1 mM sodium orthovanadate, 10 mM tetra-sodium pyrophosphate decahydrate, 1 mM PMSF, 10 µg/ml aprotinin, 10 µg/ml leupeptin) in TBS, sonicating, and then centrifuging at 14,000 g for 15 min at 4°C. Cell lysates were
adjusted to 1% Triton X-100, 0.5% sodium deoxycholate, and 0.1% SDS.
Protein A-Sepharose beads pre-loaded with anti-ERK1 polyclonal antibody (provided by Dr. C. Ashandel, Purdue University, West Lafayette,
IN) were incubated in cell lysates for 4 h at 4°C with rotation. The immune
complexes were washed three times in homogenization buffer supplemented with 1% Triton X-100, 0.5% sodium deoxycholate, and 0.1% SDS
and once in 20 mM Tris, pH 7. The immune complexes were then resuspended in 100 µl reaction buffer (12.8 mM Tris, pH 7.4, 5.5 mM para-nitrophenyl phosphate, 51.5 mM MgCl2, 2 µg/ml myelin basic protein, 0.5 mCi/ml
[-32P]ATP). The in vitro kinase reaction was carried out at 30°C for 30 min.
Reaction products were resolved by SDS-PAGE on a 10% polyacrylamide gel. Phosphorylation of myelin basic protein was quantified using a Molecular Dynamics Storm PhosphorImager (Sunnyvale, CA).
elk Reporter Assay.
MAPK (mitogen-activated protein kinase) activity
was also determined using Pathdetect ELK1 reporting system (Stratagene, La Jolla, CA) (35). MM14 cells were plated on six-well plates at a
density of 40,000 cells/well or on 24-well plates at a density of 8,000 cells/
well and cotransfected with 2.5 µg (500 ng for 24-well plate) pFR-Luc reporter vector, 200 ng (40 ng for 24-well plate) pFA-Elk1 vector, and 1 µg
(200 ng for 24-well plate) CMV-LacZ vector per well. 12-16 h after the
transfection cells were washed twice with PBS and incubated in media
containing 2.5% serum without FGF for 6 h. The cells were then left untreated, or stimulated with 0.1 nM FGF-2 or 1 nM PDGF. Cells were harvested and luciferase activity determined 6 h after mitogen stimulation.
Luciferase and -galactosidase activities were determined using the
Tropix Dual Light Assay (Tropix, Bedford, MA). Luciferase activity values were normalized to
-galactosidase activity values to correct for transfection efficiency.
High Level Expression Using a Tetracycline-Repressible System
The DNA fragment encoding a dominant-negative FGFR-1 was subcloned from pcDNFR1 (13) into the EcoRI/XbaI sites of pUHD 10-3 (28)
yielding dnFR1-tet. pUHD 10-3 is an expression vector under the control
of a tetracycline-repressible hybrid transcriptional activator constitutively
expressed from pUHD 15-1 (12). MM14 cells were co-transfected with 1 µg
of CMV-LacZ and 10 µg pUHD 15-1 and/or 10 µg of pUHC 13-3 (12) (a
luciferase reporter plasmid under the control of the transcriptional activator encoded by pUHD 15-1), and then cultured for 36 h in the presence or
absence of 1 µg/ml tetracycline. Cell lysates were prepared and assayed for -galactosidase and luciferase activities as described previously using a
Tropix Dual Light assay (13). To test the effect of a dominant-negative
FGFR-1 on the activity of the PR/FR1tm chimera, MM14 cells were transiently transfected with 1 µg of CMV-LacZ, 5 µg of the
-cardiac actin luciferase reporter construct, 10 µg pUHD 15-1, and combinations of pcPR/
FR1tm and dnFR1-tet. After osmotic shock, cells were cultured for 36 h in
the absence of tetracycline, with or without the indicated additions of
FGF-2 or PDGF-BB. Cell lysates were then prepared and analyzed as previously described (13).
Equilibrium binding of 125I-labeled FGF-2 to intact MM14 and MM14-FR1 cells. MM14 cells (5 × 105) were plated in 35-mm dishes, and 4 h later were incubated with 250 pM 125I-labeled FGF-2 (26) (7 × 103 cpm/fmol) in the presence or absence of 0.96 µM FGF-2 at 4°C. The cells were washed three times with 2 ml F10C containing 25 mM Hepes, pH 7.4, and 0.2% BSA. Cells were then washed twice with 1 ml the same buffer containing 2 M NaCl (low affinity) followed by two 1-ml washes with 20 mM NaAcetate, pH 4.0, containing 2 M NaCl and 0.2% BSA (high affinity). The washes were pooled and counted in a Clinnigamma counter (LKB-Wallac, Turku, Finland).
![]() |
Results |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
We wanted to determine if activation of the FGFR tyrosine kinase is sufficient to mediate FGF-dependent biological activities. We chose to use the MM14 skeletal muscle cell line as a model since these cells exhibit two distinct FGF-dependent responses and serve as a model for a population of FGF-dependent myoblasts present in vivo. In the absence of serum, FGFs repress terminal differentiation independent of proliferation, whereas both serum and FGFs appear to be required for stimulating proliferation (7). Moreover, MM14 cells are absolutely dependent on FGFs for repression of terminal differentiation and for growth maintenance, since other growth factors are incapable of replacing FGFs (23).
RT-PCR analysis of FGFRs in MM14 cells indicates
that the only detectable FGFR expressed is FGFR-1 (Fig.
1 A). In addition, we have previously demonstrated that
MM14 cells do not express the PDGFR. Therefore, to assess the role of the FGFR-1 tyrosine kinase in repression
of myogenesis and stimulation of proliferation in MM14
myoblasts, we examined the activity of two chimeric receptors containing the PDGF
R extracellular domain and
the FGFR-1 intracellular domain (Fig. 1 B).
MM14 cells stably expressing the PRtm/FR1 chimera
(Fig. 1 B) were selected as described in Materials and
Methods, and those clones exhibiting responses to FGF-2
similar to the parental cells were used for further studies.
MM14 cells expressing the wild-type PDGFR (16) and
the PRtm/FR1 chimera were examined by Western blotting
with an anti-PDGF
R antibody. As expected, the chimeric receptor migrated more rapidly than the wild-type
PDGF
R expressed in human fibroblasts or ectopically
expressed in MM14 cells, because of the smaller size of the
intracellular domain of FGFR-1 (Fig. 2 A). As an initial
determinant of the capacity for the receptor chimera to
signal, the tyrosine kinase activity was examined by Western blotting using anti-phosphotyrosine antibodies. Immunoblot analysis of proliferating and differentiated PDGF-BB-treated MM14 cells stably expressing the PRtm/FR1
displayed a prominent phosphorylated product migrating
at ~180 kD, the expected mass of the receptor chimera
(Fig. 2 B). The tyrosine phosphorylation occurring upon FGF stimulation of the endogenous FGFR-1 is not detectable (data not shown), consistent with our previous observations (16). Presumably, this is due to the low number
of receptors per cell (~700). Tyrosine phosphorylated
FGFR-1 is observed only after ectopic overexpression (16).
|
Next, we tested the ability of the PRtm/FR1 chimera to regulate skeletal muscle differentiation using three independent assays: (1) analysis of muscle-specific reporter gene expression; (2) the presence of muscle-specific MHC protein; and (3) fusion into multinucleated myotubes. Addition of PDGF-BB to MM14 cells stably expressing the PRtm/FR1 chimera inhibited the expression of a muscle-specific reporter gene (Fig. 3 A), and blocked differentiation as judged by either myosin staining (Fig. 3 B) or the relative number of nuclei present in multinucleated myotubes (data not shown). These data were consistent with those observed in one other stable subclone (data not shown).
|
It is possible, although unlikely, that the biological activity believed to be mediated by the PRtm/FR1 receptor chimera is an artifact occurring as a result of transfection, selection, or isolation of the two stable subclones. Therefore,
we analyzed the ability of the PRtm/FR1 chimera to repress differentiation in transiently transfected cells. In
addition, we examined the activity of a similar receptor
chimera (PR/FR1tm; see Fig. 1 A), which contains the
FGFR-1 transmembrane domain rather than the PDGFR transmembrane domain. Cells assayed for muscle-specific reporter gene activity after transient transfection
with either chimeric receptor construct and a skeletal muscle-specific reporter revealed that both the PRtm/FR1
(Fig. 4 A) and the PR/FR1tm (Fig. 4 B) chimeras similarly
inhibited muscle-specific reporter gene transcription in the
presence of PDGF-BB. Note that the PR/FR1tm chimera
inhibited the endogenous response to FGF-2 (Fig. 4 B).
|
When FGF is removed from MM14 cells in the presence
of serum, the cells withdraw from the cell cycle and express muscle-specific gene products (7). Since FGFs may
be required for proliferation of MM14 cells and for repression of differentiation, we wanted to determine if activation of the receptor chimeras was sufficient to maintain
cell proliferation as well as to repress differentiation. MM14 cells stably expressing the PRtm/FR1 chimera were
tested for the ability to synthesize DNA upon addition of
PDGF-BB. An analysis of DNA synthesis indicated that
these cells could not incorporate [3H]thymidine in the
presence of 1 nM PDGF-BB and 15% serum (Fig. 5 A).
Higher concentration of PDGF-BB up to 50 nM also
failed to elicit DNA synthesis (data not shown). Moreover, the kinetics of cell cycle withdrawal are indistinguishable for PRtm/FR1-expressing cells in the presence or
absence of PDGF-BB (Fig. 5 B). Thus, the receptor chimera does not appear to be capable of affecting either
DNA synthesis or cell growth. It is possible that the PRtm/ FR1 chimera is defective in a subset of signaling events.
However, a different receptor chimera containing the
FGFR-1 transmembrane domain would not necessarily be
expected to exhibit a similar signaling defect. To test
whether or not both receptor chimeras exhibited similar
deficiencies in signaling, MM14 cells transiently transfected with an expression vector encoding the PR/FR1tm
chimera were examined for their ability to synthesize
DNA upon addition of PDGF-BB. Cells transiently co-transfected with PR/FR1tm and LacZ expression vectors
were allowed to incorporate BrdU, and were immunostained for BrdU and -galactosidase. 10-15% of the cells stained positive for
-galactosidase activity, consistent with previously published data on transfection efficiencies (13). In cells ectopically expressing the PR/FR1tm
chimera, BrdU incorporation was not seen in the absence
of growth factors and in the presence of added PDGF-BB.
However, in contrast to the PR tm/FR1 chimera, FGF-2 addition to cells expressing the PR/FR1tm chimera does not promote DNA synthesis (Fig. 6), suggesting that the inclusion of the FGFR-1 transmembrane domain interferes
with signaling from the endogenous FGFR-1. The non-transfected cells (
-galactosidase-negative cells) did not
incorporate BrdU in the absence of FGF-2 (data not
shown). Expression of either receptor chimera appears to
be incapable of stimulating DNA synthesis in the presence
of PDGF-BB and 15% serum. No significant BrdU incorporation above control levels was seen in PDGF-BB-
treated cells negative for
-galactosidase, indicating the
absence of PDGFRs and a PDGF response in the parental MM14 cell population. Quantitative analysis of transfected
cells revealed that >80% of the PR/FR1tm- and PR tm/FR1-expressing cells failed to synthesize DNA upon addition of
PDGF-BB (Fig. 6). Thus, both receptor chimeras act similarly in their ability to transduce only a portion of the FGF
signal, suggesting that activation of the intracellular
FGFR-1 tyrosine kinase in the context of the chimeric receptor is insufficient to mediate DNA synthesis or cell division.
|
|
It is possible that the receptor chimeras are affecting the
mRNA stability, transport, or translation of the muscle-specific reporter gene (see Fig. 4) and thus, the receptor
chimeras might not actually be inhibiting skeletal muscle
differentiation. Therefore, we confirmed that the chimeric
receptors were capable of repressing myogenic differentiation. Skeletal muscle cells transiently transfected with PR/
FR1tm and LacZ expression constructs were examined for the number of nuclei in myotubes. In the presence of
PDGF-BB, cells expressing the PR/FR1tm chimera (-galactosidase-positive cells), were not present in myotubes,
similar to that of cells cultured in FGF-2 (data not shown).
In co-transfected cells, nuclei were present in myotubes in
the absence of PDGF-BB, (data not shown).
We have previously demonstrated that activation of FGF receptors in MM14 cells weakly activates ERKs (16). We thus examined the capacity of the receptor chimeras to activate MAPKs using two independent assays. The PRtm/ FR1 chimera activates ERK1/2 (Fig. 7 A) and both receptor chimeras, as well as the endogenous FGFR-1 are capable of stimulating MAPK activity as determined by an elk reporter gene assay (Fig. 7 B). In this assay, cells expressing the receptor chimeras exhibit high basal activation of the elk reporter (Fig. 7 B), which may be due to receptor activation by residual PDGF-BB present in the serum or auto-activation of receptors resulting from the high level of receptor chimera expressed.
|
One potential explanation for the ability of the receptor chimeras to repress differentiation could result from autocrine production and release of endogenous FGFs, a mechanism that we have shown to be able to replace the activity of exogenously applied FGFs (13). To test this hypothesis, we chose to block any potential FGFR-mediated signaling by exploiting a tetracycline-responsive system to induce high level expression of a truncated FGFR-1 (12). The use of this system is required to achieve high level expression of the truncated FGFR-1 necessary to block endogenous FGFR-1 signaling with relatively low amounts of expression vector used for the transient transfection assays. We have shown that ectopic expression of a vector encoding a truncated FGFR1 blocks the activity of exogenously applied FGFs and endogenously expressed FGFs in MM14 cells (13). To test the extent of induction using the tetracycline system, MM14 cells were transiently transfected with expression vectors encoding the luciferase gene under the control of the tetracycline activator, the tetracycline activator plasmid, and a constitutively active LacZ expression vector. Luciferase activity was induced several hundred-fold upon removal of tetracycline (Fig. 8 A). The presence or absence of a wide concentration range of tetracycline had no effect on myogenic differentiation or the ability of FGF to promote proliferation and repress differentiation (data not shown). We then constructed a dominant-negative FGFR expression plasmid (dnFR1-tet) that could be induced using the tetracycline activator. MM14 cells were then transiently transfected with either dnFR1-tet, pBJ5PR/FR1tm, or both along with the tetracycline activator plasmid, the muscle-specific luciferase reporter, and the constitutively active LacZ expression vector. Muscle-specific luciferase reporter assays demonstrate that the action of FGF-2 is blocked upon transfection with the dnFR1-tet construct (Fig. 8 B). However, the PR/ FR1tm chimera is capable of signaling in the presence or absence of the dnFR1-tet construct (Fig. 8 B). Thus, PDGF-dependent signaling mediated by the receptor chimeras is likely to be direct and is not mediated via production and release of endogenous FGFs.
|
A second interpretation that could account for the inability of the receptor chimera to transduce signals for cellular proliferation might be an overstimulation of ERK1/2. The endogenous FGFR-1 weakly stimulates ERK1/2 (see Fig. 7) and ectopic overexpression of the receptor chimeras stimulates ERK1/2 to a greater extent (see Fig. 7). Therefore, we isolated MM14 cells that stably overexpress FGFR-1 (MM14-FR1) at levels 7- to 10-fold higher than parental cells (Fig. 9 A). Consistent with the elevated levels of FGFR-1 in MM14-FR1 cells, activation of ERK1/2 was also significantly increased (Fig. 9 B). However, the dose-responses for FGF-2 stimulation of DNA synthesis in MM14 parental cells and MM14-FR1 were indistinguishable, suggesting that the increase in ERK1/2 activity did not affect signaling for cellular proliferation (Fig. 9 C).
|
![]() |
Discussion |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
To identify specific biological responses mediated by the
FGFR-1 tyrosine kinase domain in skeletal muscle cells,
we used receptor chimeras comprised of the PDGFR extracellular and FGFR-1 intracellular domains. We previously demonstrated that PDGF
Rs are not present in
MM14 cells and that the activated PDGF
R has no detectable effect on skeletal muscle cell proliferation or differentiation (16). Thus, it is an ideal candidate for use in
construction of chimeric receptors with FGFR-1 domains
and subsequent analysis of receptor domains necessary for
signaling. Two distinct receptor chimeras were tested that
contained the transmembrane domain of FGFR-1 or the
PDGF
R. The genetic defects in skeletal dysplasias and
craniosynostosis can result from mutations in the FGFR-3
and FGFR-2 transmembrane domains, respectively (8). These mutations lead to ligand-independent receptor
activity or ligand-dependent receptor hyperactivity (8). Thus,
it was important to determine if the transmembrane domain
replacement would affect chimeric receptor signaling.
Unexpectedly, we found that both PDGFR/FGFR-1
chimeras were capable of complementing only part of the
function of the endogenous FGFR-1. The chimeric receptors were capable of mediating a complex biological response
repression of skeletal muscle differentiation. In
contrast to the endogenous FGFR-1 signaling, neither receptor chimera supported cell proliferation. It is unlikely
that the extracellular domain of the PDGF
R and binding
to PDGF-BB indirectly inhibits FGF signaling since we
have shown previously that expression of the full-length
PDGF
R had no effect on FGF signaling through endogenous FGFR-1 (16). Interestingly, we noted that the chimera that contained the PDGFR
transmembrane domain did not affect signaling from the endogenous FGFR-1,
whereas the chimera containing the FGFR-1 transmembrane domain acted as a dominant-negative FGFR-1 mutant. While we do not understand the molecular basis for
these differences, it is known that mutations in FGFR (8)
and neu (2, 3) transmembrane domains result in constitutively active receptors. Thus, alterations in receptor regions juxtaposed to the transmembrane domain may alter
or inhibit receptor signaling. Though the chimeric receptors contain different transmembrane domains both yielded
identical biological activities, suggesting that FGF regulates skeletal muscle proliferation and differentiation via
different signaling systems. We propose that activation of the FGFR-1 receptor tyrosine kinase alone is sufficient to
repress myogenesis. This is in contrast to a number of recent reports that implicate FGF and intracellular FGF
transport in the biological activity mediated by FGFR-1.
In these studies, intracellular transport of FGF ligands
was reported to stimulate DNA synthesis independent of
FGFR tyrosine kinase activation (33, 34). Our results indicate that regulation of skeletal muscle differentiation appears to require only activation of the FGFR-1 tyrosine kinase and does not appear to require intracellular transport
of the FGF ligand nor activation of intracellular events by
the ligand.
Since ectopically expressed FGF-1 and FGF-2 repress myogenesis and stimulate proliferation (13), it is possible that the chimeric receptors signal via autocrine-stimulated release of FGFs, that act on the endogenous FGFR-1. To ensure that activation of the FGFR-1 tyrosine kinase was not signaling via autocrine release or production of FGFs, we used a tetracycline-responsive system to overexpress the dominant negative FGFR-1 mutant in cells expressing chimeric receptors. The mutant FGFR-1 blocked all signaling from the endogenous FGFR-1 but did not affect repression of differentiation mediated by the chimeric receptor. Alternatively, the level of activation of MAPKs may be critical for distinguishing between proliferation and differentiation signals. It is possible that overexpression of the receptor chimeras, which led to robust MAPK activation inhibited or altered signals that lead to proliferation. Therefore, we selected cells that overexpressed FGFR-1 and examined FGF-2-induced stimulation of ERK1/2 and FGF-2 stimulation of mitogenesis. Although FGF-2 addition significantly increased ERK1/2 activation, we observed no detectable differences in the mitogenic responses to FGF-2 between the FGFR-1-overexpressing cells and the parental cell line.
Consistent with reports suggesting that signaling events in addition to activation of FGFR kinases are necessary to mediate cellular proliferation by the FGFs, we observed that PRtm/FR1 and PR/FR1tm were incapable of maintaining cellular proliferation or initiating DNA synthesis. It is possible that the extracellular domain of FGFR, FGF, heparan sulfate proteoglycan, or a combination of these is required for DNA synthesis and cell proliferation. We favor a hypothesis that involves FGF, the ectodomain of the FGFR-1, or both, in transducing intracellular signals involved in stimulating cellular proliferation. It is tempting to speculate that the ectodomain of the receptor is required for intracellular transport of the FGF ligand, which then is involved in stimulating DNA synthesis. This hypothesis is consistent with several reports suggesting an alternate signaling role for FGF ligands (1, 4, 5, 15, 33, 34) and for the involvement of FGFR-1 in intracellular transport of the FGF ligand (27).
We hypothesize that it is unlikely that the receptor chimeras are compromised in their ability to activate their respective tyrosine kinase domains. While we cannot compare directly tyrosine phosphorylation of the endogenous
FGFR-1 with the ectopically expressed chimeric receptors,
we did compare activation of MAPKs and inhibition of
skeletal muscle gene expression by both chimeric receptors and the endogenous FGFR-1. We would expect to see
defects in signaling that would be distinct for each receptor if the construction of receptor chimeras affected activation of the FGFR-1 tyrosine kinase, yet both chimeric
receptors stimulate MAPK activity. However, activation
of the receptor chimeras may differ subtly from activation of a wild-type receptor creating a partially defective receptor that is not capable of stimulating cell proliferation. Although we tested to determine if differences in ERK1/2
activation were responsible, differences in activation levels
of other signal transducers could be involved. In other experiments, we have constructed a constitutively active
FGFR-1 receptor chimera. Preliminary data indicate that
the behavior of this receptor is identical to the PDGFR/
FGFR-1 chimeras as it is capable of repressing myogenesis but cannot support proliferation. Whereas these experiments do not prove an involvement of the ectodomain,
ligand, or additional components in FGFR-1 signaling,
they do demonstrate that the signaling events required for
repression of myogenesis and stimulation of proliferation
by FGFR-1 are distinct and separable. Remarkably, both
receptor chimeras used in our experiments were fully capable of repressing skeletal muscle differentiation, a complex biological response whose signaling pathways are not
understood.
The involvement of intracellular FGFR-1 phosphotyrosines in FGFR-1 signaling has been questioned since mutagenesis of all but two intracellular phosphotyrosines (Y654 and Y655), required for catalytic activity, had no effect on FGFR-1 signaling (22). These data suggest that the molecular mechanisms used by FGFR-1 to transduce intracellular signals may differ significantly from those described for other tyrosine kinase receptors. Recently, a similar conclusion was reached for the muscle-specific receptor tyrosine kinase (MuSK) receptor (10). Chimeric receptors comprised of the trkC extracellular domain and the MuSK intracellular domain, were incapable of acetylcholine receptor clustering, despite the activation of intracellular signaling by the chimera (10).
By determining which biological activities are mediated
by the FGFR-1 tyrosine kinase, we have shown that two
FGF-dependent cellular activities in a single cell type appear to be independently mediated by distinct signaling
mechanisms that result from ligand binding to FGFR-1.
Further analysis of the signaling pathways stimulated by
the chimeric receptors will provide us with a powerful tool
in the delineation if signaling pathways mediating the repression of skeletal muscle differentiation. Domain-swapping experiments with intracellular regions of the PDGFR and mutagenesis of the intracellular FGFR-1
domains are likely to identify critical regions of the FGFR-1
receptor involved. In addition, we can now use these chimeric receptors for rescue studies to attempt to identify
the signaling mechanisms necessary for stimulation of cellular proliferation. Identification of these latter pathways
is likely to further our understanding of FGFR signaling
and identify the molecular mechanisms involved in the activation of intracellular signaling events that generate specific biological responses.
![]() |
Footnotes |
---|
Received for publication 16 January 1998 and in revised form 27 May 1998.
Address all correspondence to Bradley B. Olwin, Department of Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology, University of Colorado, Boulder, CO 80309. Tel.: (303) 492-6816. Fax: (303) 492-1587. E-mail: Bradley.Olwin{at}colorado.eduThis work was supported by grants from the Public Health Service to B.B. Olwin and by a National Science Foundation predoctoral fellowship to A.J. Kudla.
![]() |
Abbreviations used in this paper |
---|
BrdU, 5-bromo-2 deoxyuridine;
CMV, cytomegalovirus;
ERK, extracellular-regulated kinase;
FGFR, FGF receptor;
MAPK, mitogen-activated protein kinase;
MBP, myelin basic protein;
MHC, myosin heavy chain;
PDGFR, PDGF
receptor;
PRtm/FR1, PDGF
R/FGFR-1 chimera with PDGF
R transmembrane domain;
PR/
FR1tm, PDGF
R/FGFR-1 chimera with FGFR-1 transmembrane domain;
RT, reverse transcription;
TPA, 12-O-tetra-decnoylphorbol-13-acetate.
![]() |
References |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
1. | Baldin, V., A.M. Roman, B.I. Bosc, F. Amalric, and G. Bouche. 1990. Translocation of bFGF to the nucleus is G1 phase cell cycle specific in bovine aortic endothelial cells. EMBO (Eur. Mol. Biol. Organ.) J. 9: 1511-1517 [Abstract]. |
2. | Bargmann, C.I., M.C. Hung, and R.A. Weinberg. 1986. Multiple independent activations of the neu oncogene by a point mutation altering the transmembrane domain of p185. Cell 45: 649-57 |
3. | Bargmann, C.I., and R.A. Weinberg. 1988. Increased tyrosine kinase activity associated with the protein encoded by the activated neu oncogene. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 85: 5394-5398 [Abstract]. |
4. | Bouche, G., N. Gas, H. Prats, V. Baldin, J.P. Tauber, J. Teissie, and F. Amalric. 1987. Basic fibroblast growth factor enters the nucleolus and stimulates the transcription of ribosomal genes in ABAE cells undergoing G0-G1 transition. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 84: 6770-6774 [Abstract]. |
5. | Burgess, W.H., A.M. Shaheen, M. Ravera, M. Jaye, P.J. Donohue, and J.A. Winkles. 1990. Possible dissociation of the heparin-binding and mitogenic activities of heparin-binding (acidic fibroblast) growth factor-1 from its receptor-binding activities by site-directed mutagenesis of a single lysine residue. J. Cell Biol. 111: 2129-2138 [Abstract]. |
6. | Chomczynski, P., and N. Sacchi. 1987. Single-step method of RNA isolation by acid guanidium thiocyanate-phenol-chloroform extraction. Anal. Biochem. 162: 156-159 |
7. | Clegg, C.H., T.A. Linkhart, B.B. Olwin, and S.D. Hauschka. 1987. Growth factor control of skeletal muscle differentiation: commitment to terminal differentiation occurs in G1 phase and is repressed by fibroblast growth factor. J. Cell Biol. 105: 949-956 [Abstract]. |
8. | De Moerlooze, L., and C. Dickson. 1997. Skeletal disorders associated with fibroblast growth factor receptor mutations. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev 7: 378-385 |
9. | DeHamer, M.K., J.L. Guevara, K. Hannon, B.B. Olwin, and A.L. Calof. 1994. Genesis of olfactory receptor neurons in vitro: regulation of progenitor cell divisions by fibroblast growth factors. Neuron 13: 1083-1097 |
10. |
Glass, D.J.,
E.D. Apel,
S. Shah,
D.C. Bowen,
T.M. DeChiara,
T.N. Stitt,
J.R. Sanes, and
G.D. Yancopoulos.
1997.
Kinase domain of the muscle-specific receptor tyrosine kinase (MuSK) is sufficient for phosphorylation but not clustering of acetylcholine receptors: required role for the
MuSK ectodomain?
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
94:
8848-8853
|
11. | Gospodarowicz, D., J. Weseman, and J. Moran. 1975. Presence in brain of a mitogenic agent promoting proliferation of myoblasts in low density culture. Nature 256: 216-219 |
12. | Gossen, M., and H. Bujard. 1992. Tight control of gene expression in mammalian cells by tetracycline-responsive promoters. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 89: 5547-51 [Abstract]. |
13. | Hannon, K., A.J. Kudla, M.J. McAvoy, K.L. Clase, and B.B. Olwin. 1996. Differentially expressed fibroblast growth factors regulate skeletal muscle development through autocrine and paracrine mechanisms. J. Cell Biol. 132: 1151-1159 [Abstract]. |
14. |
Hart, C.E.,
R.A. Seifert,
R. Ross, and
D.F. Bowen-Pope.
1987.
Synthesis,
phosphorylation, and degradation of multiple forms of the platelet-
derived growth factor receptor studied using a monoclonal antibody.
J.
Biol. Chem.
262:
10780-10785
|
15. | Imamura, T., K. Engleka, X. Zhan, Y. Tokita, R. Forough, D. Roeder, A. Jackson, J.A.M. Maier, T. Hla, and T. Maciag. 1990. Recovery of mitogenic activity of a growth factor mutant with a nuclear translocation sequence. Science 249: 1567-1570 |
16. | Kudla, A.J., M.L. John, D.F. Bowen-Pope, B. Rainish, and B.B. Olwin. 1995. A requirement for fibroblast growth factor in regulation of skeletal muscle growth and differentiation cannot be replaced by activation of platelet-derived growth factor signaling pathways. Mol. Cell. Biol. 15: 3238-3246 [Abstract]. |
17. | Lee, J., T.J. Dull, I. Lax, J. Schlessinger, and A. Ullrich. 1989. HER2 cytoplasmic domain generates normal mitogenic and transforming signals in a chimeric receptor. EMBO (Eur. Mol. Biol. Organ.) J. 8: 167-173 [Abstract]. |
18. | Lim, R.W., and S.D. Hauschka. 1984. EGF responsiveness and receptor regulation in normal and differentiation-defective mouse myoblasts. Dev. Biol. 105: 48-58 |
19. | Linkhart, T.A., C.H. Clegg, and S.D. Hauschka. 1980. Control of mouse myoblast commitment to terminal differentiation by mitogens. J. Supramol. Structure 14: 483-498 |
20. | Linkhart, T.A., C.H. Clegg, and S.D. Hauschka. 1981. Myogenic differentiation in permanent clonal myoblast cell lines: regulation by macromolecular growth factors in the culture medium. Dev. Biol. 86: 19-30 |
21. | Mares, J., L. Claesson, Welsh, and M. Welsh. 1992. A chimera between platelet-derived growth factor beta-receptor and fibroblast growth factor receptor-1 stimulates pancreatic beta-cell DNA synthesis in the presence of PDGF-BB. Growth Factors 6: 93-101 |
22. | Mohammadi, M., I. Dikic, A. Sorokin, W.H. Burgess, M. Jaye, and J. Schlessinger. 1996. Identification of six novel autophosphorylation sites on fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 and elucidation of their importance in receptor activation and signal transduction. Mol. Cell. Biol. 16: 977-989 [Abstract]. |
23. | Olwin, B.B., K. Hannon, and A.J. Kudla. 1994. Are fibroblast growth factors regulators of myogenesis in vivo. Prog. Growth Factor Res. 5: 145-158 |
24. | Olwin, B.B., and S.D. Hauschka. 1986. Identification of the fibroblast growth factor receptor of Swiss 3T3 cells and mouse skeletal muscle myoblasts. Biochemistry 25: 3487-3492 |
25. | Rando, T.A., and H.M. Blau. 1994. Primary mouse myoblast purification, characterization, and transplantation for cell-mediated gene therapy. J. Cell Biol. 125: 1275-1287 [Abstract]. |
26. | Rapraeger, A.C., S. Guimond, A. Krufka, and B.B. Olwin. 1994. Regulation by heparan sulfate in fibroblast growth factor signaling. Methods Enzymol. 245: 219-240 |
27. |
Reiland, J., and
A.C. Rapraeger.
1993.
Heparan sulfate proteoglycan and
FGF receptor target basic FGF to different intracellular destinations.
J.
Cell Sci.
105:
1085-1093
|
28. | Resnitzky, D., M. Gossen, H. Bujard, and S.I. Reed. 1994. Acceleration of the G1/S phase transition by expression of cyclins D1 and E with an inducible system. Mol. Cell. Biol 14: 1669-1679 [Abstract]. |
29. | Riedel, H., T.J. Dull, A.M. Honegger, J. Schlessinger, and A. Ullrich. 1989. Cytoplasmic domains determine signal specificity, cellular routing characteristics and influence ligand binding of epidermal growth factor and insulin receptors. EMBO (Eur. Mol. Biol. Organ.) J. 8: 2943-2954 [Abstract]. |
30. | Riedel, H., J. Schlessinger, and A. Ullrich. 1987. A chimeric, ligand-binding v-erbB/EGF receptor retains transforming potential. Science 236: 197-200 |
31. | Sambrook, J., E.F. Fritsch, and T. Maniatis. 1989. Molecular Cloning: A Laboratory Manual. Second ed. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, New York. 16.30-16.40. |
32. | Takebe, Y., M. Seiki, J.-I. Fujisawa, P. Hoy, K. Yokota, K.-I. Arai, M. Yoshida, and N. Arai. 1988. SRa promoter: an efficient and versatile mammalian cDNA expression system composed of the simian virus 40 early promoter and the R-U5 segment of human T-cell leukemia virus type 1 long terminal repeat. Mol. Cell. Biol. 8: 466-472 |
33. | Wiedlocha, A., P.Ø. Falnes, I.H. Madshus, K. Sandvig, and S. Olsnes. 1994. Dual mode of signal transduction by externally added acidic fibroblast growth factor. Cell 76: 1039-1051 |
34. | Wiedlocha, A., P.O. Falnes, A. Rapak, R. Munoz, O. Klingenberg, and S. Olsnes. 1996. Stimulation of proliferation of a human osteosarcoma cell line by exogenous acidic fibroblast growth factor requires both activation of receptor tyrosine kinase and growth factor internalization. Mol. Cell. Biol. 16: 270-280 [Abstract]. |
35. | Xu, L., T. Sanchez, and C.-F. Zheng. 1997. In vivo signal transduction pathway reporting systems. Strategies 10: 1-3 . |
36. | Yarden, Y., and A. Ullrich. 1988. Growth factor receptor tyrosine kinases. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 57: 443-478 |