1 Department of Cell Biology, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, 725 N. Wolfe St., Baltimore, MD 21205, USA
2 CREST Research Project of the Japan Science and Technology Corporation, Kansai Advanced Research Center, Communications Research Laboratory, 588-2 Iwaoka, Iwaoka-cho, Nishi-ku, Kobe 651-2492 Japan
*Author for correspondence (e-mail: klwilson{at}jhmi.edu)
Accepted October 15, 2001
![]() |
SUMMARY |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Key words: Barrier to autointegration factor, Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophy, lamin A, lamin-associated polypeptide 2, LEM-domain, nuclear envelope, nuclear lamina, MAN1.
![]() |
INTRODUCTION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Human emerin is a 254-residue integral protein of the nuclear inner membrane (Manilal et al., 1996; Nagano et al., 1996; Yorifuji et al., 1997). Emerin belongs to a family of nuclear proteins defined by a 40-residue motif termed the LEM-domain (Lin et al., 2000). The LEM-domain family is growing and includes MAN1 (Lin et al., 2000), lamina associated polypeptide-2 (LAP2) (Foisner and Gerace, 1993), otefin (Goldberg et al., 1998; Wolff et al., 2001) and Lem-3 (Lin et al., 2000; Lee et al., 2000). Emerin and the ß-isoform of LAP2 have a second region of high homology at their transmembrane domains, and are similar throughout their lengths. Both emerin and LAP2ß interact with lamins. LAP2ß interacts specifically with lamin B1 (Foisner and Gerace, 1993), whereas emerin interacts with both A- and B-type lamins (Fairley et al., 1999; Clements et al., 2000). In LMNA-knockout mice, emerin becomes localized to both the nuclear envelope and ER, suggesting that A-type lamins contribute to (but are not essential for) the nuclear localization of emerin (Sullivan et al., 1999). Localization at the inner nuclear membrane appears to be important for emerins function, since a mutation that prevents emerin from reaching the inner membrane causes disease (Fairley et al., 1999).
The homology between LAP2ß and emerin suggested to us that these proteins might have related functions. In addition to binding lamin B, LAP2ß also interacts with chromatin in vitro (Foisner and Gerace, 1993). A novel binding partner for LAP2ß on chromatin was identified in a yeast two-hybrid screen (Furukawa, 1999); this partner, barrier-to-autointegration factor (BAF), is an essential, highly conserved DNA-bridging protein of unknown function (Lee and Craigie, 1998; Chen and Engelman, 1998; Zheng et al., 2000). The LEM-domain is essential for LAP2ß to bind BAF (Furukawa, 1999; Shumaker et al., 2001) and BAF-DNA complexes (Shumaker et al., 2001). Because emerin has a LEM domain, we tested the hypothesis that emerin binds BAF. Our results for wildtype emerin and a collection of site-directed emerin mutants strongly support this model, and define at least two proposed functional domains within emerin.
![]() |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Site-directed mutagenesis
An emerin cDNA was generated by PCR by E. Abrams and J. Beneken from a human heart cDNA library obtained from R. Reed (Johns Hopkins School of Medicine). The starting point for site-directed mutagenesis was a cDNA encoding wildtype human emerin residues 1-222, subcloned into the pET11c vector (Novagen). All mutations were made using the QuickChange site-directed mutagenesis kit (Stratagene), following the manufacturers instructions, and verified by full-length double-stranded DNA sequence analysis (data not shown). GFP-emerin constructs were made as described (Haraguchi et al., 2001).
Emerin expression and blot overlay assays
Each emerin construct was transformed into E. coli strain BL21 (DE3). Transformed cells containing each plasmid were grown to an OD600 of 0.6, and emerin expression was induced by 0.4 mM IPTG for four hours. Cells were pelleted for 5 minutes at 14,000 g, and resuspended in 2x SDS sample buffer. Proteins from unfractionated bacterial lysates were separated on 10% SDS-PAGE gels, transferred to nitrocellulose membranes (Schleicher and Schuell), and blocked for 1 hour in PBST containing 5% nonfat dry milk. Blots were then washed twice in BRB (Blot Rinse Buffer; 10 mM Tris-HCl, pH 7.4, 150 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA, 0.1% Tween-20) for 5 minutes at 22-24°C, and incubated with 20 µCi of 35S-cysteine/methionine labeled probe protein (either BAF or lamin A; see below) diluted 1:200 into BRB containing 0.1% fetal calf serum (final volume, 10 ml). The lamin A construct in vector pET7a was a kind gift from Robert Moir and Robert Goldman (Northwestern University, Chicago). Blots were incubated overnight with 35S-labeled in vitro-transcribed/translated probe protein at 4°C, washed twice in BRB, dried and exposed to Hyperfilm MP (Amersham/Pharmacia Biotech). Emerin mutant proteins m76 and m141 consistently migrated more slowly than other recombinant emerins on SDS-PAGE.
Synthesis of 35S-Cys/Met labeled proteins and immunoprecipitation
We used the T7 promotors on expression vectors pET11c (for emerin and emerin mutants), pET7a (for lamin A) and pET15b (for BAF) to drive the expression of 35S-cysteine/methionine-labeled emerin, lamin A and BAF proteins using the TNT Quick Coupled Transcription/Translation System (Promega Corp., Madison WI), according to the manufacturers protocol. Proteins were transcribed/translated individually for 90 minutes at 30°C. For use as probes in blot overlay experiments, each protein was diluted 1:200 into BRB/0.1% FCS and used as described above. For immunoprecipitation experiments, labeled proteins (10 µl each from a 50 µl TNT reaction) were incubated (individually, or mixed as indicated) for 30 minutes at 22-25°C to allow binding. We then added 300 µl of immunoprecipitation (IP) buffer (20 mM Hepes pH 7.9, 150 mM NaCl, 10 mM EDTA, 2 mM EGTA, 0.1% NP-40, 10% glycerol, 1 mM DTT, 1 mM PMSF and 20 ug/ml leupeptin) to each sample. To immunoprecipitate 35S-labeled emerin, 4 µl of serum 2999 (immune or pre-immune) was added to each reaction and incubated one hour on ice. BAF was immunoprecipitated using rabbit serum 3000. We then added 50 µl of washed protein A Sepharose beads (Amersham/Pharmacia Biotech), incubated overnight at 4°C, centrifuged at 5000 g for 5 minutes to pellet the beads, and washed the pellets five times with ice-cold IP buffer. Bound proteins were removed from beads by boiling in 40 µl 2x SDS sample buffer, subjected to 17% SDS-PAGE, dried and exposed to Hyperfilm (Amersham/Pharmacia Biotech).
GFP-emerin plasmid construction
GFP-emerin was a gift of Yuichi Tsuchiya and Kiichi Arahata. To make a GFP fusion to emerin-m24, emerin-S54F and emerin-95-99 that included the transmembrane domain, the coding region of pET11c-emerin-m24, pET11c-emerin-S54F and pET11c-emerin-
95-99 was first PCR-amplified using primers 5'-CGTCCGGACTCAGATCCATGGACAACTAC-3' and 5'-GCGGATCCCTGGCGATCCTGGCCCAG-3'. Secondly, the PCR product was digested with BspEI and BamHI, and inserted in the pEGFP-C1 vector at the BspEI and BamHI sites. Finally, this construct was digested with SacI and BamHI, and ligated with the SalI/BamHI fragment from full-length GFP-emerin plasmids that include the transmembrane domain. To make a GFP-fusion to emerin-P183T and emerin-P183H that included the transmembrane domain, the coding region of GFP-emerin was PCR-amplified using the following primers; 5'-CGGAGCTCCCTGGACCTGTCCTATTATACTACTTCCTCCTC-3' and 5'-GGATCCGGTGGATCCCGGGCCCGCGGTACCGTAGAC-3' for emerin-P183T, and 5'-CGGAGCTCCCTGGACCTGTCCTATTATCATACTTCCTCCTC-3' and 5'-GGATCCGGTGGATCCCGGGCCCGCGGTACCGTAGAC-3' for emerin-P183H. The PCR product was digested with SacI and BamHI, and ligated with the SacI/BamHI fragment from full-length GFP-emerin plasmids. The DNA sequence of all fusion plasmids were confirmed using an ABI377 DNA sequencer (Applied Biosystems, Norwalk, CT).
GFP-emerin expression and indirect immunofluorescence staining in HeLa cells
HeLa cells were cultured in a 35 mm glass-bottom culture dish as described previously (Haraguchi et al., 1997). Transfection of the plasmid DNA encoding the wildtype and various mutations of GFP-emerin was performed with LipofectaminePlus (Gibco BRL, Rockville, MD) according to the manufacturers protocol except that the incubation time of the cells with the reagent complexes was reduced to 1.5 hours. Cells were cultured for 2 days under regular culture conditions before being subjected to live microscopic observation, as described previously (Haraguchi et al., 2000).
![]() |
RESULTS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
|
|
|
Disease-associated emerin mutations
Most human emerin mutations yield cells that are null for emerin protein. However, in four cases, comprising point mutations S54F, P183H and P183T, and a small deletion (YEESY; www.path.cam.ac.uk/emd/mutation.html), the mutant protein is stable and localized at the nuclear envelope, rather than being degraded like most other mutant emerins (Fairley et al., 1999; Ellis et al., 1999; Haraguchi et al., 2001). To determine if disease-causing mutations disrupted emerin binding to BAF or lamin A, three of these stable mutations were introduced into recombinant emerin (residues 1-222). We changed serine 54 to phenylalanine (S54F; referred to as S54P in Fairley et al.) (Fairley et al., 1999), proline 183 to histidine (P183H) (Ellis et al., 1999), and deleted five residues to create the
YEESY mutation (referred to here as
95-99) (Fairley et al., 1999). All three mutant proteins were tested for direct binding to BAF and lamin A. Our controls were wildtype emerin, mutant m24 (defective in binding BAF) (Fig. 2; Fig. 3) and mutant m141 (defective in binding lamin A; Fig. 2). Mutants S54F and P183H both interacted with BAF in blot overlay (Fig. 4A) and co-immunoprecipitation assays (Fig. 4B), and also interacted with lamin A in blot overlay assays (Fig. 4A). Thus, these mutations did not disrupt binding to either BAF or lamin A in vitro, consistent with their positions within the proposed functional map of emerin (Fig. 5). By contrast, mutation
95-99 had no effect on emerin binding to BAF, but significantly reduced its binding to lamin A (Fig. 4A, lam A). This result strongly supported the proposed lamin-binding domain of emerin, where residues 95-99 map (Fig. 5). These findings suggested that mutation
95-99 might cause disease by specifically disrupting emerin attachment to lamins.
|
|
|
![]() |
DISCUSSION |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Proposed functional domains of emerin
Our strategy of mutagenizing small clusters of conserved residues was highly effective. Every cluster of mutations from residues 11 to 179 disrupted binding to either BAF or lamin A, but not both, demonstrating that residues conserved between emerin and LAP2ß are indeed critical for emerin function. We propose that the exposed (nucleoplasmic) region of emerin has at least two independent domains, comprising an N-terminal BAF-binding domain and a central lamin-binding domain, and might also have additional domains relevant to disease (Fig. 5). These domains are each discussed below.
The most N-terminal domain of emerin is the LEM motif (residues 1-43), which is here demonstrated to bind BAF. Consistent with this model, residues 1-65 (but not residues 1-37) of emerin are sufficient to localize emerin to the core region of telophase chromosomes in vivo (Haraguchi et al., 2001). Our discovery that emerin binds BAF is also strongly supported by the recently solved solution structure of the constant region of LAP2 (Cai et al., 2001); this work showed that the LEM-domain folds independently into a conserved backbone structure (Cai et al., 2001; Laguri et al., 2001) with surface features that complement a hydrophobic binding pocket on the BAF dimer interface (Cai et al., 2001). The ability of wildtype emerin and four disease-linked emerin proteins to bind BAF, both in vitro and in living cells, strongly suggests that (a) BAF interactions are central to emerin function, and (b) for these particular mutant alleles, disease may arise from disrupted binding to a partner other than BAF, such as lamin A or a hypothetical novel partner.
Residues 70-178 comprise the proposed lamin A-binding domain. This domain includes residues 117-170, which function as a nuclear membrane retention signal for emerin (Östlund et al., 1999), supporting our proposal that this region interacts directly with lamins. Furthermore, EDMD-associated mutation 95-99, which failed to bind lamin A in vitro, is more susceptible to biochemical extraction from nuclei, consistent with weakened binding to lamins (Ellis et al., 1998). Emerin mutant
95-99 is localized at the nuclear envelope in EDMD patients (Fairley et al., 1999) and when expressed in HeLa cells (our results). This proper localization could be explained at least two ways: this mutant might somehow remain competent to bind lamin A in vivo, even though it fails to bind lamin A in vitro. Alternatively, other partners (e.g. B-type lamins, BAF or novel partners) might contribute to its localization in vivo. Two findings support the idea that emerin localization in humans depends on a partner other than lamin A, or multiple partners. First, emerin localization at the nuclear envelope is completely lost in C. elegans embryos that are depleted of their only lamin (B-type; Gruenbaum et al., unpublished), suggesting that lamins per se are essential for emerin localization. Second, emerin and lamin A both fail to associate with assembling nuclear envelopes in cells that express a dominant mutant BAF (Haraguchi et al., 2001), implying that BAF is key to localizing both emerin and lamin A. Together, these findings indicate that emerin recruitment and retention at the nuclear envelope is complicated, involving distinct sequential interactions with BAF, A-type lamins and B-type lamins. We suggest that emerin mutant
95-99 is recruited appropriately by BAF, but its function is then compromised by defective binding to lamin A. Thus in patients who express emerin
95-99, emerin interactions with A-type lamins may be abnormal.
Residues 179-222 define a potential third domain, which was not required to bind either BAF or lamin A. Based on the effectiveness of our mutagenesis strategy, and the fact that mutations P183H and P183T cause disease, we propose that this third region has a novel function. Interestingly, residues 176-222 are sufficient to localize the transmembrane domain of emerin at the nuclear envelope (Haraguchi et al., 2001), implying that the predicted third domain of emerin might interact with a partner found at or near the inner nuclear membrane. Mutations at disease-linked residue P183 had no affect on emerin binding to BAF or lamin A, either in vitro or in living HeLa cells. We therefore propose that mutations at P183 (located within the putative third domain) cause disease by disrupting emerin binding to an unidentified new partner.
Our findings show both in vitro and in vivo that the nucleoplasmic region of emerin has at least two modular structural domains, which mediate its binding to BAF and lamin A. Because two disease-associated residues (S54 and P183) both lie outside the BAF-binding and lamin-binding domains, we speculate that these mutations might disrupt emerin regulation, or define additional functional domains. An important future question will be to determine whether emerin interacts with its partners simultaneously, or if binding to one partner can displace or enhance binding to another partner. Based on the enhanced lamin-binding activity of some LEM-domain mutants, particularly m24, we speculate that these domains might influence each other intramolecularly. As precedent for intramolecular regulation of LEM proteins, we note that the binding affinity of LAP2 for BAF is reduced three- to ninefold when the BAF-binding constant region of LAP2 is linked to the variable regions of different LAP2 isoforms (Shumaker et al., 2001).
Implications for nuclear infrastructure
Our discovery that emerin binds BAF in a LEM-domain-dependent manner, coupled to parallel results for LAP2 (Furukawa, 1999; Shumaker et al., 2001), strongly suggest that all LEM proteins can bind BAF. Since BAF binds nonspecifically to double-stranded DNA (Zheng et al., 2000), our findings have important implications for chromatin organization in the nucleus. LEM proteins, as a family, are collectively positioned to play major roles in chromatin attachment to the nuclear inner membrane and lamin filaments. Emerin and other LEM proteins are expressed in nearly all cells (Lin et al., 2000), and some are abundant: the molar ratio of LAP2 to lamin B in rat liver nuclei has been estimated at 2-5%, enough to position one LAP2ß molecule every 25-50 nm along lamin filaments (Foisner and Gerace, 1993). Furthermore, the abundant isoform of LAP2 co-localizes with lamin A throughout the nuclear interior (Dechat et al., 2000; Moir et al., 2000), meaning that the proposed attachments between LEM proteins and BAF are not restricted to the nuclear periphery, but could also extend throughout the nuclear interior. Further study of emerin-BAF interactions will be critical for understanding chromatin organization in the nucleus, and the disease mechanism of EDMD.
![]() |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
![]() |
REFERENCES |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Bione, S., Maestrini, E., Rivella, S., Mancini, M., Regis, S., Romeo, G. and Toniolo, D. (1994). Identification of a novel X-linked gene responsible for Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophy. Nat. Genet. 8, 323-327.[Medline]
Bonne, G., Di Barletta, M. R., Varnous, S., Bécane, H.-M., Hammouda, E.-H., Merlini, L., Muntoni, F., Greenberg, C. R., Gary, F. et al. (1999). Mutations in the gene encoding lamin A/C cause autosomal dominant Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophy. Nat. Genet. 21, 285-288.[Medline]
Bonne, G., Mercuri, E., Muchir, A., Urtizberea, A., Bécane, H. M., Recan, D., Merlini, L., Wehnert, M., Boor, R. et al. (2000). Clinical and molecular genetic spectrum of autosomal dominant Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophy due to mutations of the lamin A/C gene. Annals Neurol. 48, 170-180.[Medline]
Cai, M., Huang, Y., Ghirlando, R., Wilson, K. L., Craigie, R. and Clore, G. M. (2001). Solution structure of the constant region of nuclear envelope protein LAP2 reveals two LEM-domain structures: one binds BAF and the other binds DNA. EMBO J. 20, 4399-4407.
Chen, H. and Engelman, A. (1998). The barrier-to-autointegration protein is a host factor for HIV type 1 integration. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95, 15270-15274.
Clements, L., Manilal, S., Love, D. R. and Morris, G. E. (2000). Direct interaction between emerin and lamin A. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 267, 709-714.[Medline]
Cohen, M., Lee, K. K., Wilson, K. L. and Gruenbaum, Y. (2001). Transcriptional repression, apoptosis, human disease and the functional evolution of the nuclear lamina. Trends Biochem. Sci. 26, 41-47.[Medline]
Dechat, T., Korbei, B., Vaughan, O. A., Vlcek, S., Hutchison, C. J. and Foisner, R. (2000). Lamina-associated polypeptide 2 binds intranuclear A-type lamins. J. Cell Sci. 113, 3473-3483.
Ellis, J. A., Craxton, M., Yates, J. R. W. and Kendrick-Jones, J. (1998) Aberrant intracellular targeting and cell cycle-dependent phosphorylation of emerin contribute to the Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophy phenotype. J. Cell Sci. 111, 781-792.
Ellis, J. A., Yates, J. R. W., Kendrick-Jones, J. and Brown, C. A. (1999). Changes at P183 of emerin weaken its protein-protein interactions resulting in X-linked Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophy. Hum. Genet. 104, 262-268.[Medline]
Emery, A. E. H. (1989) Emery-Dreifuss syndrome. J. Med. Genet. 26, 637-641.[Abstract]
Fairley, E. A., Kendrick-Jones, J. and Ellis, J. A. (1999). The Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophy phenotype arises from aberrant targeting and binding of emerin at the inner nuclear membrane. J. Cell Sci. 112, 2571-2582.
Foisner, R. and Gerace, L. (1993). Integral membrane proteins of the nuclear envelope interact with lamins and chromosomes, and binding is modulated by mitotic phosphorylation. Cell 73, 1267-1279.[Medline]
Furukawa, K. (1999). LAP2 binding protein 1 (L2BP1/BAF) is a candidate mediator of LAP2-chromatin interaction. J. Cell Sci. 112, 2485-2492.
Goldberg, M., Lu, H. H., Stuurman, N., Ashery-Padan, R., Weiss, A. M., Yu, J., Bhattacharyya, D., Fisher, P. A., Gruenbaum, Y. and Wolfner, M. F. (1998). Interactions among Drosophila nuclear envelope proteins lamin, otefin, and YA. Mol. Cell Biol. 18, 4315-4323.
Haraguchi, T., Kaneda, T. and Hiraoka, Y. (1997). Dynamics of chromosomes and microtubules visualized by multiple-wavelength fluorescence imaging in living mammalian cells: effects of mitotic inhibitors on cell cycle progression. Genes Cells 2, 369-380.
Haraguchi, T., Koujin, T., Hayakawa, T., Kaneda, T., Tsutsumi, C., Imamoto, N., Akazawa, C., Sukegawa, J., Yoneda, Y. and Hiraoka, Y. (2000). Live fluorescence imaging reveals early recruitment of emerin, LBR, RanBP2, and Nup153 to reforming functional nuclear envelopes. J. Cell Sci. 113, 779-794.
Haraguchi, T., Koujin, T., Segura, M., Lee, K. K., Matsuoka, Y., Yoneda, Y., Wilson, K. L. and Hiraoka, Y. (2001). BAF is required for emerin assembly into the reforming nuclear envelope. J. Cell Sci. 114, 4575-4585.
Laguri, C., Gilquin, B., Wolff, N., Romi-Lebrun, R., Courchay, K., Callebaut, I., Worman, H. J. and Zinn-Justin, S. (2001). Structural characterization of the LEM motif common to three human inner nuclear membrane proteins. Structure 9, 503-511.[Medline]
Lee, K. K., Gruenbaum, Y., Spann, P., Liu, J. and Wilson, K. L. (2000). C. elegans nuclear envelope proteins emerin, MAN1, lamin and nucleoporins reveal unique timing of nuclear envelope breakdown during mitosis. Mol. Biol. Cell 11, 3089-3099.
Lee, M. S. and Craigie, R. (1998). A previously unidentified host protein protects retroviral DNA from autointegration. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 95, 1528-1533.
Lin, F. and Worman, H. J. (1993). Structural organization of the human gene encoding nuclear lamin A and nuclear lamin C. J. Biol. Chem. 268, 16321-16326.
Lin, F., Blake, D. L., Callebaut, I., Skerjanc, I. S., McBurney, M. W., Pauline-Levasseur, M. and Worman, H. J. (2000). MAN1: an integral protein of the inner nuclear membrane that shares the LEM domain with lamina associated polypeptide2/thymopoietin, emerin and proteins of Caenorhabditis elegans. J. Biol. Chem. 275, 4080-4087.
Manilal, S., Man, N. T., Sewry, C. A. and Morris, G. E. (1996). The Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophy protein, emerin, is a nuclear membrane protein. Hum. Mol. Genet. 5, 801-808.
Moir, R. D., Yoon, M., Khuon, S. and Goldman, R. D. (2000). Nuclear lamins A and B1. Different pathways of assembly during nuclear envelope formation in living cells. J. Cell Biol. 151, 1155-1168.
Morris, G. E. (2001). The role of the nuclear envelope in Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophy. Trends Mol. Med. (in press).
Nagano, A., Koga, R., Ogawa, M., Kurano, Y., Kawada, J., Okada, R., Hayashi, Y. K., Tsukahara, T. and Arahata, K. (1996). Emerin deficiency at the nuclear membrane in patients with Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophy. Nat. Genet. 12, 254-259.[Medline]
Östlund, C., Ellenberg, J., Hallberg, E., Lippincott-Schwartz, J. and Worman, H. J. (1999). Intracellular trafficking of emerin, the Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophy protein. J. Cell Sci. 112, 1709-1719.
Shumaker, D. K., Lee, K. K., Tanhehco, Y. C., Craigie, R. and Wilson, K. L. (2001). LAP2 binds to BAF-DNA complexes: requirement for the LEM domain and modulation by variable regions. EMBO J. 20, 1754-1764.
Sullivan, T., Escalente-Alcalde, D., Bhatt, H., Anver, M., Bhat, N., Nagashima, K., Stewart, C. L. and Burke, B. (1999). Loss of A-type lamin expression compromises nuclear envelope integrity leading to muscular dystrophy. J. Cell Biol. 147, 913-919.
Vaughan, O. A., Alvarez-Reyes, M., Bridger, J. M., Broers, J. L. V., Ramaekers, F. C. S., Wehnert, M., Morris, G. E., Whitfield, W. G. F. and Hutchison, C. J. (2001). Both emerin and lamin C depend on lamin A for localization at the nuclear envelope. J. Cell Sci. 114, 2577-2590.[Medline]
Wilson, K. L., Zastrow, M. S. and Lee, K. K. (2001). Lamins and disease: insights into nuclear infrastructure. Cell 104, 647-650.[Medline]
Wolff, N., Gilquin, B., Courchay, K., Callebaut, I., Worman, H. J. and Zinn-Justin, S. (2001). Structural analysis of emerin, an inner nuclear membrane protein mutated in X-linked Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophy. FEBS Lett. 501, 171-176.[Medline]
Yorifuji, H., Tadano, Y., Tsuchiya, Y., Ogawa, M., Goto, K., Umetani, A., Asaka, Y. and Arahata, K. (1997). Emerin, deficiency of which causes Emery-Dreifuss muscular dystrophy, is localized at the inner nuclear membrane. Neurogenetics 1, 135-140.[Medline]
Zheng, R., Ghirlando, R., Lee, M. S., Mizuuchi, K., Krause, M. and Craigie, R. (2000). Barrier-to-autointegration factor (BAF) bridges DNA in a discrete, higher-order nucleoprotein complex. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 97, 8997-9002.