spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif spacer gif
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


spacer gif
     Home     Help     Feedback     Subscriptions     Archive     Search     Table of Contents    

First published online November 9, 2005
doi: 10.1242/10.1242/jcs.02638

Journal of Cell Science 118, 5369-5379 (2005)
Published by The Company of Biologists 2005
This Article
Right arrow Summary Freely available
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplementary Material
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Abou Kheir, W.
Right arrow Articles by Cox, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Abou Kheir, W.
Right arrow Articles by Cox, D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

A WAVE2-Abi1 complex mediates CSF-1-induced F-actin-rich membrane protrusions and migration in macrophages

Wassim Abou Kheir1,*, Jean-Claude Gevrey1,*, Hideki Yamaguchi1, Beth Isaac1 and Dianne Cox1,2,{ddagger}

1 Department of Anatomy and Structural Biology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York City, NY 10461, USA
2 Department of Developmental and Molecular Biology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York City, NY 10461, USA



View larger version (28K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 1. Expression of WAVE family members in macrophages. (A) Total RNA was isolated from equivalent numbers of cells of the murine monocyte/macrophage RAW/LR5 cell line and primary murine thioglycollate-elicited peritoneal macrophages (M{Phi}) and RT-PCR was performed using sets of primers specific for the indicated transcripts. As a negative control the reverse transcription step was omitted (–RT). RNA from brain (Br) was used as a positive control for WAVE3 expression. (B) Western blot analysis of WASP, WAVE1 and WAVE2 protein expression in RAW/LR5 cells and bone marrow-derived macrophages (BMM) using isoform-specific rabbit polyclonal antibodies. Lysates from COS-7 cells transfected with either FLAG-tagged WASP (COS/WASP), FLAG-tagged WAVE1 (COS/W) or FLAG-tagged WAVE2 (COS/W2) were used as standards and probed with the indicated antibodies. (C) Corresponding quantitative analysis: WASP/WAVE over ß-actin signals in macrophage samples were quantified and expressed as a percentage of their corresponding standard (COS/W with W standing for WASP or WAVE1 or WAVE2). WASP/WAVE normalized intensities were subsequently compared between each other using the relative expression of standards determined by means of FLAG detection. Numbers were finally expressed as percentages of WASP expression in RAW/LR5 cells. n=3 different determinations on different lysates.

 


View larger version (70K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 2. WAVE2 is enriched in F-actin rich membrane protrusions elicited by CSF-1 in macrophages. BMM (A) or RAW/LR5 cells (B) were left untreated or were treated with 20 ng/ml CSF-1 for 5 minutes as described in Materials and Methods. Cells were then fixed and stained for F-actin using Alexa Fluor 568 phalloidin, and for WAVE2, using a polyclonal goat antibody followed by Alexa Fluor 488 anti-goat IgG. Bars, 10 µm.

 


View larger version (37K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 3. Interfering with WAVE2 function inhibits CSF-1-induced F-actin rich membrane protrusions. (A) RAW/LR5 cells, transiently transfected with the indicated constructs, were treated with 20 ng/ml CSF-1 for 5 minutes and F-actin-rich protrusions were visualized by Alexa Fluor 568 phalloidin staining. Cells expressing the constructs were identified by epitope staining (FLAG for WAVE1/2 and Myc for WASP) and the number of CSF-1-elicited protrusions was quantified as described in Materials and Methods and expressed as a percentage of the CSF-1 stimulation observed in non transfected cells on the same coverslip; n=3, *P<0.05 compared to non transfected cells (represented by the dotted line in A-D). (B) RAW/LR5 cells were transiently transfected with the same constructs as in A, and their ability to undergo Fc{gamma}-R-mediated phagocytosis was determined as described in Materials and Methods and expressed as a percentage of phagocytosis observed in non transfected cells on the same cover slip; n=3, *P<0.05 compared to non transfected cells. (C) WAVE1 or WAVE2 antibodies or control IgG were introduced into BMM cells by transient permeabilization as described in Materials and Methods. The ability of cells to form F-actin rich protrusions in response to CSF-1 was analyzed as in A; n=3, *P<0.05 compared to non permeabilized cells on the same coverslip. (D) WAVE2 antibodies or control IgG were introduced into RAW/LR5 cells by transient permeabilization, as in C, and CSF-1-induced protrusions were scored as in A; n=3, *P<0.05 compared to non permeabilized cells on the same cover slip. (E) WAVE2 and ß-actin expression in WAVE2 shRNA-treated RAW/LR5 cells (heterogenous cell populations) was analyzed by western blotting with the appropriate antibodies and compared to mock shRNA treated cells (see inset) and WAVE2/ß-actin signal intensity ratios of the indicated blot were quantified. (F) Mock, WAVE2 shRNA-treated cells (white bars) or WAVE2 shRNA-treated cells transiently transfected with a human GFP-WAVE2 construct (black bars) were stimulated with CSF-1 and their ability to form F-actin-rich protrusions in response to CSF-1 was analyzed as in A and expressed as a percentage of the CSF-1 stimulation observed in mock shRNA-treated cells; n=3, *P<0.05 compared to mock shRNA-treated cells.

 


View larger version (49K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 4. WAVE2 and Abi1 are found in the same complex and are enriched at CSF-1-induced membrane protrusions. (A) FLAG-tagged WAVE2-expressing RAW/LR5 cells were lysed and lysates were sequentially incubated with control IgG and specific antibodies against FLAG for immunoprecipitation (IP). Immunoprecipitates were then subjected to western blotting using the indicated antibodies. Signals corresponding to IgG heavy chain are shown as a proof of equal loading. (B) RAW/LR5 cells were either left untreated (–) or were treated (+) with 20 ng/ml CSF-1 for 5 minutes prior to lysis and immunoprecipitation of Abi1 followed by WAVE2 and Abi1 western blotting. (C) BMM and RAW/LR5 cells were treated with CSF-1, then fixed and stained for WAVE2 and Abi1 as described in Materials in Methods. Bars, 10 µm.

 


View larger version (18K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 5. Abi1 and WAVE2 are required for CSF-1-induced F-actin rich membrane protrusions in macrophages. (A) Abi1, WAVE2 and ß-actin expression in Abi1 shRNA-treated cells (two different clonal populations shown) was analyzed by western blotting with the appropriate antibodies and compared to mock shRNA-treated cells. Quantification of Abi1/ß-actin and WAVE2/ß-actin signal intensity ratios is shown below. (B) Mock- and Abi1-shRNA-treated cells were fixed and stained for Abi1 as described in Materials and Methods. Bar, 10 µm. (C) Mock shRNA-treated cells and two independent clones with reduced Abi1/WAVE2 expression (Abi1 shRNA) were treated with 20 ng/ml CSF-1 for 5 minutes and the ability of cells to form F-actin-rich membrane protrusions in response to CSF-1 was scored as described in Fig. 3 and expressed as a percentage of the CSF-1 stimulation observed in mock shRNA-treated cells; n=3, *P<0.05 compared to mock shRNA-treated cells.

 


View larger version (17K):

[in a new window]
  		Fig. 6. WAVE2 and Abi1 are required for CSF-1-induced cell migration in macrophages. (A) Non infected (NI) and mock shRNA-treated cells showed no significant difference in cell migration in response to 20 ng/ml CSF-1 using a transmigration chamber assay as described in Materials and Methods, n=4. (B,C) Using this assay, cell migration in response to CSF-1 was determined in WAVE2 shRNA-treated cells (B) or Abi1 shRNA-treated cells (C) and compared with that of mock shRNA-treated cells. CSF-1-stimulated migration of each cell population was compared with the corresponding unstimulated condition and expressed as a percentage of the mock shRNA-treated cells; n=3 for B and C, *P<0.05 compared to mock shRNA-treated cells.

 

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?



© The Company of Biologists Ltd 2005