|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
| Home Help Feedback Subscriptions Archive Search Table of Contents | |||||
First published online December 31, 2008
doi: 10.1242/10.1242/jcs.036467
Research Article |
Department of Pharmacology, Tokyo Women's Medical University, 8-1 Kawada-cho, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 162-8666, Japan
Author for correspondence (e-mail: ymaru{at}research.twmu.ac.jp)
Accepted 7 October 2008
 |
Summary |
|---|
 Top Summary IntroductionResultsDiscussionMaterials and MethodsReferences |
|---|
motif (SAM) domain of EphA1 is required and the ankyrin region of ILK is sufficient for the interaction between EphA1 and ILK. The interaction is independent of EphA1 kinase activity but dependent on stimulation of the EphA1 ligand ephrin-A1. Activation of EphA1 kinase resulted in a decrease of ILK activity. Finally, we demonstrated that expression of a kinase-active form of ILK (S343D) rescued the EphA1-mediated spreading defect, and attenuated RhoA activation. These results suggest that EphA1 regulates cell morphology and motility through the ILK-RhoA-ROCK pathway.
Key words: EphA1, ILK, Ephrin-A1, Migration
|
Introduction |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionResultsDiscussionMaterials and MethodsReferences |
|---|
; Hynes, 1987). Focal adhesions contain integrins and multiple signaling molecules including talin, vinculin, focal adhesion kinase (FAK) and paxillin. Recently, integrin-linked kinase (ILK) has been identified as a binding partner of the β1-integrin subunit cytoplasmic domain, and a common component of focal adhesions (Hannigan et al., 1996; Nikolopoulos and Turner, 2001). ILK plays an important role in the assembly and functions of the cell-matrix structures. ILK also acts as a regulator of cell shape and motility by connecting integrins to the actin cytoskeleton (Brakebusch and Fassler, 2003).
Eph kinases constitute the largest family of receptor tyrosine kinases, with 16 distinct members. Ligands for the EphA receptor, called ephrin-A, are anchored on the plasma membrane through a glycosylphosphatidylinositol (GPI) linkage (Manning et al., 2002), whereas EphB receptors bind ligands containing transmembrane domains (ephrin-B). Because ephrins are membrane-anchored, the Eph-ephrin interaction takes place upon contact between Eph- and ephrin-presenting cells. Previous studies have shown that, in addition to signaling by Eph kinases (forward signaling), ephrins on the opposing cells can also transmit signals (reverse signaling) to the cells interior when they are engaged with Eph receptors (Bruckner et al., 1997; Davy et al., 1999; Holland et al., 1996). A well-characterized function of Eph receptors is to mediate cell-contact-induced repulsive guidance of axons and neural crest cells during development, although cell adhesion and attraction mediated by Eph receptors and ephrins have also been described (Fox and Kandpal, 2004; Wilkinson, 2001). In addition to the extensively studied nervous system, Eph receptors and ephrins are widely expressed in endothelial cells and epithelial cells. Much of the evidence considered points to Eph-receptor signaling leading to the regulation of the cytoskeleton and cell motility. EphA and EphB have been reported to suppress or promote integrin activity through interacting with several signaling molecules (Becker et al., 2000; Gu and Park, 2001; Huynh-Do et al., 2002; Vearing et al., 2005; Vindis et al., 2003). For example, EphB1 promotes cell adhesion to fibronectin, through an interaction with Nck or low-molecular-weight protein tyrosine phosphatase (LMW-PTP), in a kinase-dependent fashion (Huynh-Do et al., 2002). EphB2 was also shown to control integrin activity by inducing R-Ras (Zou et al., 1999). FAK may connect EphA2 receptors with integrin (Carter et al., 2002; Miao et al., 2000; Parri et al., 2007). EphA2 activity modulates cell adhesion and spreading in a FAK-dependent fashion. EphA2-mediated cell spreading on adhesive substrates depends not only on FAK, but also on Rho-family GTPases (Deroanne et al., 2003; Miao et al., 2003).
Rho-family GTPases are important regulators of the actin cytoskeleton and are likely to be involved in Eph-receptor regulation of cell morphology and cell motility. The activation of RhoA stimulates actomyosin contractility and stress-fiber formation, whereas the induction of Cdc42 and Rac1 results in the extension of filopodia and lamellipodia, respectively (Kozma et al., 1997). Recently, Eph-receptor activation has been linked to changes in the activities of certain Rho GTPases via guanine nucleotide exchange factor (GEF) or GTPase-activating proteins (GAPs). EphA4 has been reported to bind ephexin (Shamah et al., 2001) and Vsm-RhoGEF (Ogita et al., 2003), and EphA2 to bind Tiam1 (Tanaka et al., 2004).
EphA1 was the first member of the Eph family to be identified (Hirai et al., 1987) and is expressed mainly in epithelial tissues (Coulthard et al., 2001; Maru et al., 1988). This receptor is implicated in tumorigenicity. Low expression levels of EphA1 in malignant tumors have been reported (Fox and Kandpal, 2004; Hafner et al., 2004). In breast carcinoma cells, downregulated EphA1 expression is associated with invasive behavior of the cells, which is accompanied by dysregulation of other Eph-ephrin family members (Fox and Kandpal, 2004). However, little is known about the function of EphA1 in cell motility or morphology. We report here the function of EphA1 in cell behaviors and a novel interaction between EphA1 and ILK in the regulation of cell spreading.
|
Results |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionResultsDiscussionMaterials and MethodsReferences |
|---|
By constructing a series of mutants, we tried to identify domains within both EphA1 and ILK that mediate the interaction between the two (Fig. 1A). The cytoplasmic region of EphA1 (CP) with a kinase-inactivating mutation (CP/KD) and CP lacking the juxtamembrane domain (CP/
JM) bound the full-length ILK (ILK) as efficiently as the wild type (CP), whereas CP devoid of the sterile motif (SAM) domain in the C-terminal tail (CP/SAM) was incapable of interacting with ILK (Fig. 1B). However, the SAM domain alone (SAM) was not sufficient to accomplish the full binding and dramatically reduced colony formation was observed. The β-galactosidase liquid assay was performed to quantify the binding capacity. The activity of CP/ILK was 80% of that of an established positive control (p22/p47 in the Nox2 complex) (Sumimoto et al., 1996) (supplementary material Fig. S1). Deletion of the SAM domain abolished the binding down to the baseline level of a negative control. We could hardly detect statistically significant binding between the SAM domain alone and ILK.
|
ANK1, ANK1-2, ANK1-3). The interaction was drastically reduced in ANK1-3 (Fig. 1B) cells. SAM failed to bind ANK. Collectively, both SAM in CP and ANK3 in ILK are required for CP and ILK to bind each other. ANK is sufficient to bind CP but SAM is not sufficient to bind ILK and presumably plays an ancillary role. ANK alone acquired a higher binding ability than the whole ILK towards CP even without SAM in this particular assay.
To test the possibility that ILK and EphA1 interact in mammalian cells, we transfected HEK293 cells stably expressing GFP-tagged EphA1 (EphA1-GFP) or SAM EphA1-GFP with myc-tagged ILK (ILK-myc) (WT, wild type; KD, kinase dead), and immunoprecipitated with anti-myc antibody before and after stimulation by a chimeric protein comprising ephrin-A1 fused to the immunoglobulin Fc region ephrin-A1–Fc. As shown in Fig. 2A, EphA1-GFP was detected in anti-myc immunoprecipitates in an ephrin-A1–Fc-dependent but EphA1-kinase-activity-independent manner. This is consistent with the yeast two-hybrid results shown in Fig. 1. To eliminate the possibility that the presence of EphA1-GFP in the anti-myc immunoprecipitates might be artificially mediated by protein A/G Sepharose-bound ephrin-A1–Fc in the protein lysates, the immunoprecipitation was performed with anti-GFP antibody followed by anti-ILK immunoblotting. We found that EphA1-GFP, but not SAM-EphA1–GFP, was bound to ILK in an ephrin-A1–Fc-dependent manner (Fig. 2B). The requirement of the SAM domain is consistent with the yeast two-hybrid results shown in Fig. 1B. EphA1-GFP, which was contained in the anti-myc immunoprecipitates after ephrin-A1–Fc stimulation, disappeared when protein A Sepharose alone was purposely added in the absence of anti-myc antibody (Fig. 2B, lane 8). Although ephrin-A1–Fc stimulation at a high concentration of 10 µg/ml in HEK293 EphA1-GFP cells resulted in ephrin-A1–Fc-mediated pull down of EphA1-GFP when protein lysates were incubated with protein A Sepharose alone, we could repeatedly observe no EphA1-GFP with ephrin-A1–Fc at 1 µg/ml (supplementary material Fig. S2). Moreover, we could not detect ephrin-A1–Fc in the anti-ILK immunoprecipitates (data not shown). We also tested the interaction between ILK and EphA1, which are endogenously expressed in EBC-1 cells derived from human lung squamous cell carcinoma. As shown in Fig. 2C, binding of EphA1 and ILK was observed when cells were stimulated by ephrin-A1–Fc. These results indicate that ILK interacts with EphA1 receptor dependently on ephrin-A1–Fc but independently of EphA1 kinase activity.
|
EphA1 expression enhances adhesion to the ECM in a kinase-activity-independent manner
To investigate the functional roles of EphA1 in the regulation of spreading, integrin-mediated cell adhesion and integrin-mediated migration, we used HEK293 cells stably transfected with vector (pCMV-Tag4A) alone (Mock), or with FLAG-tagged WT- or KD-EphA1 receptor as a model system. Although EphA2, EphA4 and EphA6 were detectable in HEK293 cells by reverse transcriptase (RT)-mediated PCR analysis, EphA4, EphA6 and EphA1 were not detected by immunoblotting (data not shown). We compared the EphA1 and EphA2 expression levels between WT-EphA1 and EBC-1 cells, with leukemic K562 cells as a negative control (Fig. 3A). HEK293 WT-EphA1–FLAG cells expressed EphA1 about fivefold over EBC-1 cells, and both HEK293 Mock and HEK293 WT-EphA1–FLAG expressed EphA2 at a level of less than 10% of that observed in EBC-1 cells. Immunoblotting of total cell lysates showed that both WT-EphA1 and KD-EphA1 were stably expressed in HEK293 cells (Fig. 3B). This allowed us to make a direct comparison of biological activities between HEK293 WT- and KD-EphA1–FLAG cells. WT-EphA1–FLAG but not KD-EphA1–FLAG was autophosphorylated in normal culture conditions without ephrin-A1–Fc stimulation. Immunofluorescence analysis revealed cell-surface presentation of WT- and KD-EphA1–FLAG (supplementary material Fig. S3). Ephrin-A1–Fc stimulation resulted in phosphorylation of WT-EphA1–FLAG in a dose-dependent manner, whereas little tyrosine phosphorylation was observed for KD-EphA1–FLAG (Fig. 3B). Unclustered, monomeric ephrin-A1–Fc failed to stimulate EphA1 phosphorylation (data not shown).
|
), we studied the activation of FAK upon ephrin-A1–Fc stimulation in HEK293 Mock, WT-EphA1–FLAG and KD-EphA1–FLAG cells. We found that ephrin-A1–Fc stimulation enhanced FAK phosphorylation and binding to EphA1 (Fig. 3D,E).
Ephrin-A1-stimulated EphA1 inhibits cell spreading and migration
We further studied the effect of EphA1 activation on cell spreading. HEK293 WT-EphA1–FLAG or KD-EphA1–FLAG cells were replated on FN-coated coverslips with or without immobilized ephrin-A1–Fc (1 µg/ml) and allowed to spread for 30 minutes. As shown in Fig. 4A,B, WT-EphA1–FLAG cells spread poorly, and condensed F-actin was seen at the cell periphery by ligand stimulation. EBC-1 cells that naturally express both EphA1 and EphA2 behaved in a similar fashion. By contrast, no spreading defect was observed in Mock or KD-EphA1–FLAG cells, or in cells expressing EphA1 devoid of the SAM domain (SAM).
|
To confirm that the observed spreading defect is indeed mediated by EphA1, we used NP31/ATF3-Tet cells, which we reported previously (Masuda et al., 2008). Tetracycline (Tet)-regulated expression of the transcription factor ATF3 induces EphA1 expression. We observed a spreading defect that was dependent on both Tet and ephrin-A1–Fc. We then applied anti-EphA1 small interfering RNA (siRNA) to knock down EphA1 expression. Although we repeatedly observed decreases in the number of spreading cells after siRNA treatment, the ephrin-A1–Fc-dependent spreading defect was abrogated by anti-EphA1 siRNA (Fig. 5).
|
; Ridley et al., 2003). A significant elevation in RhoA activity and a reduction in Rac1 activity were observed in HEK293 WT-EphA1–FLAG cells (Fig. 6A,B). The changes were observed even before ligand stimulation, but were certainly enhanced by it. No significant changes in Cdc42 activity were detected in any of the transfected cells. As shown in Fig. 6C,D, Y-27632, an inhibitor of the Rho effector ROCK, attenuated the negative effects of ephrin-A1–Fc on the spreading of the WT-EphA1–FLAG cells. By contrast, the ROCK inhibitor did not affect spreading of Mock and KD-EphA1–FLAG cells.
|
In WT-EphA1–FLAG cells, ephrin-A1–Fc stimulation led to a transient inhibition of cell spreading and elevated RhoA activity, both of which could contribute to the suppression of cell motility. Thus, we performed a cell migration assay to investigate the effect of EphA1 activation on cell migration. Migration of WT-EphA1-expressing cells but not Mock or KD-EphA1 cells was significantly inhibited by ephrin-A1–Fc compared with Fc in a dose-dependent fashion (Fig. 6E, left). To test whether inhibition of migration was attributable to the activation of the RhoA-ROCK pathway, cells were treated with Y-27632. As expected, Y-27632 rescued the inhibitory effect of EphA1 on cell migration. By contrast, Y-27632 did not affect migration of Mock or KD-EphA1–FLAG cells (Fig. 6E, right). Expression of a dominant-negative RhoA (N19) also rescued ephrin-A1–Fc-stimulated inhibition of cell migration by roughly 60% (P<0.02) (data not shown).
EphA1 downregulates ILK activity
The interaction between EphA1 and ILK led us to test whether EphA1 modulates ILK kinase activity. We performed kinase assays of ILK in WT-EphA1–FLAG or KD-EphA1–FLAG cells stimulated with ephrin-A1–Fc. Mock, WT-EphA1–FLAG and KD-EphA1–FLAG cells were replated on FN-coated dishes with or without immobilized ephrin-A1–Fc for 20 minutes. Immunoprecipitated ILK was found to bind both WT-EphA1–FLAG and KD-EphA1–FLAG in an ephrin-A1–Fc-dependent manner (Fig. 7A), which is consistent with what we observed with EphA1-GFP in Fig. 2. It was then subjected to kinase assays using GST-GSK3β as an exogenous substrate. To demonstrate the specificity of this kinase assay, we pre-treated the cells with wortmannin before they were plated on ephrin-A1–Fc to inhibit PI3-kinase, which is an activator upstream of ILK kinase and downstream of FN stimulation. As shown in Fig. 7B,C, WT-EphA1–FLAG attenuated FN-induced ILK kinase activity by roughly 45% in a ligand-dependent manner, whereas neither Mock nor KD-EphA1–FLAG cells showed significant changes, suggesting that the ILK inhibition is mediated by EphA1 activation. PI3-kinase inhibition by wortmannin at 100 nM completely blocked the ILK kinase activity (Fig. 7B). Additionally, we transfected siRNA (Troussard et al., 2003) that specifically targets ILK to evaluate the function of ILK in HEK293 cell spreading. As shown in Fig. 7D, ILK expression was markedly decreased upon anti-ILK siRNA treatment. Cells transfected with anti-ILK siRNA or control siRNA were replated on FN-coated coverslips and allowed to spread for 30 minutes. As reported previously in other cell types (Filipenko et al., 2005; Fukuda et al., 2003), anti-ILK-siRNA-transfected HEK293 cells showed impaired spreading morphology, whereas control-siRNA-transfected cells spread normally (Fig. 7D). In anti-ILK-siRNA-transfected HEK293 WT-EphA1–FLAG cells at 80 nM, cell migration was inhibited by roughly 55% without ephrin-A1–Fc treatment, as compared with that in control siRNA-transfected cells, and ephrin-A1–Fc treatments failed to enhance the inhibition (data not shown). In HEK293 cells expressing WT-EphA1–FLAG devoid of the SAM domain (the domain that facilitates the interaction with ILK), ephrin-A1–Fc-stimulated inhibition of spreading was abolished (Fig. 4A). ILK kinase activity was not significantly downregulated in vitro with SAM-EphA1–FLAG. Taken together, we suppose that EphA1 activation causes an ILK-mediated spreading defect.
|
A kinase-active form of ILK blocks ephrin-A1-induced suppression of cell spreading
When HEK293 WT-EphA1–GFP and SAM-EphA1–GFP cells transfected with WT-ILK–myc were stimulated with ephrin-A1–Fc or control Fc, we observed retraction of processes only in ephrin-A1–Fc-treated HEK293 WT-EphA1–GFP cells (Fig. 8A). Merged images of ILK and EphA1 were observed even before ephrin-A1–Fc stimulation but were certainly enhanced by it. As shown in Fig. 7, EphA1 attenuates FN-induced ILK activity in an ephrin-A1–Fc-dependent manner. Therefore, we investigated the possible dominant active effect of a kinase-active form of ILK (S343D) (Persad et al., 2001) on the spreading of WT-EphA1–GFP cells. The same set of cells was transfected with the myc-tagged WT-ILK or ILK-S343D expression vector as shown in Fig. 8A and was subsequently subjected to spreading assays. Although we found almost no difference in spreading defect between Mock-transfected and WT-ILK-transfected cells (data not shown), expression of ILK-S343D had an inhibitory effect (Fig. 8B). SAM-EphA1–GFP cells spread well and were not influenced by ILK transfections.
|
A dominant-negative form of ILK blocks ephrin-A1-induced suppression of cell spreading
As shown in Fig. 1, ANK is necessary and sufficient to bind EphA1 in a yeast two-hybrid system. We tested it in mammalian cells. Myc-tagged ILK bound EphA1-GFP in an ephrin-A1–Fc-dependent manner (Fig. 2). Even in the absence of ephrin-A1–Fc stimulation, myc-tagged ANK but not ILK or CAT efficiently bound EphA1-FLAG (Fig. 9A), indicating that ANK alone can work as a dominant-negative form. To label transfected cells, ANK was tagged with GFP and introduced to HEK293 EphA1-FLAG cells. As shown in Fig. 9B,C, ANK rescued the ephrin-A1–Fc-induced spreading defect.
|
|
Discussion |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionResultsDiscussionMaterials and MethodsReferences |
|---|
Effects of Eph-ephrin signaling on cell adhesion, spreading and migration have been reported in various cell types (Davy and Robbins, 2000; Deroanne et al., 2003; Gu and Park, 2001; Huynh-Do et al., 2002; Miao et al., 2000; Miao et al., 2003; Miao et al., 2005). For example, activation of EphA2 by ephrin-A1 inhibits the Rac1-Pak1 (p21-activated kinase 1) pathway of smooth muscle cells and represses cell spreading (Deroanne et al., 2003). EphA2 also regulates HGF-induced epithelial cell morphogenesis (Miao et al., 2003). In the case of ephrin-A5-induced growth-cone collapse, ROCK is an important mediator (Davy et al., 1999; Davy and Robbins, 2000). In this report, EphA1–ephrin-A1 interaction inhibits cell spreading on but not adhesion to FN. Activation of EphA or EphB receptors was shown to modulate integrin functions (Becker et al., 2000; Gu and Park, 2001; Miao et al., 2000; Miao et al., 2005). Similar to the previous reports (Deroanne et al., 2003; Miao et al., 2003; Miao et al., 2005), inhibition of ROCK by Y-27632 attenuated the negative effects of ephrin-A1 on the spreading of WT-EphA1 cells. It was suggested that activation of Rho and ROCK transmits a negative signal to the Cdc42-Rac pathway (Hirose et al., 1998), confirming the results of Kozma et al. (Kozma et al., 1997). Mutually antagonistic effects of Rac and Rho were also observed in focal-contact and focal-complex formation in Swiss 3T3 cells (Rottner et al., 1999). In the same cell type, it was recently shown that Rac activation antagonized Rho activity (Sander et al., 1999). The decrease in Rac1 activity and elevated RhoA activity are expected to lead to an altered balance between these GTPases, and a relative increase in RhoA activity has been previously linked to inhibition of cell motility (Etienne-Manneville and Hall, 2002; Nobes and Hall, 1999). In our experiments, we also obtained results that point to such an antagonism. Activation of EphA1 by ephrin-A1 induced activation of RhoA and downregulation of Rac1. We currently do not know whether Rac downregulation is downstream of Rho activation. Activation of the EphA1 receptor tyrosine kinase by ephrin-A1 might directly influence Rac and Rho antagonistically. Crosstalks between the Rho and Cdc42-Rac pathways have been described. LIM kinase, another serine-threonine kinase that phosphorylates and thereby inactivates the actin-depolymerizing protein cofilin (Arber et al., 1998; Maekawa et al., 1999; Yang and Mizuno, 1999), is not only activated by ROCK but also by Pak1, and the association of Pak1 with LIM kinase is increased by activated Cdc42 and Rac (Edwards and Gill, 1999). Pak is activated by GTP-bound Cdc42 and Rac (Manser et al., 1995).
Currently, not much is known as to how ligand-induced activation of EphA receptor tyrosine kinases regulates the Rho and Cdc42-Rac pathways. EphA4 directly interacts with ephexin, which has GEF activity for RhoGTPases and also with Vsm-RhoGEF (Ogita et al., 2003; Shamah et al., 2001). As has been shown for EphB2 receptors (Holland et al., 1997), EphA receptors might also interact, via autophosphorylated juxtamembrane tyrosine residues, with RasGAP (Ras GTPase-activating protein), which is constitutively associated with RhoGAP. RhoGAP is a negative regulator of Rho, and the strong activation of Rho by ephrin-A1 in our experiments would require inactivation of RhoGAP activity. It remains to be shown whether additional factors (such as p62 Dok) of the RasGAP-RhoGAP complex are responsible for the inhibition (Holland et al., 1997; Holland et al., 1996). EphA receptors have been shown recently to interact with several different downstream factors. Non-receptor tyrosine kinases such as Src, Fyn, Yes and Abl bind directly via their SH2 domain to phosphorylated tyrosine residues of several different EphA receptors (Bruckner and Klein, 1998; Kalo and Pasquale, 1999).
In this report, we identified ILK as an interacting partner of EphA1 by the yeast two-hybrid analysis, and demonstrated that the SAM domain facilitated EphA1 binding to the ANK domain of ILK in a ligand-dependent and kinase-independent manner. ILK serves as a scaffold that brings together other proteins that are associated with the actin cytoskeleton. Specifically, the N-terminus of ILK mediates interactions with PINCH and ILK-associated phosphatase (ILKAP; also known as PP2C
), whereas the C-terminal half binds to integrins β1 and β3, paxillin, actopaxin, and affixin (Fukuda et al., 2003; Hannigan et al., 1996; Nikolopoulos and Turner, 2000; Nikolopoulos and Turner, 2001; Nikolopoulos and Turner, 2002). ILK not only serves as a molecular scaffold at the cell-ECM adhesion sites but also participates in signal-transduction pathways. Downstream targets of ILK signaling include PKB (Akt), GSK3β, β-catenin and the myosin light chain (Ren et al., 1999; Ren et al., 2000). Cell-ECM interactions regulate ILK activity, and these events are probably mediated by PI3K (Fig. 9D).
Currently, we do not know the mechanism of how activated EphA1 negatively regulates the kinase activity of ILK. ILK did not appear to be phosphorylated by EphA1 (data not shown). ILKAP is a serine-threonine phosphatase that has been shown to negatively regulate ILK kinase activity (Leung-Hagesteijn et al., 2001). In addition to ILKAP, other inhibitors of ILK have been identified. PTEN is a 3'-inositol lipid phosphatase and its activity is required for tumor-suppressor function. ILK can potentially be activated by a PH-like-domain-mediated interaction with 3'-phosphorylated inositol lipids. Several studies have shown that PTEN-null prostate carcinoma cells have constitutively increased levels of ILK activity, and transfection of PTEN into PTEN-null cells downregulated ILK activity (Obara et al., 2004). Dab2 (also known as DOC2) is a candidate tumor suppressor and downregulates ILK activity by unknown mechanisms (Wang et al., 2001). Dab2 contains the phosphotyrosine-binding (PTB) domain in its N-terminus.
The LIM-domain-only adapter protein PINCH links ILK to activated growth-factor receptors such as EGFR via another adapter, Nck (Persad and Dedhar, 2003). ILK and PINCH are concentrated in peripheral ruffles of cells spreading on FN (Tu et al., 1999). EphA1 might not require those adapters for interaction with ILK and binding is likely to be more direct, via non-SAM regions within the cytoplasmic domain. Because the SAM domain participates in homo- and hetero-interactions with diverse partners, including protein, RNA, Zn2+ and lipid (Qiao and Bowie, 2005), it might bring another molecule that is required for EphA1 to efficiently bind ILK. As in the case of EphA4, EphA1 still retains its kinase activity on stimulation by ephrin-A1–Fc even in the absence of the SAM domain (data not shown) (Park et al., 2004). Because the SAM domain alone failed to bind ILK, it plays a certain ancillary role for the EphA1-ILK interaction.
The kinase-active form of ILK (S343D) served in a dominant-active manner, and its expression resulted in the restoration of reduced ILK activity and attenuation of the ephrin-A1–Fc-induced spreading defect in WT-EphA1 cells, and also in a reduction of RhoA activity. This implies that kinase activity of ILK is important for EphA1-mediated cellular responses. The ANK domain of ILK worked in a dominant-negative manner, and attenuated ephrin-A1-induced RhoA activation and the spreading defect (Fig. 9C). These data suggest that ILK is involved in EphA1-initiated RhoA activation. ILK has been implicated in integrin-mediated signaling to the actin cytoskeleton (Sakai et al., 2003; Yamaji et al., 2001). The mechanisms whereby ILK exerts these effects are largely unknown, although they potentially involve a combination of ILK-associated kinase activity, focal-adhesion localization and scaffold activity. Of interest, ILK has been linked to early cell-spreading events (Chun et al., 2003; Filipenko et al., 2005; Fukuda et al., 2003; Tu et al., 2001; Wu and Dedhar, 2001; Yamaji et al., 2001; Zhang et al., 2002). It is well established that Rho family GTPases can control cell spreading and cell motility, and that ILK regulates cytoskeletal reorganization by virtue of its ability to activate the small GTPases Rac1 and Cdc42 via the guanine nucleotide exchange activity of alpha-PIX (Filipenko et al., 2005). Depletion of ILK by siRNA resulted in a spreading defect (Fig. 7D) (Filipenko et al., 2005; Fukuda et al., 2003) and a reduction of Rac1 activity in epithelial cells (Filipenko et al., 2005). Given that RhoA and ILK kinase activity do not fully correlate (Fig. 8D), ILK does not necessarily inhibit RhoA directly, and EphA1 might stimulate RhoA-ROCK and inhibit ILK in different signaling pathways. We demonstrated that activation of EphA1 receptor resulted in downregulation of Rac1 activity and of ILK kinase activity. These data suggest that attenuation of ILK kinase activity by EphA1 could lead to inhibition of alpha-PIX activity for Rac1, and result in a shift of balance among Rho-family GTPases to enhance RhoA activity.
|
Materials and Methods |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionResultsDiscussionMaterials and MethodsReferences |
|---|
Plasmid construction
The full-length DNA fragment encoding WT-EphA1 was prepared by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) with eph cDNA (Maru et al., 1988) as a template. PCR was performed by KOD plus polymerase (Takara) with primers 5'-GAATTCACCATGGAGCGGCGCTG-3' (forward) and 5'-GTCGACGTCCTTGAATCCCTGAATACT-3' (reverse), and cloned in frame into the EcoRI and SalI site of pCMV-Tag4A (Stratagene) to generate FLAG-tagged WT-EphA1, and also into pEGFP-N3 (Clontech) to generate GFP-tagged EphA1. The kinase dead (KD) form of EphA1, in which valine 638 in the ATP-binding region was changed to arginine (V638R) (Shamah et al., 2001; Shu et al., 1994), was prepared with primers 5'-GACACTGTCATAGGAGAAGGAGAGTTTGGGGAACGGTAT-3' (forward) and 5'-GTCGACGTCCTTGAATCCCTGAATACT-3' (reverse). The PCR product was digested with Tth111I and SalI, and replaced by the corresponding sequence of WT-EphA1. SAM-EphA1 was constructed by PCR with primers 5'-GAATTCACCATGGAGCGGCGCTG-3' (forward) and 5'-TTGCTCCAGATGTGCCTGAAG-3' (reverse).
Cell culture and transfection
HEK293, NP31, MCF7 and Rat1 cells were maintained in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (DMEM) supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum and 1% streptomycin/penicillin and L-glutamine. The mammalian expression vectors for FLAG-tagged WT- and KD-EphA1 with a single mutation in the kinase domain (V638R) were transfected into HEK293 cells using SuperFect transfection reagent (Qiagen). Clonal G418-resistant cells were isolated and expanded. Expression of WT- or KD-EphA1 was analyzed by immunoblotting with anti-FLAG antibody. All the experiments were performed with a mixture of more than ten G418-resistant populations of clonal cells. NP31/ATF3-Tet cells were described previously (Masuda et al., 2008). siRNA targeting human ILK (Troussard et al., 2003) or rat EphA1 (Masuda et al., 2008) and a control non-silencing sequence were synthesized by Japan Bioservice. Cells were transfected with siRNA using TransIT-TKO reagent (Mirus). ILK expression was evaluated by immunoblotting 2 days after transfection.
Immunofluorescent staining
HEK293 cells expressing FLAG- or GFP-tagged WT-, KD- or SAM-EphA1 with or without transfection with ILK-myc were plated on coverslips, unstimulated or stimulated by ephrin-A1–Fc after serum starvation and fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde for 1 hour at room temperature. Then cells were permeabilized with 0.1% Triton X-100 in PBS for 5 minutes and washed with PBS. Cells were incubated with anti-FLAG or anti-myc antibodies for 1 hour at room temperature and washed with PBS. Next, cells were incubated with Cy3- or TRITC-conjugated anti-mouse IgG (Jackson ImmunoResearch) for 1 hour at room temperature. Cells were co-stained with phalloidin and/or DAPI when indicated. Samples were photographed using an OLYMPUS BX-51 fluorescence microscope equipped with DP70 digital camera system and analyzed.
Cell-adhesion assay
Standard cell-adhesion assays were carried out as described previously (Miao et al., 2000). Briefly, 96-well plates were coated with ECM proteins such as VN, FN and poly-L-lysine at 5 µg/ml at 4°C overnight. Then, ephrin-A1–Fc or Fc was clustered with goat anti-human Fc at a ratio of 1:5 on ice for 30 minutes before adding to ECM-coated wells. Non-specific binding sites were blocked with 1% BSA/phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) at room temperature for 1 hour. Cells were serum starved overnight, and were detached with 2 mM EDTA and washed with adhesion medium (serum-free DMEM containing 0.1% BSA). Approximately 1x104 cells were plated in each well in adhesion medium and allowed to adhere at 37°C for 30 minutes. Adherent cells were fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde and stained with 0.5% crystal violet. A590 was measured with extracted dye using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay reader (Molecular Devices).
Cell spreading
The cells were plated on FN-coated (5 µg/ml) coverslips with or without immobilized ephrin-A1–Fc (1 µg/ml) in adhesion medium and allowed to spread for 30 minutes at 37°C. The cell morphology was observed under an Olympus IX70 fluorescent microscope equipped with digital camera and recorded. Non-spreading cells were defined as round cells, whereas spreading cells were cells with extended processes as described (Fukuda et al., 2003; Zhang et al., 2002). The percentage of cells with spreading morphology was quantified by analyzing at least 300 cells from four randomly selected fields.
Cell-migration assay
Cell-migration assays using modified Boyden chambers were performed essentially as described (Miao et al., 2000). To test the migration of transfected HEK293 cells, the underside of filter inserts (8-µm pore size, COSTER) was coated with 50 ng of FN in 10 µl of PBS. Non-specific binding sites were blocked with 1% BSA/PBS. Approximately 1x104 cells in serum-free DMEM containing 0.1% BSA were plated on the top of the insert and allowed to migrate through the filter at 37°C overnight. Ephrin-A1–Fc or Fc at 1 µg/ml was added to the lower chamber. Cells were fixed with 4% paraformaldehyde and stained with 0.5% crystal violet. Cells that went through the filter and stayed on the underside of inserts were counted.
Immunoprecipitation and immunoblotting
Cells were lysed in lysis buffer containing 25 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.4), 150 mM NaCl, 25 mM NaF, 10% glycerol, 1% NP-40, 2 mM EDTA, 1 mM phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride (PMSF), 1 mM Na3VO4, 2 µg/ml leupeptin and 2 µg/ml aprotinin for 30 minutes at 4°C. Lysates were clarified at 13,000 g for 5 minutes. Immunoprecipitation was carried out using antibodies at 1 µg/mg of total protein at 4°C for 1 hour. Immune complexes were collected using protein-A-Sepharose beads (Amersham Biosciences) for 1 hour at 4°C. The beads were then washed with immunoprecipitation washing buffer containing 20 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.4), 10% glycerol, 50 mM NaCl, 0.2% NP-40, 0.5 mM PMSF and 0.5 mM Na3VO4. The samples were boiled in reducing SDS sample buffer and separated on polyacrylamide gel. Proteins were transferred to PVDF membranes (Bio-Rad) and probed with the indicated antibodies.
Rho-GTPases activity assay
RhoA and Rac-Cdc42 activities were determined as described previously (Ren et al., 1999; Ren et al., 2000). Cells were replated on plates coated with FN (1 µg/ml) and ephrin-A1–Fc or Fc (1 µg/ml) for 15 minutes and lysed in a buffer containing 50 mM Tris-HCl (pH 7.4), 1% NP-40, 10 mM MgCl2, 150 mM NaCl, 1 mM PMSF, 10 µg/ml leupeptin and 10 µg/ml aprotinin on ice for 5 minutes. Cell lysates were immediately incubated with GST-Rhotekin RBD or GST-PAK-CD coupled on glutathione-Sepharose-4B beads for 1 hour at 4°C. The beads were then washed and re-suspended in SDS sample buffer. The GTP-bound RhoA, Rac1 or Cdc42 was analyzed by immunoblotting using anti-RhoA, anti-Rac1 or anti-Cdc42 antibody, respectively. Blot densities were quantified using NIH Image software.
Yeast two-hybrid screening and cDNA isolation
The yeast two-hybrid screening using the EphA cytoplasmic domain as bait was performed as described previously (Pandey et al., 1994; Takeda et al., 1999). Briefly, an EphA1 bait plasmid containing the EphA1 cytoplasmic domain (AA570-976) fused to the GAL4 DNA-binding domain in pGBK-T7 (Clontech) was co-transformed into AH109 strain with a human placenta expression library fused to the GAL4 activation domain in pACT2 (Clontech). 54 clones were proved to be positive by confirmation using reporter gene (β-galactosidase activity) and re-transformation. Library plasmids recovered from the positive clones were used in co-transformation with either the EphA1 cytoplasmic bait or other control baits. A full-length human ILK cDNA was isolated from HeLa cell cDNAs by PCR using KOD plus polymerase (Takara) with 5'-ACCATGGACGACATTTTCACTCAG-3' (forward) and 5'-CTCGAGCTTGTCCTGCATCTTCTCAAG-3' (reverse) primers. The β-galactosidase liquid assay was performed as described previously (Takeda et al., 1999).
In vitro kinase assay
For the ILK kinase assay, ILK was immunoprecipitated with monoclonal anti-ILK antibody (Upstate), and washed twice with lysis buffer and once with kinase buffer [20 mM MOPS (pH 7.0), 10 mM MgCl2, 5 mM MnCl2]. Purified GST-GSK3β (1 µg) and 100 µM ATP were added in 30 µl of kinase buffer and incubated for 30 minutes at 30°C. Reactions were stopped by adding SDS-PAGE loading buffer. Phosphorylated substrates were separated by SDS-PAGE and detected by immunoblotting using anti-phospho-GSK3β (Ser 9) antibody.
Statistical analysis
All values are presented as means ± s.d. from at least three independent experiments. Statistical analysis was performed with Student's t-test. Values of P<0.05 were considered to be statistically significant.
|
Footnotes |
|---|
This study was partly supported by Takeda Science Foundation, Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research (No. 12147210) to Y.M. and by the Center of Excellence (COE) Program for the 21st Century in Japan.
* These authors contributed equally to this work 
|
References |
|---|
|
TopSummaryIntroductionResultsDiscussionMaterials and MethodsReferences |
|---|
Arber, S., Barbayannis, F. A., Hanser, H., Schneider, C., Stanyon, C. A., Bernard, O. and Caroni, P. (1998). Regulation of actin dynamics through phosphorylation of cofilin by LIM-kinase. Nature 393, 805-809.[CrossRef][Medline]
Becker, E., Huynh-Do, U., Holland, S., Pawson, T., Daniel, T. O. and Skolnik, E. Y. (2000). Nck-interacting Ste20 kinase couples Eph receptors to c-Jun N-terminal kinase and integrin activation. Mol. Cell. Biol. 20, 1537-1545.
Brakebusch, C. and Fassler, R. (2003). The integrin-actin connection, an eternal love affair. EMBO J. 22, 2324-2333.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bruckner, K. and Klein, R. (1998). Signaling by Eph receptors and their ephrin ligands. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 8, 375-382.[CrossRef][Medline]
Bruckner, K., Pasquale, E. B. and Klein, R. (1997). Tyrosine phosphorylation of transmembrane ligands for Eph receptors. Science 275, 1640-1643.
Carter, N., Nakamoto, T., Hirai, H. and Hunter, T. (2002). EphrinA1-induced cytoskeletal re-organization requires FAK and p130(cas). Nat. Cell Biol. 4, 565-673.[Medline]
Chun, S. J., Rasband, M. N., Sidman, R. L., Habib, A. A. and Vartanian, T. (2003). Integrin-linked kinase is required for laminin-2-induced oligodendrocyte cell spreading and CNS myelination. J. Cell Biol. 163, 397-408.
Coulthard, M. G., Lickliter, J. D., Subanesan, N., Chen, K., Webb, G. C., Lowry, A. J., Koblar, S., Bottema, C. D. and Boyd, A. W. (2001). Characterization of the Epha1 receptor tyrosine kinase: expression in epithelial tissues. Growth Factors 18, 303-317.[Medline]
Davy, A. and Robbins, S. M. (2000). Ephrin-A5 modulates cell adhesion and morphology in an integrin-dependent manner. EMBO J. 19, 5396-5405.[CrossRef][Medline]
Davy, A., Gale, N. W., Murray, E. W., Klinghoffer, R. A., Soriano, P., Feuerstein, C. and Robbins, S. M. (1999). Compartmentalized signaling by GPI-anchored ephrin-A5 requires the Fyn tyrosine kinase to regulate cellular adhesion. Genes Dev. 13, 3125-3135.
Deroanne, C., Vouret-Craviari, V., Wang, B. and Pouyssegur, J. (2003). EphrinA1 inactivates integrin-mediated vascular smooth muscle cell spreading via the Rac/PAK pathway. J. Cell Sci. 116, 1367-1376.
Edwards, D. C. and Gill, G. N. (1999). Structural features of LIM kinase that control effects on the actin cytoskeleton. J. Biol. Chem. 274, 11352-11361.
Etienne-Manneville, S. and Hall, A. (2002). Rho GTPases in cell biology. Nature 420, 629-635.[CrossRef][Medline]
Filipenko, N. R., Attwell, S., Roskelley, C. and Dedhar, S. (2005). Integrin-linked kinase activity regulates Rac- and Cdc42-mediated actin cytoskeleton reorganization via alpha-PIX. Oncogene 24, 5837-5849.[CrossRef][Medline]
Fox, B. P. and Kandpal, R. P. (2004). Invasiveness of breast carcinoma cells and transcript profile: Eph receptors and ephrin ligands as molecular markers of potential diagnostic and prognostic application. Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 318, 882-892.[CrossRef][Medline]
Fukuda, T., Chen, K., Shi, X. and Wu, C. (2003). PINCH-1 is an obligate partner of integrin-linked kinase (ILK) functioning in cell shape modulation, motility, and survival. J. Biol. Chem. 278, 51324-51333.
Giancotti, F. G. and Ruoslahti, E. (1999). Integrin signaling. Science 285, 1028-1032.
Gu, C. and Park, S. (2001). The EphA8 receptor regulates integrin activity through p110gamma phosphatidylinositol-3 kinase in a tyrosine kinase activity-independent manner. Mol. Cell. Biol. 21, 4579-4597.
Hafner, C., Schmitz, G., Meyer, S., Bataille, F., Hau, P., Langmann, T., Dietmaier, W., Landthaler, M. and Vogt, T. (2004). Differential gene expression of Eph receptors and ephrins in benign human tissues and cancers. Clin. Chem. 50, 490-499.
Hannigan, G. E., Leung-Hagesteijn, C., Fitz-Gibbon, L., Coppolino, M. G., Radeva, G., Filmus, J., Bell, J. C. and Dedhar, S. (1996). Regulation of cell adhesion and anchorage-dependent growth by a new beta 1-integrin-linked protein kinase. Nature 379, 91-96.[CrossRef][Medline]
Hirai, H., Maru, Y., Hagiwara, K., Nishida, J. and Takaku, F. (1987). A novel putative tyrosine kinase receptor encoded by the eph gene. Science 238, 1717-1720.
Hirose, M., Ishizaki, T., Watanabe, N., Uehata, M., Kranenburg, O., Moolenaar, W. H., Matsumura, F., Maekawa, M., Bito, H. and Narumiya, S. (1998). Molecular dissection of the Rho-associated protein kinase (p160ROCK)-regulated neurite remodeling in neuroblastoma N1E-115 cells. J. Cell Biol. 141, 1625-1636.
Holland, S. J., Gale, N. W., Mbamalu, G., Yancopoulos, G. D., Henkemeyer, M. and Pawson, T. (1996). Bidirectional signalling through the EPH-family receptor Nuk and its transmembrane ligands. Nature 383, 722-725.[CrossRef][Medline]
Holland, S. J., Gale, N. W., Gish, G. D., Roth, R. A., Songyang, Z., Cantley, L. C., Henkemeyer, M., Yancopoulos, G. D. and Pawson, T. (1997). Juxtamembrane tyrosine residues couple the Eph family receptor EphB2/Nuk to specific SH2 domain proteins in neuronal cells. EMBO J. 16, 3877-3888.[CrossRef][Medline]
Huynh-Do, U., Vindis, C., Liu, H., Cerretti, D. P., McGrew, J. T., Enriquez, M., Chen, J. and Daniel, T. O. (2002). Ephrin-B1 transduces signals to activate integrin-mediated migration, attachment and angiogenesis. J. Cell Sci. 115, 3073-3081.
Hynes, R. O. (1987). Integrins: a family of cell surface receptors. Cell 48, 549-554.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kalo, M. S. and Pasquale, E. B. (1999). Signal transfer by Eph receptors. Cell Tissue Res. 298, 1-9.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kozma, R., Sarner, S., Ahmed, S. and Lim, L. (1997). Rho family GTPases and neuronal growth cone remodelling: relationship between increased complexity induced by Cdc42Hs, Rac1, and acetylcholine and collapse induced by RhoA and lysophosphatidic acid. Mol. Cell. Biol. 17, 1201-1211.[Abstract]
Leung-Hagesteijn, C., Mahendra, A., Naruszewicz, I. and Hannigan, G. E. (2001). Modulation of integrin signal transduction by ILKAP, a protein phosphatase 2C associating with the integrin-linked kinase, ILK1. EMBO J. 20, 2160-2170.[CrossRef][Medline]
Maekawa, M., Ishizaki, T., Boku, S., Watanabe, N., Fujita, A., Iwamatsu, A., Obinata, T., Ohashi, K., Mizuno, K. and Narumiya, S. (1999). Signaling from Rho to the actin cytoskeleton through protein kinases ROCK and LIM-kinase. Science 285, 895-898.
Manning, G., Whyte, D. B., Martinez, R., Hunter, T. and Sudarsanam, S. (2002). The protein kinase complement of the human genome. Science 298, 1912-1934.
Manser, E., Chong, C., Zhao, Z. S., Leung, T., Michael, G., Hall, C. and Lim, L. (1995). Molecular cloning of a new member of the p21-Cdc42/Rac-activated kinase (PAK) family. J. Biol. Chem. 270, 25070-25078.
Maru, Y., Hirai, H., Yoshida, M. C. and Takaku, F. (1988). Evolution, expression, and chromosomal location of a novel receptor tyrosine kinase gene, eph. Mol. Cell. Biol. 8, 3770-3772.
Masuda, J., Usui, R. and Maru, Y. (2008). Fibronectin type I repeat is a non-activating ligand for EPHA1 and inhibits ATF3-dependent angiogenesis. J. Biol. Chem. 283, 13148-13155.
Miao, H., Burnett, E., Kinch, M., Simon, E. and Wang, B. (2000). Activation of EphA2 kinase suppresses integrin function and causes focal-adhesion-kinase dephosphorylation. Nat. Cell Biol. 2, 62-69.[CrossRef][Medline]
Miao, H., Nickel, C. H., Cantley, L. G., Bruggeman, L. A., Bennardo, L. N. and Wang, B. (2003). EphA kinase activation regulates HGF-induced epithelial branching morphogenesis. J. Cell Biol. 162, 1281-1292.
Miao, H., Strebhardt, K., Pasquale, E. B., Shen, T. L., Guan, J. L. and Wang, B. (2005). Inhibition of integrin-mediated cell adhesion but not directional cell migration requires catalytic activity of EphB3 receptor tyrosine kinase. Role of Rho family small GTPases. J. Biol. Chem. 280, 923-932.
Nikolopoulos, S. N. and Turner, C. E. (2000). Actopaxin, a new focal adhesion protein that binds paxillin LD motifs and actin and regulates cell adhesion. J. Cell Biol. 151, 1435-1448.
Nikolopoulos, S. N. and Turner, C. E. (2001). Integrin-linked kinase (ILK) binding to paxillin LD1 motif regulates ILK localization to focal adhesions. J. Biol. Chem. 276, 23499-234505.
Nikolopoulos, S. N. and Turner, C. E. (2002). Molecular dissection of actopaxin-integrin-linked kinase-Paxillin interactions and their role in subcellular localization. J. Biol. Chem. 277, 1568-1575.
Nobes, C. D. and Hall, A. (1999). Rho GTPases control polarity, protrusion, and adhesion during cell movement. J. Cell Biol. 144, 1235-1244.
Obara, S., Nakata, M., Takeshima, H., Katagiri, H., Asano, T., Oka, Y., Maruyama, I. and Kuratsu, J. (2004). Integrin-linked kinase (ILK) regulation of the cell viability in PTEN mutant glioblastoma and in vitro inhibition by the specific COX-2 inhibitor NS-398. Cancer Lett. 208, 115-122.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ogita, H., Kunimoto, S., Kamioka, Y., Sawa, H., Masuda, M. and Mochizuki, N. (2003). EphA4-mediated Rho activation via Vsm-RhoGEF expressed specifically in vascular smooth muscle cells. Circ. Res. 93, 23-31.
Pandey, A., Lazar, D. F., Saltiel, A. R. and Dixit, V. M. (1994). Activation of the Eck receptor protein tyrosine kinase stimulates phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase activity. J. Biol. Chem. 269, 30154-30157.
Park, E. K., Warner, N., Bong, Y. S., Stapleton, D., Maeda, R., Pawson, T. and Daar, I. O. (2004). Ectopic EphA4 receptor induces posterior protrusions via FGF signaling in Xenopus embryos. Mol. Biol. Cell 15, 1647-1655.
Parri, M., Buricchi, F., Giannoni, E., Grimaldi, G., Mello, T., Raugei, G., Ramponi, G. and Chiarugi, P. (2007). EphrinA1 activates a Src/Focal adhesion kinase-mediated motility response leading to Rho-dependent actino/myosin contractility. J. Biol. Chem. 282, 19619-19628.
Persad, S. and Dedhar, S. (2003). The role of integrin-linked kinase (ILK) in cancer progression. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 22, 375-384.[CrossRef][Medline]
Persad, S., Attwell, S., Gray, V., Mawji, N., Deng, J. T., Leung, D., Yan, J., Sanghera, J., Walsh, M. P. and Dedhar, S. (2001). Regulation of protein kinase B/Akt-serine 473 phosphorylation by integrin-linked kinase: critical roles for kinase activity and amino acids arginine 211 and serine 343. J. Biol. Chem. 276, 27462-27469.
Qiao, F. and Bowie, J. U. (2005). The many faces of SAM. Sci STKE 2005, re7.
Ren, X. D., Kiosses, W. B. and Schwartz, M. A. (1999). Regulation of the small GTP-binding protein Rho by cell adhesion and the cytoskeleton. EMBO J. 18, 578-585.[CrossRef][Medline]
Ren, X. D., Kiosses, W. B., Sieg, D. J., Otey, C. A., Schlaepfer, D. D. and Schwartz, M. A. (2000). Focal adhesion kinase suppresses Rho activity to promote focal adhesion turnover. J. Cell Sci. 113, 3673-3678.[Abstract]
Ridley, A. J., Schwartz, M. A., Burridge, K., Firtel, R. A., Ginsberg, M. H., Borisy, G., Parsons, J. T. and Horwitz, A. R. (2003). Cell migration: integrating signals from front to back. Science 302, 1704-1709.
Rottner, K., Hall, A. and Small, J. V. (1999). Interplay between Rac and Rho in the control of substrate contact dynamics. Curr. Biol. 9, 640-648.[CrossRef][Medline]
Sakai, T., Li, S., Docheva, D., Grashoff, C., Sakai, K., Kostka, G., Braun, A., Pfeifer, A., Yurchenco, P. D. and Fassler, R. (2003). Integrin-linked kinase (ILK) is required for polarizing the epiblast, cell adhesion, and controlling actin accumulation. Genes Dev. 17, 926-940.
Sander, E. E., ten Klooster, J. P., van Delft, S., van der Kammen, R. A. and Collard, J. G. (1999). Rac downregulates Rho activity: reciprocal balance between both GTPases determines cellular morphology and migratory behavior. J. Cell Biol. 147, 1009-1022.
Shamah, S. M., Lin, M. Z., Goldberg, J. L., Estrach, S., Sahin, M., Hu, L., Bazalakova, M., Neve, R. L., Corfas, G., Debant, A. et al. (2001). EphA receptors regulate growth cone dynamics through the novel guanine nucleotide exchange factor ephexin. Cell 105, 233-244.[CrossRef][Medline]
Shu, H. K., Chang, C. M., Ravi, L., Ling, L., Castellano, C. M., Walter, E., Pelley, R. J. and Kung, H. J. (1994). Modulation of erbB kinase activity and oncogenic potential by single point mutations in the glycine loop of the catalytic domain. Mol. Cell. Biol. 14, 6868-6878.
Sumimoto, H., Hata, K., Mizuki, K., Ito, T., Kage, Y., Sakaki, Y., Fukumaki, Y., Nakamura, M. and Takeshige, K. (1996). Assembly and activation of the phagocyte NADPH oxidase. Specific interaction of the N-terminal Src homology 3 domain of p47phox with p22phox is required for activation of the NADPH oxidase. J. Biol. Chem. 271, 22152-22158.
Takeda, N., Shibuya, M. and Maru, Y. (1999). The BCR-ABL oncoprotein potentially interacts with the xeroderma pigmentosum group B protein. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96, 203-207.
Tanaka, M., Ohashi, R., Nakamura, R., Shinmura, K., Kamo, T., Sakai, R. and Sugimura, H. (2004). Tiam1 mediates neurite outgrowth induced by ephrin-B1 and EphA2. EMBO J. 23, 1075-1088.[CrossRef][Medline]
Troussard, A. A., Mawji, N. M., Ong, C., Mui, A., St-Arnaud, R. and Dedhar, S. (2003). Conditional knock-out of integrin-linked kinase demonstrates an essential role in protein kinase B/Akt activation. J. Biol. Chem. 278, 22374-22378.
Tu, Y., Li, F., Goicoechea, S. and Wu, C. (1999). The LIM-only protein PINCH directly interacts with integrin-linked kinase and is recruited to integrin-rich sites in spreading cells. Mol. Cell. Biol. 19, 2425-2434.
Tu, Y., Huang, Y., Zhang, Y., Hua, Y. and Wu, C. (2001). A new focal adhesion protein that interacts with integrin-linked kinase and regulates cell adhesion and spreading. J. Cell Biol. 153, 585-598.
Vearing, C., Lee, F. T., Wimmer-Kleikamp, S., Spirkoska, V., To, C., Stylianou, C., Spanevello, M., Brechbiel, M., Boyd, A. W., Scott, A. M. et al. (2005). Concurrent binding of anti-EphA3 antibody and ephrin-A5 amplifies EphA3 signaling and downstream responses: potential as EphA3-specific tumor-targeting reagents. Cancer Res. 65, 6745-6754.
Vindis, C., Cerretti, D. P., Daniel, T. O. and Huynh-Do, U. (2003). EphB1 recruits c-Src and p52Shc to activate MAPK/ERK and promote chemotaxis. J. Cell Biol. 162, 661-671.
Wang, S. C., Makino, K., Xia, W., Kim, J. S., Im, S. A., Peng, H., Mok, S. C., Singletary, S. E. and Hung, M. C. (2001). DOC-2/hDab-2 inhibits ILK activity and induces anoikis in breast cancer cells through an Akt-independent pathway. Oncogene 20, 6960-6964.[CrossRef][Medline]
Wilkinson, D. G. (2001). Multiple roles of EPH receptors and ephrins in neural development. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2, 155-164.[Medline]
Wu, C. and Dedhar, S. (2001). Integrin-linked kinase (ILK) and its interactors: a new paradigm for the coupling of extracellular matrix to actin cytoskeleton and signaling complexes. J. Cell Biol. 155, 505-510.
Yamaji, S., Suzuki, A., Sugiyama, Y., Koide, Y., Yoshida, M., Kanamori, H., Mohri, H., Ohno, S. and Ishigatsubo, Y. (2001). A novel integrin-linked kinase-binding protein, affixin, is involved in the early stage of cell-substrate interaction. J. Cell Biol. 153, 1251-1264.
Yang, N. and Mizuno, K. (1999). Nuclear export of LIM-kinase 1, mediated by two leucine-rich nuclear-export signals within the PDZ domain. Biochem. J. 338, 793-798.[CrossRef][Medline]
Zhang, Y., Guo, L., Chen, K. and Wu, C. (2002). A critical role of the PINCH-integrin-linked kinase interaction in the regulation of cell shape change and migration. J. Biol. Chem. 277, 318-326.
Zou, J. X., Wang, B., Kalo, M. S., Zisch, A. H., Pasquale, E. B. and Ruoslahti, E. (1999). An Eph receptor regulates integrin activity through R-Ras. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 96, 13813-13818.
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati 
Twitter What's this?
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
