Click here to close
Hello! We notice that you are using Internet Explorer, which is not supported by Xenbase and may cause the site to display incorrectly.
We suggest using a current version of Chrome,
FireFox, or Safari.
Bisson N
,
Poitras L
,
Mikryukov A
,
Tremblay M
,
Moss T
.
???displayArticle.abstract???
The control of cell adhesion is an important mechanism by which Eph receptors regulate cell sorting during development. Activation of EphA4 in Xenopus blastulae induces a reversible, cell autonomous loss-of-adhesion and disruption of the blastocoel roof. We show this phenotype is rescued by Nckbeta (Grb4) dependent on its interaction with EphA4. Xenopus p21(Cdc42/Rac)-activated kinase xPAK1 interacts with Nck, is activated in embryo by EphA4 in an Nck-dependent manner, and is required for EphA4-induced loss-of-adhesion. Ectopic expression of xPAK1 phenocopies EphA4 activation. This does not require the catalytic activity of xPAK1, but it does require its GTPase binding domain and is enhanced by membrane targeting. Indeed, membrane targeting of the GTPase binding domain (GBD) of xPAK1 alone is sufficient to phenocopy EphA4 loss-of-adhesion. Both EphA4 and the xPAK1-GBD down-regulate RhoA-GTP levels, and consistent with this, loss-of-adhesion can be rescued by activated Cdc42, Rac, and RhoA and can be epistatically induced by dominant-negative RhoA. Despite this, neither Cdc42 nor Rac activities are down-regulated by EphA4 activation or by the xPAK1-GBD. Together, the data suggest that EphA4 activation sequesters active Cdc42 and in this way down-regulates cell-cell adhesion. This novel signaling pathway suggests a mechanism for EphA4-guided migration.
Figure 1. Nckβ overexpression rescues the Epp loss-of-adhesion phenotype. (A) Example of a lesion caused by loss of animal pole blastomere adhesion resulting from the expression of Epp. Examples of rescue of this phenotype by the coexpression of Nckβ forms are also shown. The middle panels show corresponding manually cross-sectioned embryos, and the boxed regions are shown at higher magnification in the bottom panels. (B) The structure of Nckα and Nckβ and their mutant forms is shown above a histogram of the percentage of embryos displaying loss-of-adhesion lesions. Scoring was on the basis of visible lesions; no correction for lesion size was made. The ratio of Epp to Nck RNA injected was maintained at 1-4. The numbers above the histogram columns refer to the total number of embryos scored. The bottom panel shows the relative Nckβ and Nckα SH3-2 and 3xSH3 expression levels determined by Western analysis using an antibody against the HA epitope tag. Nckα wild type (wt) was not tagged and hence could not be detected in this way.
Figure 2. Tyrosines 595 and 601 on EphA4 are essential for the loss-of-adhesion phenotype and for Nckβ interaction. (A) Example of a lesion caused by loss of animal pole blastomere adhesion resulting from the expression of Epp and block of this phenotype by independent mutagenesis of two conserved tyrosines in the juxtamembrane domain. (B) Histogram of the percentage of embryos displaying loss-of-adhesion lesions. Scoring was on the basis of visible lesions, no correction for lesion size was made. The same amount of RNA was injected for wild-type (wt) or mutant Epp. The numbers above the histogram columns refer to the total number of embryos scored over three independent experiments. (C) Interaction of xEpp with Nckβ. HA-Nckβ and xEpp-FLAG (wt or mutants) were transfected in 293T cells, and total protein extracts were immunoprecipitated with anti-FLAG antibody, Western blotted, and probed with anti-HA antibody. (D) The data in C were quantified and are shown normalized to the wt EppâNckβ interaction levels.
Figure 3. xPAK1 is activated by EphA4 in embryo. (A) Assay of xPAK1 kinase activity in extracts from embryos coexpressing xPAK1 or a catalytically inactive xPAK1 (KD-xPAK1), the receptors EphA4 or hEGFR and the two Nck isoforms. Relative xPAK1 and Nckβ expression were determined by Western analysis by using an antibody to the HA epitope-tag. Nckα was not epitope tagged and so was not detected in this assay. (B) Interaction of xPAK1 with Nckβ. HA-Nckβ and xPAK1-FLAG were transfected in 293T cells, and total protein extracts were immunoprecipitated with anti-FLAG antibody, Western blotted, and probed with anti-HA antibody. (C) xPAK1 is required for loss-of-adhesion. Histogram showing the percentage of embryos displaying loss-of-adhesion lesions when injected with Epp alone or when coinjected with an affinity-purified anti-xPAK1 (αPAK1) antibody or a control antibody (αCtrl). Scoring was on the basis of visible lesions, no correction for lesion size was made. Statistical analysis showed that differences were significant; *p = 0.0199 and **p = 0.0106.
Figure 4. xPAK1 induces the loss-of-adhesion phenotype that can be suppressed by C-cadherin. (A) xPAK1 domain structure indicating the ATP binding site mutation used to inactivate the kinase domain. (B) Left panel shows examples of control embryos and embryos displaying loss of blastomere adhesion induced by xPAK1 or the KD mutant in comparison with the activated EphA4 (Epp) phenotype. The corresponding boxed regions are shown at higher magnification in the middle-left panels. The middle-right panels show manually cross-sectioned embryos, and the corresponding boxed regions are shown at higher magnification in the right panels. (C) Coexpression of xPAK1 with GFP shows that the effect of xPAK1 is restricted to the expressing cells. Visible and UV refer to incident and fluorescent light images, respectively. (D) Epp and KD-xPAK1 RNAs were coinjected with or without C-cadherin RNA, and loss-of-adhesion lesions was scored. The ratio of Epp or xPAK1 to cadherin RNA was maintained at 1-4. Scoring was on the basis of visible lesions; no correction for lesion size was made. The numbers above the histogram columns refer to the total number of embryos scored.
Figure 5. The xPAK1 loss-of-adhesion phenotype requires the GBD and is enhanced by the Nck binding site and by CAAX targeted membrane recruitment. (A) The structure of the xPAK1 mutants used. Amino acid mutations and the extent of deletion mutations are indicated as is the C-terminal CAAX extension. (B) Each xPAK1 mutant was injected and loss-of-adhesion lesions were scored. RNA injections were adjusted to give a high penetrance of the KD-xPAK1âinduced phenotype, and this same amount of each mutant RNA was then injected. Bottom panel shows relative protein expression levels as determined by Western analysis by using an antibody to the HA epitope-tag. Two regions of the same Western analysis are shown. (C) Doseâresponse relationship for increasing amounts of injected KD-L98F, KDâ, KD-Nckâ, KD-GBDâ, and KD-ÎGBD-xPAK1 RNAs. Scoring was regardless of lesion size. (D) Comparison of lesion size. Equal RNA amounts of each mutant were injected, and the sizes of loss-of-adhesion lesions were categorized relative to the total animal pole surface. The numbers above the histogram columns refer to the total number of embryos scored. (E) KD-L98F xPAK1 displays an increased affinity for GTP-Cdc42. HA-tagged xPAK1 constructs were expressed in embryo, whole extracts applied to Sepharose-bound GST-Cdc42 fusion protein precharged with GTP, and revealed by Western blotting by using the HA epitope tag.
Figure 6. The functional GBD of xPAK1 is sufficient to induce the loss-of-adhesion phenotype, but its function is enhanced by membrane targeting. (A) The structure of the GBD constructs (xPAK1 a.a. 61-85 and a.a. 61-123). (B) Phenotype of the GBD-induced lesions, left panels show external animal pole views, and right panels show sections through the lesions. (C) Binding of in vitro-translated GTP-charged wild type Cdc42 and Rac1 GTPases to the GST-immobilized xPAK1 GBDs 61-85 and 61-123. (D) Western analysis of expression levels of the GBD constructs using an antibody to the common HA epitope-tag (h embryos in 1Ã MMR and l embryos in 0.1Ã MMR). Two exposures of the same analysis are shown to increase the visible dynamic range. (E) Statistical analysis of lesion penetrance. Embryos were injected in parallel with 70, 200, or 400 pg of GBD 61-123 and GBD 61-123-CAAX RNAs. Embryos displaying obvious lesions, irrespective of size, were scored. Total number of embryos analyzed is shown above each column. In B and D, each embryo was injected with 200 pg of mutant RNA.
Figure 7. Activated Cdc42, Rac1, and RhoA rescue EphA4 induced loss-of-adhesion. (A) Epp RNA was coinjected with activated Cdc42 or Rac1 GTPases RNA (ratio 1:3) at the two-cell stage. Lower panels show corresponding sections of embryos in top panels, and corresponding boxed regions are shown at higher magnification in the bottom panels. (B) As in A, but the xPAK1-GBD 61-123 was coinjected either alone or with dominant-negative (N19) or activated RhoA (L63) (ratio 1:2). Bottom panels show sections of the corresponding embryos, and corresponding boxed regions are shown at higher magnification in the bottom panels. Typical examples of resulting embryos are shown. See Supplemental Figure 1 for sample images of dominant-negative GTPase coinjection. (C) Quantitation of Epp and GBD rescue with active and dominant-negative forms of Cdc42, Rac1, and RhoA. The numbers above the histogram columns refer the total number of embryos scored. (D) Levels of active (GTP-bound) Cdc42 in embryos expressing Epp or EppK (kinase dead Epp that does not give the loss-of-adhesion phenotype) and xPAK1 GBD constructs. Active Cdc42 levels were measured by pull-down with the xPAK1 GBD. The average of three experiments is shown. (E) Levels of active (GTP-bound) Rac1, measured as in D. The average of two experiments is shown. (F) Levels of active (GTP-bound) RhoA in embryos expressing Epp or EppK or xPAK1 GBD constructs. Active RhoA levels were measured by pull-down with the rhotekin GBD. The average of two experiments is shown.
Figure 8. DN-RhoA and DN-Rac1 also induce loss-of-adhesion. (A) Phenotypes of the DN-Cdc42 (N17), DN-Rac1 (N17), and DN-RhoA (N19) expression in embryo. Top panels show external animal pole views, middle panels show sections through the lesions, and corresponding boxed regions are shown at higher magnification in the bottom panels. Typical examples of resulting embryos are shown. (B) Histogram of the percentage of embryos displaying loss-of-adhesion lesions. Scoring was on the basis of visible lesions; no correction for lesion size was made. The same amount of GTPases was injected for all mutants. The numbers above the histogram columns refer to the total number of embryos scored over two independent experiments. For DN-Rac1, the shaded bar represents the penetrance of the distinct phenotype shown in A. (C) Confocal imaging of the actin cytoskeleton in a phalloidin-stained control embryo and in embryos undergoing Epp and xPAK1-GBD (61-123) loss-of-adhesion. The boundary of the loss-of-adhesion lesion is indicated by a dotted line.
Figure 9. Schematic diagram describing the probable mechanisms of induction of the loss-of-adhesion lesions by EphA4. Pointed arrowed lines show activating and blunt ended lines inhibitory signaling and line density indicates signaling strength.
Adler,
Abl family kinases and Cbl cooperate with the Nck adaptor to modulate Xenopus development.
2000, Pubmed,
Xenbase
Adler,
Abl family kinases and Cbl cooperate with the Nck adaptor to modulate Xenopus development.
2000,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Bagrodia,
A novel regulator of p21-activated kinases.
1998,
Pubmed
Becker,
Nck-interacting Ste20 kinase couples Eph receptors to c-Jun N-terminal kinase and integrin activation.
2000,
Pubmed
Benard,
Characterization of rac and cdc42 activation in chemoattractant-stimulated human neutrophils using a novel assay for active GTPases.
1999,
Pubmed
Bisson,
The catalytic domain of xPAK1 is sufficient to induce myosin II dependent in vivo cell fragmentation independently of other apoptotic events.
2003,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Bokoch,
Interaction of the Nck adapter protein with p21-activated kinase (PAK1).
1996,
Pubmed
Bokoch,
Biology of the p21-activated kinases.
2003,
Pubmed
Braga,
Epithelial cell shape: cadherins and small GTPases.
2000,
Pubmed
Brown,
Human Ste20 homologue hPAK1 links GTPases to the JNK MAP kinase pathway.
1996,
Pubmed
Chen,
Nckbeta adapter regulates actin polymerization in NIH 3T3 fibroblasts in response to platelet-derived growth factor bb.
2000,
Pubmed
Cooke,
EphA4 is required for cell adhesion and rhombomere-boundary formation in the zebrafish.
2005,
Pubmed
Cowan,
Ephrins in reverse, park and drive.
2002,
Pubmed
Dvorsky,
Always look on the bright site of Rho: structural implications for a conserved intermolecular interface.
2004,
Pubmed
Eden,
Mechanism of regulation of WAVE1-induced actin nucleation by Rac1 and Nck.
2002,
Pubmed
Faure,
A member of the Ste20/PAK family of protein kinases is involved in both arrest of Xenopus oocytes at G2/prophase of the first meiotic cell cycle and in prevention of apoptosis.
1997,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Fukata,
Rho-family GTPases in cadherin-mediated cell-cell adhesion.
2001,
Pubmed
Galisteo,
The adaptor protein Nck links receptor tyrosine kinases with the serine-threonine kinase Pak1.
1996,
Pubmed
Gupta,
Dominant-negative mutants of the SH2/SH3 adapters Nck and Grb2 inhibit MAP kinase activation and mesoderm-specific gene induction by eFGF in Xenopus.
1998,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Habas,
Coactivation of Rac and Rho by Wnt/Frizzled signaling is required for vertebrate gastrulation.
2003,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Hall,
Rho GTPases and the actin cytoskeleton.
1998,
Pubmed
Holland,
Juxtamembrane tyrosine residues couple the Eph family receptor EphB2/Nuk to specific SH2 domain proteins in neuronal cells.
1997,
Pubmed
Huot,
Ephrin signaling in axon guidance.
2004,
Pubmed
Irie,
EphB receptors regulate dendritic spine development via intersectin, Cdc42 and N-WASP.
2002,
Pubmed
Islam,
The cytoskeletal effector xPAK1 is expressed during both ear and lateral line development in Xenopus.
2000,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Jaffe,
Rho GTPases: biochemistry and biology.
2005,
Pubmed
Jones,
Expression of an amphibian homolog of the Eph family of receptor tyrosine kinases is developmentally regulated.
1995,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Kullander,
Mechanisms and functions of Eph and ephrin signalling.
2002,
Pubmed
Lee,
Dishevelled mediates ephrinB1 signalling in the eye field through the planar cell polarity pathway.
2006,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Lu,
Activation of Pak by membrane localization mediated by an SH3 domain from the adaptor protein Nck.
1997,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Luo,
Rho GTPases in neuronal morphogenesis.
2000,
Pubmed
Mackay,
Rho GTPases.
1998,
Pubmed
Manser,
A brain serine/threonine protein kinase activated by Cdc42 and Rac1.
1994,
Pubmed
Manser,
PAK kinases are directly coupled to the PIX family of nucleotide exchange factors.
1998,
Pubmed
Maruta,
Rho family-associated kinases PAK1 and rock.
2003,
Pubmed
Mellitzer,
Eph receptors and ephrins restrict cell intermingling and communication.
1999,
Pubmed
Morreale,
Structure of Cdc42 bound to the GTPase binding domain of PAK.
2000,
Pubmed
Murai,
'Eph'ective signaling: forward, reverse and crosstalk.
2003,
Pubmed
Nobes,
Rho, rac, and cdc42 GTPases regulate the assembly of multimolecular focal complexes associated with actin stress fibers, lamellipodia, and filopodia.
1995,
Pubmed
Noren,
Eph receptor-ephrin bidirectional signals that target Ras and Rho proteins.
2004,
Pubmed
Obermeier,
PAK promotes morphological changes by acting upstream of Rac.
1998,
Pubmed
Pasquale,
Eph receptor signalling casts a wide net on cell behaviour.
2005,
Pubmed
Penzes,
Rapid induction of dendritic spine morphogenesis by trans-synaptic ephrinB-EphB receptor activation of the Rho-GEF kalirin.
2003,
Pubmed
Poitras,
PAK interacts with NCK and MLK2 to regulate the activation of jun N-terminal kinase.
2003,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Poitras,
A tissue restricted role for the Xenopus Jun N-terminal kinase kinase kinase MLK2 in cement gland and pronephric tubule differentiation.
2003,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Poliakov,
Diverse roles of eph receptors and ephrins in the regulation of cell migration and tissue assembly.
2004,
Pubmed
Rao,
Domain requirements for the Dock adapter protein in growth- cone signaling.
1998,
Pubmed
Rivera,
Inducible clustering of membrane-targeted SH3 domains of the adaptor protein Nck triggers localized actin polymerization.
2004,
Pubmed
Sahin,
Eph-dependent tyrosine phosphorylation of ephexin1 modulates growth cone collapse.
2005,
Pubmed
Scales,
Novel members of the eph receptor tyrosine kinase subfamily expressed during Xenopus development.
1995,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Shamah,
EphA receptors regulate growth cone dynamics through the novel guanine nucleotide exchange factor ephexin.
2001,
Pubmed
Smith,
The EphA4 and EphB1 receptor tyrosine kinases and ephrin-B2 ligand regulate targeted migration of branchial neural crest cells.
1997,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Stein,
Nck recruitment to Eph receptor, EphB1/ELK, couples ligand activation to c-Jun kinase.
1998,
Pubmed
Steinberg,
Adhesion in development: an historical overview.
1996,
Pubmed
Tanaka,
Association of Dishevelled with Eph tyrosine kinase receptor and ephrin mediates cell repulsion.
2003,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Tanaka,
Expression of mutated Nck SH2/SH3 adaptor respecifies mesodermal cell fate in Xenopus laevis development.
1997,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Tepass,
Cell sorting in animal development: signalling and adhesive mechanisms in the formation of tissue boundaries.
2002,
Pubmed
Thompson,
Delineation of the Cdc42/Rac-binding domain of p21-activated kinase.
1998,
Pubmed
Vadlamudi,
Filamin is essential in actin cytoskeletal assembly mediated by p21-activated kinase 1.
2002,
Pubmed
Weinstein,
Src family kinase function during early Xenopus development.
2001,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Wilson,
The structure of an antigenic determinant in a protein.
1984,
Pubmed
Winning,
Pagliaccio, a member of the Eph family of receptor tyrosine kinase genes, has localized expression in a subset of neural crest and neural tissues in Xenopus laevis embryos.
1994,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Winning,
Disruption of cell adhesion in Xenopus embryos by Pagliaccio, an Eph-class receptor tyrosine kinase.
1996,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Winning,
EphA4 catalytic activity causes inhibition of RhoA GTPase in Xenopus laevis embryos.
2002,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase
Winning,
EphA4 activity causes cell shape change and a loss of cell polarity in Xenopus laevis embryos.
2001,
Pubmed
,
Xenbase