Previous Article | Next Article 
Mol Cell Biol, August 1998, p. 4689-4697, Vol. 18, No. 8
0270-7306/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
CDC42 and FGD1 Cause Distinct Signaling and
Transforming Activities
Ian P.
Whitehead,1 *
Karon
Abe,1
Jerome L.
Gorski,2 and
Channing
J.
Der1
Department of Pharmacology and Lineberger
Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina School of
Medicine, Chapel Hill, North Carolina
27599-7295,1 and
Departments of Human
Genetics and Pediatrics, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor,
Michigan 48109-06882
Received 9 January 1998/Returned for modification 6 March
1998/Accepted 29 May 1998
 |
ABSTRACT |
Activated forms of different Rho family members (CDC42, Rac1, RhoA,
RhoB, and RhoG) have been shown to transform NIH 3T3 cells as well as
contribute to Ras transformation. Rho family guanine nucleotide
exchange factors (GEFs) (also known as Dbl family proteins) that
activate CDC42, Rac1, and RhoA also demonstrate oncogenic potential.
The faciogenital dysplasia gene product, FGD1, is a Dbl family member
that has recently been shown to function as a CDC42-specific GEF.
Mutations within the FGD1 locus cosegregate with
faciogenital dysplasia, a multisystemic disorder resulting in extensive
growth impairments throughout the skeletal and urogenital systems. Here
we demonstrate that FGD1 expression is sufficient to cause tumorigenic
transformation of NIH 3T3 fibroblasts. Although both FGD1 and
constitutively activated CDC42 cooperated with Raf and showed
synergistic focus-forming activity, both quantitative and qualitative
differences in their functions were seen. FGD1 and CDC42 also activated
common nuclear signaling pathways. However, whereas both showed
comparable activation of c-Jun, CDC42 showed stronger activation of
serum response factor and FGD1 was consistently a better activator of
Elk-1. Although coexpression of FGD1 with specific inhibitors of CDC42
function demonstrated the dependence of FGD1 signaling activity on
CDC42 function, FGD1 signaling activities were not always consistent
with the direct or exclusive stimulation of CDC42 function. In summary,
FGD1 and CDC42 signaling and transformation are distinct, thus
suggesting that FGD1 may be mediating some of its biological activities
through non-CDC42 targets.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The Rho subfamily of Ras-related
GTPases (14 mammalian members) controls multiple aspects of cell
behavior, including cytoskeletal rearrangement, nuclear signaling, and
cell growth (reviewed in reference 67). For example,
CDC42 mediates the induction of actin microspikes and filopodia by
bradykinin (26, 33), whereas Rac1 is required for growth
factor-induced membrane ruffling and lamellipodia formation
(47). In contrast, RhoA regulates the formation of actin
stress fibers (46). In Swiss 3T3 cells, the assembly of
these structures involves a cascade in which CDC42 activates Rac1,
which in turn activates RhoA (33). Rho family proteins also
have demonstrated roles in the regulation of gene expression as
measured by (i) the transcriptional activation of the serum response
factor (SRF) (19), (ii) activation of c-Jun NH2-terminal kinase (JNK) and its downstream target c-Jun
(10, 32, 35), (iii) activation of the ternary complex factor
protein Elk-1 (62), (iv) activation of p38/Mpk2
(63), and (v) regulation of expression from the cyclin D1
promoter (55). Finally, there is growing evidence that the
deregulated expression of Rho family members has profound effects on
the proliferative potential of cells. Activated derivatives of RhoA,
RhoB, Rac1, and CDC42 cause oncogenic transformation when expressed in
rodent fibroblast cell lines and may contribute to Ras-mediated
malignant transformation (23, 39, 41, 42, 53, 67).
Rho family GTPases function as regulated switches that cycle between a
biologically active GTP-bound and an inactive GDP-bound form
(5). They are activated by guanine nucleotide exchange factors (GEFs) that catalyze the exchange of bound GDP for GTP and
inactivated by GTPase-activating proteins that stimulate GTP hydrolysis
(4). The Dbl-related proteins are a large family of
structurally related molecules that have a common ability to catalyze
GEF activity for specific members of the Rho family (7, 59).
Like activated derivatives of their putative GTPase targets, catalytically active derivatives of many Dbl-related proteins are
highly oncogenic, promoting tumor growth in nude mice.
The region of sequence similarity that defines members of the Dbl
family consists of a Dbl homology (DH) domain arranged in tandem with a
pleckstrin homology (PH) domain. An intact DH domain is essential for
the GEF activity of the Dbl protein (the mammalian prototype of the Dbl
family) as well as for the transforming activity of many Dbl family
proteins (20, 31, 48, 57, 58, 60). The PH domain also
mediates the transforming activity of Dbl-related proteins, in part, by
targeting them to specific cellular locations (58, 65).
FGD1 was determined by positional cloning to be the gene
responsible for faciogenital dysplasia (FGDY) (also known as
Aarskog-Scott syndrome), an X-linked skeletal dysplasia first described
in 1970 (1). Mutations at the FGDY locus alter the size and
shape of a number of small bones and cartilage elements but leave other skeletal structures unaffected (15, 16). The cardinal
features of this disease include widely spaced eyes (hypertelorism),
ptosis, down-slanting palpebral fissures, dysplastic ears,
maxillary hypoplasia, and disproportionate acromelic short stature;
radiographic abnormalities include maxillary and mandibular hypoplasia,
hypoplastic phalanges, retarded bone maturation, and a variety of
vertebral anomalies including cervical spina bifida occulta and
odontoid hypoplasia (15, 16). These observations suggest
that, like the genes responsible for the mouse mutations short ear
(25) and brachypodism (50), FGD1 acts
on a limited number of mesenchymal condensations during skeletogenesis
(16).
The FGDY gene product (FGD1) encodes tandem DH and PH domains
(38) and has been shown recently to encode GEF activity
specific for CDC42 (64). Microinjection of FGD1 into Swiss
3T3 cells induces the formation of filopodial extensions consistent
with the in vivo activation of CDC42 (36). The demonstrated
relationship between FGD1 and CDC42 function suggests that they may
have a common ability to regulate signaling pathways that influence
cell growth, cell cycle progression, and transcription.
Although CDC42 involvement in the regulation of cell morphology and
gene expression has been well documented (10, 19, 26, 33),
its contribution, if any, to proliferative signaling pathways remains
unclear. The stable expression of the constitutively activated,
GTPase-defective CDC42(12V) mutant has been shown to be growth
inhibitory in NIH 3T3 cells (28) yet growth promoting in
Rat-1 cells (40). In contrast, a recent report indicates that an NIH 3T3 cell line that has been stably transfected with a
second constitutively activated CDC42 mutant [CDC42(F28L)] exhibits many of the hallmarks of transformation (28). This suggests that constitutively activated mutants of CDC42 do not have equivalent activities in biological assays and that they do not necessarily mimic
activation of endogenous CDC42 by a GEF. The latter point is
illustrated by our recent observation that Dbl family members whose in
vitro exchange activities include CDC42 exhibit potent focus-forming
activity in NIH 3T3 cells whereas activated derivatives of their
putative GTPase targets do not ((56); unpublished
observations). Thus, it is unclear whether FGD1 would regulate
signaling pathways leading to cell proliferation and transformation or
pathways that trigger growth inhibition.
In the present study we have compared the abilities of activated
derivatives of CDC42 and FGD1 to transform NIH 3T3 mouse fibroblasts
and their abilities to stimulate the activation of nuclear signaling
pathways. NIH 3T3 cells were used in these studies, because they are an
embryonic fibroblast cell line and our in situ analyses have revealed
that the highest level of FGD1 expression occurs during development in
mesenchymal condensations (unpublished observations). FGD1 expression
is first detected prior to the differentiation of chondrocytes and
osteoblasts, when mesenchymal condensations are comprised almost
exclusively of embryonic fibroblast cells (17). Whereas both
FGD1 and CDC42 can cause growth transformation of NIH 3T3 cells, they
do so in qualitatively and quantitatively distinct manners. Similarly,
both FGD1 and CDC42 exhibit distinct signaling profiles when assayed
for their ability to stimulate the activation of nuclear signalling
pathways mediated by SRF, Elk-1, and c-Jun. Although the stimulation of
these transcriptional activities by FGD1 occurs in a CDC42-dependent
manner, they cannot always be attributed to direct or exclusive
stimulation of CDC42 function. In summary, our comparison of CDC42 and
FGD1 transforming and signaling activities suggests that FGD1 may
regulate some of these activities through non-CDC42 targets.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Molecular constructs.
pRK5-myc-FGD1
(36) encodes the tandem DH and PH domains of the FGD1
protein (residues 375 to 710) fused at the NH2 terminus to
a Myc epitope tag. pRK5-myc-FGD1
(36) encodes
a naturally occurring splice variant of FGD1 that contains a
deletion within the DH domain; it encodes a derivative with the same
NH2 and COOH termini as pRK5-myc-FGD1 but is
missing residues 398 to 433 (37). pAX142-myc-FGD1
and pAX142-myc-FGD1
were made by isolating the ScaI/EcoRI inserts from pRK5-myc-FGD1
and pRK5-myc-FGD1
, respectively, filling in the ends of
the fragments with T4 DNA polymerase, and ligating into pAX142
(58) digested with SmaI.
pAX142-lsc-D7HA (56) and
pAX142-Dbl-HA1 (56) encode transforming
derivatives of the Lsc and Dbl proteins, respectively, fused in frame
at the NH2 terminus to an epitope from the hemagglutinin
(HA) protein of influenza virus. The cDNA sequences encoding wild-type
Rac1 and RhoA, dominant-inhibitory RhoA [RhoA(19N)], and
dominant-inhibitory CDC42 [CDC42(17N)] were removed from the
pZIP-NeoSV(x)1 vector (24) and inserted into the
SmaI site of pAX142. pAX142-cdc42(12V) encodes a constitutively activated derivative of the CDC42 protein (kindly provided by R. Cerione) inserted into the SmaI site
of pAX142. pcDNA3-HA-cdc42 encodes wild-type CDC42 protein
fused at the NH2 terminus to an HA epitope (kindly provided
by S. Bagrodia and R. Cerione). pZIP-raf(340D)
(24) encodes a weakly transforming, activated derivative of
the Raf-1 kinase. pyDF30-WASP-GBD encodes the GTPase binding
domain (GBD) of WASP (the product of the Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome
locus) and was kindly provided by M. Symons (40). WASP was
shown recently to be a CDC42-specific effector (3, 52). The
cDNA sequences encoding
-galactosidase were removed from pcDNA3.1/His/lacZ (Invitrogen) and inserted into the
SmaI site of pAX142.
Cell culture, transfection, and transformation assays.
NIH
3T3 cells were maintained in Dulbecco's modified Eagle medium (high
glucose) supplemented with 10% calf bovine serum. Primary focus
formation assays were performed in NIH 3T3 cells exactly as described
previously (9). Briefly, NIH 3T3 cells were transfected by
calcium phosphate coprecipitation in conjunction with a glycerol shock.
Focus formation was scored at 14 days. Cognate empty vectors for each
construct were employed as controls. NIH 3T3 cell lines that stably
express pRK5, pRK5-myc-FGD1, and pRK5-myc-FGD1
were generated by calcium phosphate coprecipitation followed by
selection for 14 days in growth medium supplemented with G418 (200 µg/ml). Multiple drug-resistant colonies (>100) were pooled together
to establish cell lines for the transformation assays. For secondary
focus assays 103 stably selected cells were mixed with
106 untransfected NIH 3T3 cells and then plated on
60-mm-diameter dishes. Foci were scored at 7 days.
Anchorage-independent growth and tumorigenicity in nude mice were
measured as described previously (9, 34). For soft agar
assays and primary and secondary focus formation assays, experiments
were performed in triplicate.
Transient-expression reporter gene assays.
For
transient-expression reporter assays, NIH 3T3 cells were transfected by
calcium phosphate coprecipitation, allowed to recover for 30 h,
and starved in Dulbecco's modified Eagle medium with 0.5% newborn
calf serum for 14 h before lysate preparation (9, 18,
54). Analysis of luciferase expression in transiently transfected
NIH 3T3 cells was performed as previously described by using enhanced
chemiluminescence reagents and a Monolight 2010 luminometer (Analytical
Luminescence, San Diego, Calif.) (18). The reporter
constructs utilized have been described previously: Gal4-Elk-1
(30) and 5×Gal4-luc (51), Gal-Jun(1-223)
(51), (SREm-)2Luc (55), and CD1-Luc
(2).
-Galactosidase activity in transiently transfected
NIH 3T3 cells was determined exactly as described previously
(29). All assays were performed in triplicate.
Western blotting.
Expression of Myc-epitope-tagged FGD1
proteins in transiently transfected 293 cells and in stably selected
NIH 3T3 cell lines was determined by Western blot analysis as described
previously (58) by using the 9E10 antibody (Santa Cruz
Biotech). Membranes were incubated with horseradish peroxidase-labeled
anti-mouse secondary antibodies, and protein was visualized with
enhanced chemiluminescence reagents (Amersham).
 |
RESULTS |
FGD1 and Raf cooperate to transform NIH 3T3 mouse fibroblasts.
Although FGD1 expression alters the actin cytoskeleton in a manner
consistent with the in vivo activation of CDC42 (36), its
role, if any, in the regulation of cell proliferation has not yet been
determined. To investigate the role of the FGD1 protein in the control
of cell growth, we compared the effects of expressing catalytically
active derivatives of FGD1 and CDC42 on the proliferative properties of
NIH 3T3 mouse fibroblasts. During murine development FGD1 expression is
first detected in cellular condensations that are comprised exclusively
of fibroblasts (unpublished observations). pAX142-myc-FGD1
encodes a fragment of the FGD1 protein that exhibits in vitro GEF
activity specific for the CDC42 protein (64) and induces the
formation of filopodia when injected into Swiss 3T3 cells
(36). pAX142-cdc42(12V) encodes an
activated derivative of CDC42 that has been shown previously to be
transforming in Rat-1 but not NIH 3T3 cells. To assess the relationship
between GEF and transforming activity, we also examined the
transforming properties of pAX142-myc-FGD1
, which encodes
a biologically inactive peptide derived from a naturally occurring
splice variant of the FGD1 protein (37). FGD1
is
identical to FGD1 except that it harbors a small deletion (residues 398 to 433) within the DH domain.
Initially, we compared the abilities of FGD1, FGD1
, and CDC42(12V)
to induce the formation of foci in a primary focus formation assay. At
DNA concentrations up to 5 µg/60-mm-diameter plate, pAX142-cdc42(12V), pAX142-myc-FGD1,
and pAX142-myc-FGD1
failed to induce focus formation when
transfected into NIH 3T3 cells (Fig. 1a).
In this respect, FGD1 differs from other Dbl family members that encode
GEF activity for CDC42, such as the Dbl and Dbs oncoproteins
(56). Activated derivatives of Dbl and Dbs exhibit potent
transforming activity in primary focus formation assays
(56).

View larger version (82K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
CDC42(12V) and FGD1 cooperate with Raf-1 in NIH 3T3
focus formation assays. (a) NIH 3T3 cells were cotransfected with
pZIP-NeoSV(x)1 or pAX142 expression plasmids encoding the indicated
proteins. Five hundred nanograms of each construct was transfected per
60-mm-diameter dish. Foci of transformed cells were counted at 14 days.
Data shown are from one experiment performed in duplicate and are
representative of three independent experiments. Error bars, standard
errors. (b) FGD1 and CDC42(12V) cooperate with Raf(340D) to cause
transformed foci with distinct morphologic appearances. Foci were
photographed under phase microscopy at 14 days.
|
|
We and others have shown that activated derivatives of the Dbl and Rho
families can synergistically interact with activated
Raf-1 to induce
potent focus formation in NIH 3T3 cells (
22,
24,
41,
42). In
addition, it has been shown that dominant-inhibitory
versions of CDC42,
Rac1, RhoA, RhoB, and RhoG can block the transforming
activity of Ras
(
23,
27,
39-42,
49). To further investigate
the oncogenic
potential of FGD1, we compared the abilities of
FGD1 and CDC42 to
cooperate with Raf-1 in an NIH 3T3 cell focus
formation assay. For this
analysis we utilized a weakly activated
derivative of Raf-1
[Raf(340D)] that has been shown previously
to have very weak activity
in a focus formation assay (
24).
Whereas the expression of
either FGD1 or Raf(340D) alone produced
relatively few foci,
coexpression of FGD1 and Raf(340D) caused
a >15-fold enhancement of
focus-forming activity (Fig.
1a). A
much weaker cooperativity
(threefold) was observed when we coexpressed
Raf(340D) with CDC42(12V),
and no cooperativity was observed between
Raf(340D) and FGD1

or the
empty pRK5 vector control.
Interestingly, the morphology of the foci induced by Raf in cooperation
with FGD1 (Raf + FGD1-induced foci) was strikingly
different from
the morphology of the Raf + CDC42-induced foci
(Fig.
1b). The
Raf + FGD1-induced foci had a swirled morphology,
contained
elongated and highly refractile cells, and were indistinguishable
in
appearance from foci induced by activated Raf or Ras alone
(data not
shown). In contrast, Raf + CDC42-induced foci lacked
refractile
cells and exhibited the more dense, stellate morphology
reminiscent of
transformed foci induced by Rho and Dbl family
proteins. Based on the
clear differences we observe between FGD1
and CDC42 (both quantitative
and qualitative) in these cooperation
assays, we conclude that either
the
cdc42(
12V) mutation does not
precisely mimic
activation of CDC42 by FGD1 or the FGD1 protein
has an in vivo
signaling activity that is distinct from CDC42
activation.
Stable expression of FGD1 in NIH 3T3 cells is sufficient to cause
anchorage independence and tumorigenic transformation.
To further
examine the effects of FGD1 expression on cell growth, we established
stable lines of NIH 3T3 cells that constitutively express FGD1. NIH 3T3
cells were stably transfected with pRK5-myc-FGD1, pRK5-myc-FGD1
, or the empty pRK5 vector control, and then
multiple G418-resistant colonies were pooled. Numerous G418-resistant
colonies were selected from FGD1-transfected cells, and we were able to readily detect expression of FGD1 protein (Fig.
2A). In contrast, relatively few
G418-resistant colonies were obtained from the FGD1
-transfected
cells and we were unable to select cell populations in which we could
detect expression of the protein. The failure to detect expression of
FGD1
was not due to inherent instability of the protein, since good
expression was observed in transiently transfected 293 cells (Fig. 2A).
A more likely explanation is that FGD1
is either toxic or growth
inhibitory when constitutively expressed in NIH 3T3 cells.

View larger version (54K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
FGD1 causes growth transformation of NIH 3T3 cells. NIH
3T3 cells were transfected with 3 µg of pRK5 or
pRK5-myc-FGD1 and then selected for 14 days with
G418-containing growth medium (200 µg/ml). (a) Expression of FGD1 and
FGD1 . The upper panel shows FGD1 expression in a stably selected NIH
3T3 cell line. The lower panel shows transient expression of FGD1 and
FGD1 in 293 cells. Expression was determined by Western blot
analysis using an anti-Myc antibody (9E10; Santa Cruz Biotech). (b) NIH
3T3 cells that constitutively express FGD1 cause Rho-like transformed
foci in a secondary focus formation assay. Stably selected cells
(103) were mixed with 106 untransformed cells
and then plated. Foci were counted and photographed at 7 days. (c) FGD1
promotes anchorage-independent growth in soft agar when constitutively
expressed in NIH 3T3 cells. The FGD1-transfected cell line was seeded
at 5 × 104 cells per 60-mm-diameter dish in growth
medium containing 0.3% agar over a base layer of 0.6%. Colonies were
counted and photographed at 21 days.
|
|
Although cell populations expressing FGD1 exhibited no obvious
morphological transformation compared to cells transfected
with vector
alone (not shown), the FGD1-expressing cell line exhibited
significant
secondary focus formation and growth in soft agar
(Table
1 and Fig.
2B
and C). The focus morphology associated
with FGD1 expression (Fig.
2B)
is typical of Dbl family members
and is reminiscent of the focus
morphology that is associated
with activated derivatives of RhoA or
Rac1 in NIH 3T3 cells (
23).
We also examined the
FGD1-expressing cells for tumorigenicity
in nude mice. Cells expressing
FGD1 showed rapid tumor formation,
while vector control lines did not
(Table
1). We conclude that
the
expression of a catalytically active derivative of FGD1 disrupts
the
growth properties of NIH 3T3 fibroblasts and is sufficient
for
tumorigenic transformation.
FGD1 and CDC42 show differing abilities to activate the SRF, Elk-1,
and c-Jun transcription factors.
The distinct biological
activities of FGD1 and CDC42 seen in the Raf cooperativity studies
suggested that their signaling activities may also be distinct. To
address this question, we compared the abilities of FGD1 and CDC42 to
activate the c-Jun and Elk-1 transcription factors and to stimulate
transcription from the cyclin D1 promoter. We also compared their
abilities to stimulate transcription from a mutant serum response
element (from the c-fos promoter) that is only responsive to
SRF activation. We have shown previously that Dbl family members
(including those with GEF activity for CDC42) have a common ability to
activate these four transcriptional reporters (56;
unpublished observations).
Both FGD1 and CDC42(12V) stimulated transcription from the SRF, c-Jun,
and Gal-Elk reporters but showed negligible activation
of the cyclin D1
reporter (Fig.
3). Under identical
conditions,
good activation of cyclin D1 transcription was observed
with an
activated derivative of Dbl (Dbl-HA1), which is in accordance
with our previous observations (
56). Although FGD1 and
FGD1
are expressed at equivalent levels when transiently expressed
(Fig.
2A), in no instance did we observe signaling activity associated
with FGD1

, thus indicating the dependence of these signaling
events
on FGD1-encoded GEF activity. Although both CDC42 and FGD1
stimulated
the same reporters, their relative degrees of activity
differed for
each assay. Stimulation of SRF by CDC42 was consistently
10-fold higher
than that by FGD1, whereas both exhibited roughly
equivalent
stimulation of c-Jun. In contrast, FGD1 consistently
stimulated higher
levels of Elk-1 activity (threefold) than that
by CDC42. This suggests
that the stimulation of these reporters
by FGD1 and CDC42 may not be
attributable to a common mechanism
of activation and again suggests
that FGD1 may encode biological
activities that are not mimicked by the
CDC42(12V) mutant protein.

View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
FGD1 and CDC42 stimulate transcription from common
promoter elements. NIH 3T3 cells were transfected with 1.5 µg of
pAX142, pAX142-myc-FGD1, pAX142-myc-FGD1 , or
pAX142-cdc42(12V) along with luciferase gene
reporter constructs for SRF transcriptional activity (2.5 µg) (A),
c-Jun transcriptional activity (500 ng of Gal-Jun and 2.5 µg 5×Gal)
(B), Elk-1 transcriptional activity (500 ng of Gal-Elk and 2.5 µg of
5×Gal) (C), or cyclin-D1 transcription (2.5 µg of CD1-luciferase)
(D). Following transfection, cells were cultured for 30 h and then
serum starved (0.5% calf serum) for 14 h before extract
preparation. Luciferase activity was determined and expressed as fold
activation relative to the level of activation seen with the vector
controls. Data shown are representative of three independent
experiments performed on duplicate plates. Error bars, standard
errors.
|
|
FGD1 cooperates with Raf(340D) to activate Elk-1 but not SRF or
c-Jun.
The synergistic interaction that we have observed between
Raf(340D) and FGD1 in a primary focus formation assay may be the consequence of cooperativity in the activation of transcriptional pathways. c-Jun and Elk-1 are activated by distinct mitogen-activated protein kinase cascades (e.g., JNK, p38, and extracellular
signal-related kinase [ERK]) that have been implicated in the
regulation of transforming pathways in NIH 3T3 cells (reviewed in
reference 67). In addition, we have shown previously
that the activation of SRF-mediated pathways correlates well with the
transforming activity of Dbl family members and, in particular, those
that have GEF activity for CDC42 (56). To assess possible
contributions of SRF-, c-Jun-, and Elk-1-mediated pathways to FGD1
transforming activity, we examined whether Raf(340D) cooperates with
FGD1 to activate these response elements.
Both activated CDC42 and FGD1 cooperated with Raf to activate the Elk-1
responsive element (four- and threefold above additive
levels,
respectively), but little or no cooperation was observed
in the SRF or
c-Jun assays (Fig.
4). This suggests that
Elk-1-mediated
signaling, but not that mediated by SRF or c-Jun, may
contribute
to FGD1- and CDC42-mediated transforming activity. However,
since
both FGD1 and CDC42 cooperate with Raf to activate Elk-1, this
activation cannot fully account for the qualitative and quantitative
differences that we have observed in CDC42 + Raf and FGD1 + Raf
focus assays. Even though the cooperation between FGD1 and Raf
in
the Elk-1 assay is consistently higher than that between CDC42
and Raf,
it is unlikely that this marginal difference (four- versus
threefold)
in activity can fully account for these striking differences.
We
conclude that the differences in transforming potency that
we observed
between FGD1 and CDC42 are attributable to the differential
activation
of additional signaling pathways that we have not yet
identified.

View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 4.
FGD1 and CDC42(12V) cooperate with Raf to stimulate
Elk-1 but not SRF or c-Jun transcriptional activity. NIH 3T3 cells were
cotransfected with pAX142 or pZIP-NeoSV(x)1 (500 ng) expression
plasmids encoding the indicated proteins along with luciferase gene
reporter constructs for SRF transcriptional activity (2.5 µg) (A),
c-Jun transcriptional activity (500 ng of Gal-Jun and 2.5 µg of
5×Gal) (B), or Elk-1 transcriptional activity (500 ng of Gal-Elk and
2.5 µg of 5×Gal) (C). Transcriptional assays were performed as
described in the legend to Fig. 3. Data shown are representative of
three independent experiments performed on duplicate plates. Error
bars, standard errors.
|
|
FGD1 activates Elk-1, SRF, and c-Jun via CDC42-regulated
pathways.
Our observation that FGD1 and CDC42 have differing
abilities to stimulate transcriptional and transforming events suggests that not all FGD1 activity is mediated by its interactions with CDC42.
To explore this possibility further, we wished to determine if FGD1
stimulation of transcription from the Elk-1, c-Jun, and SRF reporters
is impaired by coexpression with specific inhibitors of CDC42 function.
pAX142-cdc42(17N) encodes a GTPase-defective dominant-inhibitory mutant of CDC42 (provided by R. Cerione). pyDF30-WASP-GBD encodes the GBD of WASP (an effector protein
specific for CDC42) and has been shown to specifically inhibit CDC42-
and FGD1-mediated cytoskeletal rearrangements (36, 40, 52). Coexpression of FGD1 with either WASP-GBD or CDC42(17N) markedly inhibits its ability to activate SRF, Elk-1, or c-Jun (Fig.
5). To test for possible toxicity of
either WASP-GBD or CDC42(17N), we cotransfected NIH 3T3 cells with
pAX142-
-galactosidase and either
pyDF30-WASP-GBD or pAX142-cdc42(17N).
-Galactosidase activity was equivalent in cells transfected with
pyDF30-WASP-GBD, with pAX142-cdc42(17N), or with vector alone (data not
shown), thus indicating that WASP-GBD and CDC42(17N) do not kill NIH
3T3 cells in transient assays and that they do not inhibit expression
from the pAX142-encoded EF1-
promoter. Thus, we conclude that
WASP-GBD and CDC42(17N) inhibition is specific and that FGD1 activates c-Jun, Elk-1, and SRF via CDC42-regulated pathways.

View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 5.
FGD1 stimulates SRF, Elk-1, and c-Jun activity in a
CDC42-dependent manner. NIH 3T3 cells were cotransfected with
expression plasmids encoding the indicated proteins (1.5 µg of
pAX142, pAX142-myc-FGD1,
pAX142-cdc42(12V), or
pAX142-cdc42(17N); 0.25 µg of pyDF30 or
pyDF30-WASP-GBD) along with luciferase gene reporter
constructs for SRF transcriptional activity (2.5 µg) (A), c-Jun
transcriptional activity (500 ng of Gal-Jun and 2.5 µg of 5×Gal)
(B), or Elk-1 transcriptional activity (500 ng of Gal-Elk and 2.5 µg
of 5×Gal) (C). Transcriptional assays were performed as described in
the legend to Fig. 3. Data shown are representative of three
independent experiments performed on duplicate plates. Error bars,
standard error.
|
|
FGD1 activates Elk-1 and SRF but not c-Jun by direct interaction
with CDC42.
We and others have shown that Ras GEFs can stimulate
the activity of wild-type Ras to activate transcription from
Ras-responsive promoter elements (8, 43, 44). To determine
if FGD1 regulates transcriptional activation via direct stimulation of
CDC42, we measured FGD1 activation of the Elk-1, Jun, and SRF reporters in the presence of wild-type CDC42. To more precisely measure cooperativity due to synergy, we determined the titers of CDC42 and
FGD1 DNA used in these transfections to a level (500 ng) at which they
exhibited low transcriptional activity when transfected alone (Fig.
6a). Under these transfection conditions,
we observed that FGD1 acted synergistically with wild-type CDC42 to
cause transcriptional activation of Elk-1 and SRF (3-fold and 10-fold above additive levels, respectively) but not c-Jun (Fig. 6a). Interestingly, a strongly transforming derivative of Dbl that is
consistently more active in Elk-1, c-Jun, and SRF assays than FGD1
(Fig. 6a compares 50 ng of Dbl-HA1 to 500 ng of FGD1) failed to
synergize with wild-type CDC42 in the Elk-1 assays yet showed weak
cooperativity in the c-Jun and SRF assays. This suggests that Dbl
family exchange factors with equivalent in vitro substrates may
interact with these substrates, in vivo, in a biologically distinct
manner. It further suggests that activation of the JNK pathway by FGD1,
although clearly CDC42 dependent, may also require FGD1-mediated
signaling events that are independent of CDC42. A plasmid construct
encoding an activated derivative of Lsc, a Dbl family protein with GEF
activity for RhoA, but not CDC42 (14, 60) failed to
cooperate with wild-type CDC42 in these signaling assays, thus
indicating the specificity of the synergy for CDC42 GEFs.

View larger version (25K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 6.
FGD1 cooperates with RhoA and CDC42 but not Rac1 to
stimulate transcriptional response elements. NIH 3T3 cells were
cotransfected with pAX142 expression plasmids encoding the indicated
proteins (0.5 µg of pAX142, pAX142-cdc42,
pAX142-FGD1, pAX142-lsc-D7HA, and
pAX142-Dbl-HA1 [a] or 0.5 µg of pAX142,
pAX142-FGD1, pAX142-rhoA, pAX142-rac1,
or pAX142-cdc42 [b]) along with luciferase gene reporter
constructs for SRF transcriptional activity (2.5 µg) (A), c-Jun
transcriptional activity (500 ng of Gal-Jun and 2.5 µg of 5×Gal)
(B), or Elk-1 transcriptional activity (500 ng of Gal-Elk and 2.5 µg
of 5×Gal) (C). Transcriptional assays were performed as described in
the legend to Fig. 3. Data shown are representative of three
independent experiments performed on duplicate plates. Error bars,
standard errors.
|
|
Finally, we wished to determine if FGD1 could cooperate with Rho family
GTPases other than CDC42 in signaling assays. We observed
that under
conditions under which FGD1 cooperated with CDC42 in
SRF and Elk-1
assays, FGD1 did not cooperate with wild-type Rac1
(Fig.
6b).
Interestingly, cooperativity was observed between FGD1
and wild-type
RhoA in the SRF assay (threefold above additivity)
but not in the c-Jun
or Elk-1 assays. The cooperativity between
FGD1 and RhoA, although less
striking than that between FGD1 and
CDC42, may reflect weak in vivo
exchange activity of FGD1 for
RhoA. In support of this we observed that
FGD1-mediated stimulation
of transcription from the SRF and Elk-1
reporters but not the
c-Jun reporter is impaired by coexpression with
RhoA(19N), a dominant-inhibitory
mutant of the RhoA protein (Fig.
7).

View larger version (11K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 7.
FGD1 stimulates SRF and Elk-1 but not c-Jun activity in
a RhoA-dependent manner. NIH 3T3 cells were cotransfected with
expression plasmids encoding the indicated proteins [1.5 µg of
pAX142, pAX142-myc-FGD1, and
pAX142-rhoA(19N)] along with luciferase gene
reporter constructs for SRF transcriptional activity (2.5 µg) (A),
c-Jun transcriptional activity (500 ng of Gal-Jun and 2.5 µg of
5×Gal) (B), or Elk-1 transcriptional activity (500 ng of Gal-Elk and
2.5 µg of 5×Gal) (C). Transcriptional assays were performed as
described in the legend to Fig. 3. Data shown are representative of
three independent experiments performed on duplicate plates. Error
bars, standard errors.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
Disruption of the FGD1 locus by translocation or
premature truncation has been detected in patients that suffer from
FGDY (also referred to as Aarskog-Scott syndrome) (38). Loss
of the FGD1 locus is associated with a characteristic
pattern of growth impairment during development of the skeletal system,
thus suggesting that FGD1-mediated signaling pathways may play a
crucial role in this process (1, 15, 16). FGD1 is expressed
during development in the embryonic fibroblasts that comprise the early
mesenchymal condensations (unpublished observations). Mesenchymal
condensations form by a variety of mechanisms, including increased
mitotic activity and the aggregation of cells towards a center
(17). Our observation that FGD1 expression can disrupt the
proliferative properties of NIH 3T3 cells suggests that FGD1 may be a
necessary component of growth control pathways that regulate the
establishment of these condensations during normal embryonic
development. We have shown that expression of the FGD1 gene
product in NIH 3T3 cells is sufficient to cause tumorigenic
transformation as well as to activate transcription factors (SRF,
Elk-1, and c-Jun) which have demonstrated roles in the regulation of
cell growth. In addition, FGD1 synergizes strongly with Raf in
transformation assays. The synergy between FGD1 and Raf in
transformation assays is associated with an increase in Elk-1 but not
SRF or c-Jun activation, thus suggesting that activation of SRF or
c-Jun is not necessary for this synergistic interaction.
Whereas the transcriptional activation of c-Jun by FGD1 is consistent
with the previous observation that FGD1 is a good stimulator of JNK
activity (36, 64), it is unclear by which mechanism FGD1 is
stimulating Elk-1 activity. Elk-1 is a target for the mitogen-activated
protein kinases ERK (11, 12, 21), JNK (6, 13, 61, 62,
66), and p38 (45, 62). It is unlikely that FGD1
activation of Elk-1 is mediated by ERKs, since we and others have
observed that ERK1 and ERK2 are not activated in COS cells by FGD1
(unpublished observations; 36). In addition, we have
recently determined that Elk-1 can be activated by many Dbl family
members, most of which are not good activators or ERKs (unpublished
observations). It also appears that FGD1-mediated Elk-1 activation is
not a consequence of JNK activation, since FGD1 cooperates with CDC42
and Raf to activate Elk-1 under conditions where c-Jun (and presumably
JNK) activity remains unchanged. The components of the pathway leading
from FGD1/CDC42 to Elk-1 activation remain to be elucidated.
Although recent evidence suggests that FGD1 functions exclusively as an
activator of CDC42 (36, 64), the transforming activity and
signaling profile of FGD1 in the present study were not always
consistent with in vivo activation of CDC42. We observed both
qualitative and quantitative differences between FGD1 and CDC42(12V) in
transformation assays, and both proteins exhibited distinctive patterns
of activation of reporter elements. One explanation for these
differences is that FGD1 may be utilizing GTPase substrates other than
CDC42 to trigger downstream signaling events. In support of this, we
observed that FGD1 consistently exhibits cooperativity with wild-type
RhoA in SRF reporter assays and that a dominant-inhibitory mutant of
RhoA partially blocks signaling by FGD1. Although this suggests that
FGD1 may be utilizing RhoA as a substrate in vivo, it is also possible
that RhoA is acting downstream of CDC42 to regulate some of the FGD1
signaling activities. We also observed that FGD1 does not cooperate
with wild-type CDC42 in an assay for c-Jun activation under conditions
under which a second CDC42 GEF (Dbl) does. Thus, although FGD1
activates c-Jun in a CDC42-dependent manner, this activation may be
dependent upon additional FGD1-mediated signaling activities. We have
shown recently that several Dbl family members have a broader range of
in vivo substrate utilization than is indicated by their in vitro
activity, and this may also apply to FGD1 (56).
Some of the differences we observed between CDC42 and FGD1 in both
signaling and transformation assays may also be attributable to the
inability of a constitutively activated mutant to precisely mimic
activation of a GTPase by a GEF. The biological consequences of an
interaction between an exchange factor and a GTPase are likely to
differ for each GEF, and constitutively activated mutants of the GTPase
may not always be able to substitute for the GEF-GTPase complex. For
example, Dbl family GEFs may sequester their GTPase targets to
particular cellular locations and, consequently, regulate differential
interactions with specific effectors. Thus, the GEF may need to be
present to optimize the stimulation of a particular signaling pathway
by the GTPase. If true, this would explain how FGD1 can be a much more
efficient activator of Elk-1 than CDC42(12V) yet still clearly activate
Elk-1 in a CDC42-dependent manner.
Additionally, it is possible that differences between FGD1 and CDC42
activity may be a phenomenon specific for the cycling-defective CDC42(12V) mutant. Recent observations by Lin et al. with the CDC42(28L) mutant suggest that enhanced GDP/GTP cycling also
contributes to downstream signaling (28). However, our
preliminary analysis of the CDC42(28L) mutant indicates that it behaves
identically to CDC42(12V) in cooperativity focus formation assays with
Raf(340D) (unpublished observations), thus suggesting that the observed differences between CDC42 and FGD1 function cannot be simply attributed to a lack of cycling by the CDC42(12V) mutant.
We have also examined the transforming and signaling activities of
FGD1
, a peptide derived from a naturally occurring splice variant of
FGD1 that harbors a small deletion within its DH domain (37). This deletion removes several residues that are highly conserved in all DH domains and would be predicted to abolish the
catalytic activity of FGD1 (59). Consistent with this, we observed that FGD1
lacked any measurable transforming or signaling activity when assayed under the same conditions as FGD1. Interestingly, we were unable to select stable cell lines that express detectable levels of the FGD1
protein, suggesting that its expression may be
toxic or growth inhibitory to NIH 3T3 cells. Since we have also
observed that the dominant-negative CDC42(17N) mutant is also growth
inhibitory in NIH 3T3 cells (unpublished data), FGD1
may form
nonproductive interactions with CDC42 and thus may represent a
naturally occurring, dominant-inhibitory mutant of FGD1.
In summary, we have presented evidence that expression of the FGD1
protein has profound effects on growth control and nuclear signaling
activity in NIH 3T3 cells. Although we have strong in vivo evidence
that at least some of these events are mediated by specific
interactions between CDC42 and FGD1, it is also clear that FGD1 has
functions other than guanine nucleotide exchange on CDC42. FGD1
expression is primarily restricted to fetal and embryonic tissues
(38), and recent RNA in situ hybridizations show that FGD1
is predominantly expressed in cell populations from which skeletal
precursors arise (unpublished observations). Investigations as to
whether FGD1 and CDC42 exhibit a growth-promoting activity in skeletal
precursors will be important to pursue. We are currently evaluating
whether FGD1 can promote the growth or differentiation of osteoblasts.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
We thank Carol Martin and Que Lambert for technical support,
Jennifer Parrish for preparation of figures, Marc Symons for the
WASP-GBD cDNA sequences, and Rick Cerione for the
cdc42(WT), cdc42(17N), and
cdc42(12V) cDNA sequences.
This work was supported by Public Health Service grants CA42978,
CA55008, and CA63071 to C.J.D. from the National Cancer Institute. I.P.W. is a research fellow of the National Cancer Institute of Canada
supported with funds provided by the Terry Fox Run.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Present address: Department of
Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ 07103-2714. Phone: (973) 972-4483. Fax: (973) 972-3644.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Aarskog, D.
1970.
A familial syndrome of short stature associated with facial dysplasia and genital anomalies.
J. Pediatr.
77:856-861[Medline].
|
| 2.
|
Albanese, C.,
J. Johnson,
G. Watanabe,
N. Eklund,
D. Vu,
A. Arnold, and R. G. Pestell.
1996.
Transforming p21-Ras mutants and c-Ets-2 activate the cyclin D1 promoter through distinguishable regions.
J. Biol. Chem.
270:23589-23597[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 3.
|
Aspenström, P.,
U. Lindberg, and A. Hall.
1996.
Two GTPases, Cdc42 and Rac, bind directly to a protein implicated in the immunodeficiency disorder Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome.
Curr. Biol.
6:70-75[Medline].
|
| 4.
|
Boguski, M. S., and F. McCormick.
1993.
Proteins regulating Ras and its relatives.
Nature
366:643-654[Medline].
|
| 5.
|
Bourne, H. R.,
D. A. Sanders, and F. McCormick.
1990.
The GTPase superfamily: conserved structure and molecular mechanism.
Nature
349:117-126.
|
| 6.
|
Cavigelli, M.,
F. Dolfi,
F.-X. Claret, and M. Karin.
1995.
Induction of c-fos expression through JNK-mediated TCF/Elk-1 phosphorylation.
EMBO J.
14:5957-5964[Medline].
|
| 7.
|
Cerione, R. A., and Y. Zheng.
1996.
The Dbl family of oncogenes.
Curr. Opin. Cell Biol.
8:216-222[Medline].
|
| 8.
|
Chevallier-Multon, M.-C.,
F. Schweighoffer,
I. Barlat,
N. Baudouy,
I. Fath,
M. Duchesne, and B. Tocqué.
1993.
Saccharomyces cerevisiae CDC25 (1028-1589) is a guanine nucleotide releasing factor for mammalian Ras proteins and is oncogenic in NIH3T3 cells.
J. Biol. Chem.
268:11113-11118[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 9.
|
Clark, G. J.,
A. D. Cox,
S. M. Graham, and C. J. Der.
1995.
Biological assays for Ras transformation.
Methods Enzymol.
255:395-412[Medline].
|
| 10.
|
Coso, O. A.,
M. Chiariello,
J.-C. Yu,
H. Teramoto,
P. Crespo,
N. Xu,
T. Miki, and J. S. Gutkind.
1995.
The small GTP-binding proteins Rac1 and Cdc42 regulate the activity of the JNK/SAPK signaling pathway.
Cell
81:1137-1146[Medline].
|
| 11.
|
Gille, H.,
M. Kortenjann,
O. Thomae,
C. Moomaw,
C. Slaughter,
M. H. Cobb, and P. E. Shaw.
1995.
ERK phosphorylation potentiates Elk-1-mediated ternary complex formation and transactivation.
EMBO J.
14:951-962[Medline].
|
| 12.
|
Gille, H.,
A. D. Sharrocks, and P. E. Shaw.
1992.
Phosphorylation of transcription factor p62TCF by MAP kinase stimulates ternary complex formation at c-fos promoter.
Nature
358:414-417[Medline].
|
| 13.
|
Gille, H.,
T. Strahl, and P. E. Shaw.
1995.
Activation of ternary complex factor Elk-1 by stress-activated protein kinases.
Curr. Biol.
5:1191-1200[Medline].
|
| 14.
|
Glaven, J. A.,
I. P. Whitehead,
T. Nomanbhoy,
R. Kay, and R. A. Cerione.
1996.
Lfc and Lsc oncoproteins represent two new guanine nucleotide exchange factors for the Rho GTP-binding protein.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:27374-27381[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 15.
|
Gorlin, R. J.,
M. M. Cohen, and L. S. Levin.
1990.
Syndromes of the head and neck, 3rd ed.
Oxford University Press, New York, N.Y.
|
| 16.
| Gorski, J. L. In L. Jameson (ed.),
Principles of molecular medicine, in press. Humana Press, New York,
N.Y.
|
| 17.
|
Hall, B. K., and T. Miyake.
1992.
The membranous skeleton: the role of cell condensations in vertebrate skeletogenesis.
Anat. Embryol.
186:107-124[Medline].
|
| 18.
|
Hauser, C. A.,
J. K. Westwick, and L. A. Quilliam.
1995.
Ras-mediated transcription activation: analysis by transient cotransfection assays.
Methods Enzymol.
255:412-426[Medline].
|
| 19.
|
Hill, C. S.,
J. Wynne, and R. Treisman.
1995.
The Rho family GTPases RhoA, Rac1 and Cdc42Hs regulate transcriptional activation by SRF.
Cell
81:1159-1170[Medline].
|
| 20.
|
Horii, Y.,
J. F. Beeler,
K. Sakaguchi,
M. Tachibana, and T. Miki.
1994.
A novel oncogene, ost, encodes a guanine nucleotide exchange factor that potentially links Rho and Rac signaling pathways.
EMBO J.
13:4776-4786[Medline].
|
| 21.
|
Janknecht, R.,
W. H. Ernst,
V. Pingoud, and A. Nordheim.
1993.
Activation of ternary complex factor Elk-1 by MAP kinases.
EMBO J.
12:5097-5104[Medline].
|
| 22.
|
Khosravi-Far, R.,
M. Chrzanowska-Wodnicka,
P. A. Solski,
A. Eva,
K. Burridge, and C. J. Der.
1994.
Vav and Dbl mediate transformation via Ras-independent mitogen activated protein kinase activation.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14:6848-6857[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 23.
|
Khosravi-Far, R.,
P. A. Solski,
G. J. Clark,
M. S. Kinch, and C. J. Der.
1995.
Activation of Rac1, RhoA, and mitogen-activated protein kinases is required for Ras transformation.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15:6443-6453[Abstract].
|
| 24.
|
Khosravi-Far, R.,
M. A. White,
J. K. Westwick,
P. A. Solski,
M. Chrzanowska-Wodnicka,
L. Van Aeist,
M. H. Wigler, and C. J. Der.
1996.
Oncogenic Ras activation of Raf/MAP kinase-independent pathways is sufficient to cause tumorigenic transformation.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
16:3923-3933[Abstract].
|
| 25.
|
King, J. A.,
P. C. Marker,
K. J. Seung, and D. M. Kingsley.
1994.
BMP5 and the molecular, skeletal, and soft-tissue alterations in short ear mice.
Dev. Biol.
166:112-122[Medline].
|
| 26.
|
Kozma, R.,
S. Ahmed,
A. Best, and L. Lim.
1995.
The Ras-related proteins Cdc42Hs and bradykinin promote formation of peripheral actin microspikes and filopodia in Swiss 3T3 fibroblasts.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15:1942-1952[Abstract].
|
| 27.
|
Lebowitz, P. F.,
W. Du, and G. C. Prendergast.
1997.
Prenylation of RhoB is required for its cell transforming function but not its ability to activate serum response element-dependent transcription.
J. Biol. Chem.
272:16093-16095[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 28.
|
Lin, R.,
S. Bagrodia,
R. Cerione, and D. Manor.
1997.
A novel Cdc42Hs mutant induces cellular transformation.
Curr. Biol.
7:794-797[Medline].
|
| 29.
|
Maniatis, T.,
E. F. Fritsch, and J. Sambrook.
1989.
Molecular cloning: a laboratory manual, 2nd ed.
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.
|
| 30.
|
Marais, R.,
J. Wynne, and R. Treisman.
1993.
The SRF accessory protein Elk-1 contains a growth factor-regulated transcriptional activation domain.
Cell
73:381-393[Medline].
|
| 31.
|
Miki, T.,
C. L. Smith,
J. E. Long,
A. Eva, and T. P. Fleming.
1993.
Oncogene ect2 is related to regulators of small GTP-binding proteins.
Nature
362:462-465[Medline].
|
| 32.
|
Minden, A.,
A. Lin,
F.-X. Claret,
A. Abo, and M. Karin.
1995.
Selective activation of the JNK signaling cascade and c-Jun transcriptional activity by the small GTPases Rac and Cdc42Hs.
Cell
81:1147-1157[Medline].
|
| 33.
|
Nobes, C. D., and A. Hall.
1995.
Rho, Rac, and Cdc42 GTPases regulate the assembly of multimolecular focal complexes associated with actin stress fibers, lamellipodia, and filopodia.
Cell
81:53-62[Medline].
|
| 34.
|
Oldham, S. M.,
G. J. Clark,
L. M. Gangarosa,
R. J. Coffey, Jr., and C. J. Der.
1996.
Activation of the Raf-1/MAP kinase cascade is not sufficient for Ras transformation of RIE-1 epithelial cells.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
93:6924-6928[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 35.
|
Olson, M. F.,
A. Ashworth, and A. Hall.
1995.
An essential role for Rho, Rac and Cdc42 GTPases in cell cycle progression through G1.
Science
269:1270-1272[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 36.
|
Olson, M. F.,
N. G. Pasteris,
J. L. Gorski, and A. Hall.
1996.
Faciogenital dysplasia protein (FGD1) and Vav, two related proteins required for normal embryonic development, are upstream regulators of Rho GTPases.
Curr. Biol.
6:1628-1633[Medline].
|
| 37.
|
Pasteris, N. G.,
J. M. Buckler,
A. B. Cadle, and J. L. Gorski.
1997.
Genomic organization of the faciogenital dysplasia (FGD1; Aarskog-Scott syndrome) gene.
Genomics
43:390-394[Medline].
|
| 38.
|
Pasteris, N. G.,
M. Cadle,
L. J. Logie,
M. E. Porteous,
C. E. Schwartz,
R. E. Stevenson,
T. W. Glover,
R. S. Wilroy, and J. L. Gorski.
1994.
Isolation and characterization of the faciogenital dysplasia (Aarskog-Scott syndrome) gene: a putative Rho/Rac guanine nucleotide exchange factor.
Cell
79:669-678[Medline].
|
| 39.
|
Prendergast, G. C.,
R. Khosravi-Far,
P. A. Solski,
H. Kurzawa,
P. F. Lebowitz, and C. J. Der.
1995.
Critical role of RhoB in cell transformation by oncogenic Ras.
Oncogene
10:2289-2296[Medline].
|
| 40.
|
Qiu, R.-G.,
A. Abo,
F. McCormick, and M. Symons.
1997.
Cdc42 regulates anchorage-independent growth and is necessary for Ras transformation.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17:3449-3458[Abstract].
|
| 41.
|
Qiu, R.-G.,
J. Chen,
D. Kirn,
F. McCormick, and M. Symons.
1995.
An essential role for Rac in Ras transformation.
Nature
374:457-459[Medline].
|
| 42.
|
Qiu, R.-G.,
J. Chen,
F. McCormick, and M. Symons.
1995.
A role for Rho in Ras transformation.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
92:11781-11785[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 43.
|
Quilliam, L. A.,
S. Y. Huff,
K. M. Rabun,
W. Wei,
D. Broek, and C. J. Der.
1994.
Membrane-targeting potentiates CDC25 and SOS activation of Ras transformation.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
91:8512-8516[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 44.
|
Quilliam, L. A.,
K. Kato,
K. M. Rabun,
M. M. Hisaka,
S. Y. Huff,
S. Campbell-Burk, and C. J. Der.
1994.
Identification of residues critical for Ras(17N) growth-inhibitory phenotype and for Ras interaction with guanine nucleotide exchange factors.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14:1113-1121[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 45.
|
Raingeaud, J.,
A. J. Whitmarsh,
T. Barrett,
B. Dérijard, and R. J. Davis.
1996.
MKK3- and MKK6-regulated gene expression is mediated by the p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase signal transduction pathway.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
16:1247-1255[Abstract].
|
| 46.
|
Ridley, A. J., and A. Hall.
1992.
The small GTP-binding protein rho regulates the assembly of focal adhesions and actin stress fibers in response to growth factors.
Cell
70:389-399[Medline].
|
| 47.
|
Ridley, A. J.,
H. F. Paterson,
C. L. Johnston,
D. Diekmann, and A. Hall.
1992.
The small GTP-binding protein rac regulates growth factor-induced membrane ruffling.
Cell
70:401-410[Medline].
|
| 48.
|
Ron, D.,
M. Zannini,
M. Lewis,
R. B. Wickner,
L. T. Hunt,
G. Graziani,
S. R. Tronick,
S. A. Aaronson, and A. Eva.
1991.
A region of proto-dbl essential for its transforming activity shows sequence similarity to a yeast cell cycle gene, CDC24, and the human breakpoint cluster gene, bcr.
New Biol.
3:372-379[Medline].
|
| 49.
|
Roux, P.,
C. Gauthier-Rouvière,
S. Doucet-Brutin, and P. Fort.
1997.
The small GTPases Cdc42Hs, Rac1 and RhoG delineate Raf-independent pathways that cooperate to transform NIH3T3 cells.
Curr. Biol.
7:629-637[Medline].
|
| 50.
|
Storm, E. E.,
T. V. Huynh,
N. G. Copeland,
N. A. Jenkins,
D. M. Kinsley, and S. Lee.
1997.
Limb alterations in brachypodism mice due to alterations in a new member of the TGF beta-superfamily.
Nature
368:639-43.
|
| 51.
|
Su, B.,
E. Jacinto,
M. Hibi,
T. Kallunki,
M. Karin, and Y. Ben-Neriah.
1994.
JNK is involved in signal integration during costimulation of T lymphocytes.
Cell
77:727-736[Medline].
|
| 52.
|
Symons, M.,
J. M. J. Derry,
B. Kariak,
S. Jiang,
V. Lemahieu,
F. McCormick,
U. Francke, and A. Abo.
1996.
Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome protein, a novel effector for the GTPase CDC42Hs, is implicated in actin polymerization.
Cell
84:723-734[Medline].
|
| 53.
|
Vincent, S., and J. Settleman.
1997.
The PRK2 kinase is a potential effector target of both Rho and Rac GTPases and regulates actin cytoskeletal organization.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17:2247-2256[Abstract].
|
| 54.
|
Westwick, J. K., and D. A. Brenner.
1995.
Methods for analyzing c-Jun kinase.
Methods Enzymol.
255:342-360[Medline].
|
| 55.
|
Westwick, J. K.,
Q. T. Lambert,
G. J. Clark,
M. Symons,
L. Van Aelst,
R. G. Pestell, and C. J. Der.
1997.
Rac regulation of transformation, gene expression and actin organization by multiple, PAK-independent pathways.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17:1324-1335[Abstract].
|
| 56.
| Westwick, J. K., R. J. Lee, Q. T. Lambert, M. Symons, R. G. Pestell, C. J. Der, and I. P. Whitehead. Transforming potential of Dbl family proteins
correlates with transcription from the cyclin D1 promoter but not with
activation of Jun-NH2-terminal kinase, p38/Mpk2, serum
response factor or c-Jun. J. Biol. Chem., in press.
|
| 57.
|
Whitehead, I.,
H. Kirk, and R. Kay.
1995.
Retroviral transduction and oncogenic selection of a cDNA encoding Dbs, a homolog of the Dbl guanine nucleotide exchange factor.
Oncogene
10:713-721[Medline].
|
| 58.
|
Whitehead, I.,
H. Kirk,
C. Tognon,
G. Trigo-Gonzalez, and R. Kay.
1995.
Expression cloning of lfc, a novel oncogene with structural similarities to guanine nucleotide exchange factors and to the regulatory region of protein kinase C.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:18388-18395.
|
| 59.
|
Whitehead, I. P.,
S. Campbell,
K. L. Rossman, and C. J. Der.
1997.
Dbl family proteins.
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1332:F1-F23[Medline].
|
| 60.
|
Whitehead, I. P.,
R. Khosravi-Far,
H. Kirk,
G. Trigo-Gonzalez,
C. J. Der, and R. Kay.
1996.
Expression cloning of lsc, a novel oncogene with structural similarities to the Dbl family of guanine nucleotide exchange factors.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:18643-18650[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 61.
|
Whitmarsh, A. J.,
P. Shore,
A. D. Sharrocks, and R. J. Davis.
1995.
Integration of MAP kinase signal transduction pathways at the serum response element.
Science
269:403-407[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 62.
|
Whitmarsh, A. J.,
S.-H. Yang,
M. S.-S. Su,
A. D. Sharrocks, and R. J. Davis.
1997.
Role of p38 and JNK mitogen-activated protein kinases in the activation of ternary complex factors.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
17:2360-2371[Abstract].
|
| 63.
|
Zhang, S.,
J. Han,
M. A. Sells,
J. Chernoff,
U. G. Knaus,
R. J. Ulevitch, and G. M. Bokoch.
1995.
Rho family GTPases regulate p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase through the downstream mediator Pak1.
J. Biol. Chem.
270:23934-23936[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 64.
|
Zheng, Y.,
D. J. Fischer,
M. F. Santos,
G. Tigyi,
N. G. Pasteris,
J. L. Gorski, and Y. Xu.
1996.
The faciogenital dysplasia gene product FGD1 functions as a Cdc42Hs-specific guanine-nucleotide exchange factor.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:33169-33172[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 65.
|
Zheng, Y.,
D. Zangrilli,
R. A. Cerione, and A. Eva.
1996.
The pleckstrin homology domain mediates transformation by oncogenic Dbl through specific intracellular targeting.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:19017-19020[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 66.
|
Zinck, R.,
M. A. Cahill,
M. Kracht,
C. Sachsenmaier,
R. A. Hipskind, and A. Nordheim.
1995.
Protein synthesis inhibitors reveal differential regulation of mitogen-activated protein kinase and stress-activated protein kinase pathways that converge on Elk-1.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
15:4930-4938[Abstract].
|
| 67.
| Zohn, I. E., S. L. Campbell, R. Khosravi-Far,
K. L. Rossman, and C. J. Der. Rho family proteins and
Ras transformation: the Rhoad least traveled gets congested. Oncogene,
in press.
|
Mol Cell Biol, August 1998, p. 4689-4697, Vol. 18, No. 8
0270-7306/98/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1998, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Marlow, L. A., Reynolds, L. A., Cleland, A. S., Cooper, S. J., Gumz, M. L., Kurakata, S., Fujiwara, K., Zhang, Y., Sebo, T., Grant, C., McIver, B., Wadsworth, J. T., Radisky, D. C., Smallridge, R. C., Copland, J. A.
(2009). Reactivation of Suppressed RhoB is a Critical Step for the Inhibition of Anaplastic Thyroid Cancer Growth. Cancer Res.
69: 1536-1544
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Helms, W. S., Jeffrey, J. L., Holmes, D. A., Townsend, M. B., Clipstone, N. A., Su, L.
(2007). Modulation of NFAT-dependent gene expression by the RhoA signaling pathway in T cells. J. Leukoc. Biol.
82: 361-369
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Bauer, H., Veron, N., Willert, J., Herrmann, B. G.
(2007). The t-complex-encoded guanine nucleotide exchange factor Fgd2 reveals that two opposing signaling pathways promote transmission ratio distortion in the mouse. Genes Dev.
21: 143-147
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Berzat, A. C., Buss, J. E., Chenette, E. J., Weinbaum, C. A., Shutes, A., Der, C. J., Minden, A., Cox, A. D.
(2005). Transforming Activity of the Rho Family GTPase, Wrch-1, a Wnt-regulated Cdc42 Homolog, Is Dependent on a Novel Carboxyl-terminal Palmitoylation Motif. J. Biol. Chem.
280: 33055-33065
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Chenette, E. J., Abo, A., Der, C. J.
(2005). Critical and Distinct Roles of Amino- and Carboxyl-terminal Sequences in Regulation of the Biological Activity of the Chp Atypical Rho GTPase. J. Biol. Chem.
280: 13784-13792
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Palmby, T. R., Abe, K., Karnoub, A. E., Der, C. J.
(2004). Vav Transformation Requires Activation of Multiple GTPases and Regulation of Gene Expression. Mol Cancer Res
2: 702-711
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Benasciutti, E., Pages, G., Kenzior, O., Folk, W., Blasi, F., Crippa, M. P.
(2004). MAPK and JNK transduction pathways can phosphorylate Sp1 to activate the uPA minimal promoter element and endogenous gene transcription. Blood
104: 256-262
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Jiang, K., Sun, J., Cheng, J., Djeu, J. Y., Wei, S., Sebti, S.
(2004). Akt Mediates Ras Downregulation of RhoB, a Suppressor of Transformation, Invasion, and Metastasis. Mol. Cell. Biol.
24: 5565-5576
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Marinissen, M. J., Servitja, J.-M., Offermanns, S., Simon, M. I., Gutkind, J. S.
(2003). Thrombin Protease-activated Receptor-1 Signals through Gq- and G13-initiated MAPK Cascades Regulating c-Jun Expression to Induce Cell Transformation. J. Biol. Chem.
278: 46814-46825
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Hou, P., Estrada, L., Kinley, A. W., Parsons, J. T., Vojtek, A. B., Gorski, J. L.
(2003). Fgd1, the Cdc42 GEF responsible for Faciogenital Dysplasia, directly interacts with cortactin and mAbp1 to modulate cell shape. Hum Mol Genet
12: 1981-1993
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Gao, J., Estrada, L., Cho, S., Ellis, R. E., Gorski, J. L.
(2001). The Caenorhabditis elegans homolog of FGD1, the human Cdc42 GEF gene responsible for faciogenital dysplasia, is critical for excretory cell morphogenesis. Hum Mol Genet
10: 3049-3062
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Estrada, L., Caron, E., Gorski, J. L.
(2001). Fgd1, the Cdc42 guanine nucleotide exchange factor responsible for faciogenital dysplasia, is localized to the subcortical actin cytoskeleton and Golgi membrane. Hum Mol Genet
10: 485-495
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Wang, L., Zhang, H., Solski, P. A., Hart, M. J., Der, C. J., Su, L.
(2000). Modulation of HIV-1 Replication by a Novel RhoA Effector Activity. J. Immunol.
164: 5369-5374
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Bock, B. C., Vacratsis, P. O., Qamirani, E., Gallo, K. A.
(2000). Cdc42-induced Activation of the Mixed-Lineage Kinase SPRK in Vivo. REQUIREMENT OF THE Cdc42/Rac INTERACTIVE BINDING MOTIF AND CHANGES IN PHOSPHORYLATION. J. Biol. Chem.
275: 14231-14241
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Abe, K., Rossman, K. L., Liu, B., Ritola, K. D., Chiang, D., Campbell, S. L., Burridge, K., Der, C. J.
(2000). Vav2 Is an Activator of Cdc42, Rac1, and RhoA. J. Biol. Chem.
275: 10141-10149
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Kwon, T., Kwon, D. Y., Chun, J., Kim, J. H., Kang, S. S.
(2000). Akt Protein Kinase Inhibits Rac1-GTP Binding through Phosphorylation at Serine 71 of Rac1. J. Biol. Chem.
275: 423-428
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Whitehead, I. P., Lambert, Q. T., Glaven, J. A., Abe, K., Rossman, K. L., Mahon, G. M., Trzaskos, J. M., Kay, R., Campbell, S. L., Der, C. J.
(1999). Dependence of Dbl and Dbs Transformation on MEK and NF-kappa B Activation. Mol. Cell. Biol.
19: 7759-7770
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Lin, R., Cerione, R. A., Manor, D.
(1999). Specific Contributions of the Small GTPases Rho, Rac, and Cdc42 to Dbl Transformation. J. Biol. Chem.
274: 23633-23641
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Johnson, D. I.
(1999). Cdc42: An Essential Rho-Type GTPase Controlling Eukaryotic Cell Polarity. Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev.
63: 54-105
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Stenmark, H, Aasland, R
(1999). FYVE-finger proteins--effectors of an inositol lipid. J. Cell Sci.
112: 4175-4183
[Abstract]