Previous Article | Next Article 
Molecular and Cellular Biology, June 2000, p. 3870-3879, Vol. 20, No. 11
0270-7306/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Molecular Determinants of Differential Ligand
Sensitivities of Insect Ecdysteroid Receptors
Sheng-Fu
Wang,1
Stephen
Ayer,2
William A.
Segraves,2
Daryl R.
Williams,3 and
Alexander S.
Raikhel1,*
Programs in Genetics, Cell & Molecular
Biology, Department of Entomology, Michigan State University, East
Lansing, Michigan 488241; Department of
Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology, Yale University, New
Haven, Connecticut 06520-81032; and
School of Biological Sciences, The University of Liverpool,
Liverpool L69 7ZB, United Kingdom3
Received 18 January 2000/Returned for modification 19 February
2000/Accepted 13 March 2000
 |
ABSTRACT |
The functional receptor for insect ecdysteroid hormones is a
heterodimer consisting of two nuclear hormone receptors, ecdysteroid receptor (EcR) and the retinoid X receptor homologue Ultraspiracle (USP). Although ecdysone is commonly thought to be a hormone precursor and 20-hydroxyecdysone (20E), the physiologically active steroid, little is known about the relative activity of ecdysteroids in various
arthropods. As a step toward characterization of potential differential
ligand recognition, we have analyzed the activities of various
ecdysteroids using gel mobility shift assays and transfection assays in Schneider-2 (S2) cells. Ecdysone showed little activation of
the Drosophila melanogaster receptor complex (DmEcR-USP).
In contrast, this steroid functioned as a potent ligand for the
mosquito Aedes aegypti receptor complex (AaEcR-USP),
significantly enhancing DNA binding and transactivating a reporter gene
in S2 cells. The mosquito receptor also displayed higher
hormone-independent DNA binding activity than the
Drosophila receptor. Subunit-swapping experiments indicated
that the EcR protein, not the USP protein, was responsible for ligand
specificity. Using domain-swapping techniques, we made a series of
Aedes and Drosophila EcR chimeric constructs.
Differential ligand responsiveness was mapped near the C terminus of
the ligand binding domain, within the identity box previously
implicated in the dimerization specificity of nuclear receptors. This
region includes helices 9 and 10, as determined by comparison with
available crystal structures obtained from other nuclear receptors.
Site-directed mutagenesis revealed that Phe529 in Aedes
EcR, corresponding to Tyr611 in Drosophila EcR, was most
critical for ligand specificity and hormone-independent DNA binding
activity. These results demonstrated that ecdysone could function as a
bona fide ligand in a species-specific manner.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Ligand-activated transcription
factors in the superfamily of steroid/thyroid/retinoid nuclear hormone
receptors play an essential role in regulating the differential
expression of genes involved in fundamental processes of animal
development and reproduction. In vertebrates, a wide variety of
distinct gene-regulatory pathways are realized by the action of
chemically diverse ligands, including steroid hormones, thyroid
hormones, retinoids, vitamin D, prostaglandins, and oxysterols, in
combination with their cognate receptors (38, 39, 66).
In sharp contrast with this diversity of signals in vertebrate animals,
the major events in development and reproduction in insects are
primarily governed by a small number of known nuclear hormone receptor
ligands. Among them, the steroid hormone 20-hydroxyecdysone (20E) is
widely accepted as the key hormone regulating a vast array of gene
activities (5, 15, 22, 50). The molecular basis of 20E
action has been elucidated in great detail (10, 24, 26, 46, 51,
56, 64, 65). The two nuclear hormone receptors that play a
central role in the initiation of the 20E-induced gene regulatory
hierarchy are the ecdysteroid receptor (EcR) and the retinoid X
receptor (RXR) homologue Ultraspiracle (USP) (12, 18, 25, 27, 34,
43, 57, 60). It has been shown that USP is an obligatory
heterodimeric partner of EcR, required for both ligand and DNA binding
(63, 74, 75). Functional diversity of ecdysteroid receptors
within a given species may be achieved in part by differential
expression of EcR and USP isoforms. Different EcR isoforms have been
identified and cloned from the fruit fly Drosophila
melanogaster and from the tobacco hornworm Manduca sexta, and evidence suggests that differential EcR isoform
expression contributes to the tissue and stage specificity of 20E
action (29, 52, 61). Two USP isoforms have been identified
and cloned in the mosquito Aedes aegypti and in M. sexta (30, 31). Both mosquito USP isoforms (USP-A and
USP-B) have been shown to form functional heterodimeric complexes with
the mosquito EcR, when binding to either ecdysteroid-responsive
elements (EcREs) or ecdysteroid ligand (31). The mosquito
and tobacco hornworm USP isoforms appear to be functionally distinct,
displaying differential response to activation by 20E and thus
contributing to the tissue and stage specificity of 20E action
(36, 69). Differential ecdysteroid response may also be
effected through the differential recognition of a variety of EcREs,
including inverted and direct repeats with various spacers (1, 2,
14, 49, 70).
The ecdysteroid 20E is derived via ecdysone-20-monooxygenase-mediated
conversion of ecdysone in the peripheral tissues of an insect body
(19, 58). However, detailed studies of M. sexta and D. melanogaster suggest a more complex composition of
steroid hormones in at least some insects. In M. sexta, the
major ecdysteroid secreted by the prothoracic glands is
3-dehydroxyecdysone, which is converted to ecdysone in the hemolymph
(33, 54, 71, 72). Furthermore, during the pupal-adult
metamorphosis of M. sexta, there are three major hemolymph
ecdysteroid peaks: ecdysone, 20E, and 20,26-dihydroxyecdysone
(71). In D. melanogaster, the ring gland
synthesizes and secretes ecdysone and 20-deoxymakisterone, which are
converted in peripheral tissues to 20E and makisterone, respectively
(44, 47).
While these findings raise the question of whether ecdysteroids
other than 20E can play distinct roles in insect development and
reproduction, there are only a few examples of differential action of
ecdysteroids. Champlin and Truman (7, 8) have recently
presented the most compelling case of ecdysone as an active
hormone, demonstrating a role for ecdysone in stimulating cell
proliferation during optic lobe neurogenesis in M. sexta.
Study of the direct interaction between physiological ecdysteroids
and their receptors has been hampered by the relatively low affinity of
receptor-ligand interactions. Previous studies on the interaction
between ecdysteroids and the EcR have been conducted primarily using
crude receptor-containing cell extracts by analysis of competition for
binding of the radiolabeled ecdysteroid ponasterone A (PonA) (11,
37, 40, 53, 76). Recently, a more detailed analysis of the
binding of PonA and the nonsteroidal agonist tebufenozide (RH-5992) to
the EcR-USP heterodimer has been reported. When tritiated PonA was
bound to EcR-USP complexes of D. melanogaster, A. aegypti, and the lepidopteran Choristoneura fumiferana,
similar affinities were observed (Kds of 0.8, 2.8, and 3 nM, respectively); the Kds for
tebufenozide, a synthetic ecdysteroid agonist, for the same receptors
were 336, 28, and 0.5 nM, respectively (16). These data
suggest that variability within the hormone binding domain of EcRs may
result in substantial difference in the binding of various ligands.
Comparatively little is known about the effect of the various
endogenous insect ecdysteroids on the DNA binding and transactivating
ability of the EcR-USP heterodimer.
Here, we used the Drosophila EcR-B1-USP (DmEcR- DmUSP) and
Aedes EcR-USP-B (AaEcR-AaUSP) heterodimers and
examined the effect of ecdysone and 20E on their DNA binding and
transactivation properties. We show that while 20E activates both
DmEcR-DmUSP and AaEcR-AaUSP, ecdysone is an efficient activator only of
AaEcR-AaUSP. The differential responsiveness of the mosquito and fly
EcR-USP heterodimers to these ecdysteroids was determined by the EcR
subunit and not by USP. Furthermore, domain-swapping experiments
demonstrated that the high responsiveness to ecdysone was located in
the C-terminal portion of the AaEcR ligand binding domain (LBD), within
a region previously implicated in receptor heterodimerization. Using
site-directed mutagenesis, we have identified a single amino acid,
Phe529 in AaEcR, corresponding to Tyr611 in DmEcR, which plays a
critical role in ligand specificity and hormone-independent DNA binding activity.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
In vitro protein synthesis and EMSA.
For electrophoretic
mobility shift assays (EMSA), nuclear receptor proteins were
synthesized in vitro using a coupled transcription-translation (TNT)
kit from Promega. The in vitro expression vectors pGEM3Z-AaEcR, pGEM3Z-AaUSP-B, pGEM7Z-DmEcR, and pGEM7Z-DmUSP, with entire open reading frames of indicated nuclear receptor cDNAs, were constructed as
described previously (31, 70). TNT-produced protein was quantified by [35S]methionine labeling, sodium dodecyl
sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis, and phosphorimage analysis.
Protein yield ranged from 0.1 to 1.6 fmol/µl. A parallel TNT reaction
with the same concentration of unlabeled methionine was performed to
produce the protein for EMSA. The amounts of receptor proteins were
adjusted in order to have comparable levels of DNA-protein complexes
for the mosquito and Drosophila EcR-USP after activation
with 20E. Under these conditions, the hormone-independent DNA binding
of DmEcR-USP was not detectable. Receptor proteins were first incubated with 5 × 10
5M ecdysteroid at room temperature for
30 min in a total volume of 20 µl of HKN buffer containing 20 mM
HEPES (pH 7.5), 2 mM dithiothreitol, 100 mM KCl, 7.5% glycerol, 1%
NP-40 (Boehringer Mannheim), 2 µg of poly(dI-dC) · poly(dI-dC)
(Pharmacia Biotech), and 3 µg of nonspecific single-stranded
competitor oligonucleotide (70). Then 50 fmol of
32P-labeled probe IRhsp-1, which is
the Drosophila heat shock protein 27 (HSP-27) EcRE (IRhsp-1 [70]), was added to
the mixture followed by incubation at room temperature for another 30 min. Bound and free probes were resolved in 5 or 6% native acrylamide
gels in 0.5× Tris-borate-EDTA. The gel was vacuum dried and exposed to
either X-ray film (Kodak) or a PhosphorImager (Molecular Dynamics) for quantification.
Ecdysteroids and purification.
Muristerone A (MurA),
polypodine B (PolB), 20E, 20-hydroxyecdysone 22-acetate (22A), and
2-deoxy-20-hydroxyecdysone (2DE) were purchased from Sigma. PonA was
purchased from Invitrogen.
Ecdysone was purchased from SIMES (Milan, Italy) and contained
approximately 2% 20E. Purification of the ecdysone was carried out on
a reversed-phase Nova-Pak C18 cartridge (10 cm by 8 mm; particle size, 4 µm; Waters Associates, Watford, Herts, United Kingdom), using a linear gradient over 30 min of 35 to 100% (vol/vol) methanol-water at 1 ml/min. For each injection, 20 µg of ecdysone was
introduced onto the column using a Gilson 234 autoinjector (Gilson,
Villiers le Bel, France), and the separation was monitored by UV
absorbance at 254 nm. Contaminating 20E eluted at 5 min, with pure
ecdysone eluting at 8.5 min. Repeated high-pressure liquid
chromatographic runs were carried out; the area around the ecdysone
peak was collected over a 3-min period in each case, the fractions were
combined, and the solvent was removed by rotary evaporation to yield
approximately 1 mg of ecdysone. Analysis of an aliquot of the purified
ecdysone under the same chromatographic conditions showed that it was
essentially pure.
Reporter and insect expression vectors for transfection
assays.
The reporter plasmids
MTV-Eip-Luc (Eip-Luc) and
MTV-Hsp-Luc (Hsp-Luc) were kind gifts from M. McKeown (Salk
Institute, San Diego, Calif.). Partial sequencing indicated Eip-Luc
contained four copies of eip-28/29 EcRE, whereas Hsp-Luc
contained two copies of hsp-27 EcRE. The expression vector
pAc-DmEcR (34) utilizes actin 5C to expressed DmEcR in
Schneider-2 (S2) cells. The reporter pAc5-LacZ (Invitrogen) was used to
normalize transfection efficiency. The entire AaEcR cDNA was obtained
by digesting pcDNA3.1Zeo(+)-AaEcR (70) with
BamHI, blunted with Klenow enzyme, and further digested with
XbaI. This AaEcR cDNA fragment was then inserted into the EcoRV and XbaI sites of pAc5/V5/HisA
(Invitrogen), yielding the expression construct pAc5-AaEcR. AaUSP
expression plasmids pAc5-AaUSP-B and pAc5-DmUSP were constructed by
inserting the EcoRI cDNA fragments from
pcDNA3.1Zeo(+)-AaUSP-B and pcDNA3.1Zeo(+)-DmUSP (70) into the EcoRI site of pAc5/V5/HisA. These expression plasmids
utilized the same promoter, actin 5C. All constructs were confirmed by restriction enzyme digestion and partial sequencing.
Cell culture and transient transfection assay.
Drosophila cell line S2 (Invitrogen) was maintained at 22 to
24°C in Schneider Drosophila medium supplemented with 10%
heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum, penicillin (100 U/ml), and
streptomycin (100 µg/ml) (Gibco BRL). Transfection was conducted with
LipofectACE (Gibco BRL) with an optimal DNA lipid ratio of 1:20
(wt/wt). Typically, 100 ng of luciferase reporter gene, 25 ng of
reporter pAc5-LacZ, 12.5 ng of each receptor, and 3 µg of LipofectACE
were mixed in a 24-well plate with a total volume of 20 µl and
incubated at room temperature for 30 min. The expression vector
pAc5/V5/HisA was used as carrier DNA so that each well received 150 ng
of total DNA. The transfection cocktail was overlaid with 500 µl of
S2 cells, which were diluted to 106 cells/ml in
Drosophila serum-free medium (Gibco BRL). Half of the amount
of DNA, LipofectACE, and cells were used for transfection assays in
48-well plates. Transfection was terminated 12 to 15 h later with
the addition of 5% fetal bovine serum. After 24 or 36 h of
hormone treatment, the medium was aspirated and the cells in suspension
and attachment were combined in 100 µl of reporter lysis buffer
(Promega) and lysed with three cycles of freezing and thawing. Reporter
gene assays were conducted as described for the Promega firefly
luciferase reporter and
-galactosidase systems. A luminometer
(Turner Designs model TD20e) was used to detect luciferase activity
with 10-s delay time and 30-s integration time. The luciferase activity
was normalized with
-galactosidase activity. Transfection assays
were carried out in duplicates or triplicates, and each independent
experiment was repeated at least three times. Although the absolute
values of reporter gene activities varied from experiment to
experiment, the fold induction of luciferase activity from cells
treated with hormone over those treated with control vehicle ethanol
remained relatively consistent after normalization with LacZ.
Construction of chimeric receptors.
Five chimeric receptors,
AEBsrG1, the reciprocal construct
DEBsrG1, DEXma3,
DEKpn1, and DEBgl2, were
constructed by swapping at the DNA binding domain (DBD) and boundaries
between domains C and D, domains D and E, and domains E and F,
respectively. A BamHI fragment containing the DmEcR cDNA from pAc5-DmEcR was first subcloned into the BamHI site of
pcDNA3.1/Zeo(+), yielding pcDNA3.1/Zeo(+)-DmEcR. pcDNA3.1/Zeo(+)-AaEcR
was constructed in a similar way, as described previously
(70). The 1,939bp BsrGI-XbaI fragment
in pcDNA3.1/Zeo(+)-AaEcR was exchanged with the 2,125bp
BsrGI-XbaI fragment in pcDNA3.1/Zeo(+)-DmEcR,
yielding two chimeric receptor constructs,
pcDNA3.1/Zeo(+)-AEBsrG1 and
pcDNA3.1/Zeo(+)-DEBsrG1.
pGEM7Z-DEXma3 was created by digesting
pGEM7Z-DmEcR with XmaIII and XbaI, and the
3,435-bp fragment containing the vector and 5' region of the DmEcR cDNA
was ligated with a 1,869-bp XmaIII-XbaI fragment
bearing the 3' region of the AaEcR cDNA from pcDNA3.1/Zeo(+)-AaEcR. To make the construct pcDNA3.1/Zeo(+)-DEKpn1, the
1,309-bp KpnI fragment with a 5' region of AaEcR cDNA in pcDNA3.1/Zeo(+)-AaEcR was replaced with 1,508-bp KpnI
fragment with a 5' region from DmEcR cDNA in pcDNA3.1/Zeo(+)-DmEcR.
pcDNA3.1/Zeo(+)-DEBgl2 was created by ligating
the 5,959-bp BglII fragment from pcDNA3.1/Zeo(+)-AaEcR with
a 3,061-bp BglII fragment from pcDNA3.1/Zeo(+)-DmEcR.
Nine chimeric constructs, AE
Sac1,
AE
Nru1, DE
Bbs1,
DE
TthIII1, DE
Csp1,
DE
Spe1, DE
BsiW1,
AE
NB, and DE
SS, were prepared by swapping
within the LBD using a combination
of restriction digestion and PCR
amplification techniques. pGEM3Z-AE
Nru1 was
constructed by replacing the 1,303-bp
NruI-
EcoRI
fragment
in pGEM3Z-AaEcR with the 1,490-bp
NruI-
EcoRI fragment from pGEM7Z-DmEcR.
pGEM7Z-DE
TthIII1 was constructed by replacing
the 1,409-bp fragment in pGEM7Z-DmEcR
with the 1,182-bp
TthIII1-
XbaI fragment from
pcDNA3.1/Zeo(+)-AaEcR.
To construct
pGEM3Z-AE
Sac1, the primer pair
DE-
Sac1-For and DE-
EcoR1-Rev was used to amplify
an 836-bp fragment from pGEM7Z-DmEcR. This fragment was digested
with
SacI and
EcoRI to replace the 991-bp
SacI-
EcoRI fragment
in pGEM3Z-AaEcR, yielding the
chimera pGEM3Z-AE
Sac1. PCRs were performed with
the polymerase
Pfu (Promega) with an
initial denaturation at
94°C for 2 min followed by 20 cycles of
denaturation at 94°C for
45 s, annealing at 60°C for 45 s, and
elongation at 72°C
for 3 min. To make the chimeric constructs
pGEM7Z-DE
Bbs1,
pGEM7Z-DE
Csp1,
pGEM7Z-DE
Spe1,
pGEM7Z-DE
BsiW1, and
pGEM7Z-DE
SS, pairs of forward and reverse
primers were annealed with the
template, either pGEM3Z-AaEcR or
pGEM7Z-DmEcR, for PCR amplification,
and the amplified fragments
were digested with restriction enzymes
to allow cloning into the
appropriate recipient plasmids. The
chimeric plasmid
pGEM3Z-AE
NB was constructed by replacing the
1,284-bp
NruI-
EcoRI fragment
in pGEM3Z-AaEcR with
the 729-bp
NruI-
XbaI fragment in
pGEM7Z-DE
BsiW1, blunting the
EcoRI
and
XbaI
sites.
Construction of site-directed point mutants.
Site-directed
mutagenesis of DmEcR was conducted according to the instruction manual
for the QuickChange site-directed mutagenesis system (Stratagene). A
pair of complementary primers (40 pmol of each) and 10 ng of template
plasmid pGEM3Z-AaEcR or pGEM7Z-DmEcR in 100 µl (total volume) were
subjected to PCR amplification with Pfu (Promega). PCRs were
performed with an initial denaturation at 94°C for 2 min, followed by
15 cycles of denaturation at 94°C for 30 s, annealing at 60°C
for 30 s, and elongation at 72°C for 14 min. The PCR products
were treated with DpnI (Stratagene) to remove the methylated
template DNA then gel purified, and transformed into Escherichia
coli. Sixteen site-directed mutants with a single amino acid
mutation were constructed this way. Eight of these (pGEM3Z-AEH502A,
pGEM3Z-AEA520C,
pGEM3Z-AEP523S,
pGEM3Z-AEK524M,
pGEM3Z-AEC525S,
pGEM3Z-AES526L,
pGEM3Z-AE1528F, and
pGEM3Z-AEF529Y) were AaEcR mutants; the
other eight (pGEM7Z-DEA584H,
pGEM7Z-DEC602A,
pGEM7Z-DES605P,
pGEM7Z-DEM606K,
pGEM7Z-DES607C,
pGEM7Z-DEL608S,
pGEM7Z-DEF610I, and
pGEM7Z-DEY611F) were DmEcR mutants. These
mutants were confirmed by partial sequencing. PCR primer sequences are
available upon request.
 |
RESULTS |
Differential effects of ecdysone and 20E on EcR-USP DNA binding
activity.
First, we compared the abilities of several ecdysteroids
to stimulate the DNA binding activity of the mosquito and
Drosophila EcR-USP heterodimers. The following ecdysteroids
were tested: ecdysone, 20E, 2DE, 22A, PolB, PonA, and MurA. Each
ecdysteroid (5 × 10
5 M) was incubated with receptor
proteins prepared by in vitro transcription-translation (see Materials
and Methods), and the reaction mix was subjected to EMSA. We first
compared the effect of various ecdysteroids on Aedes
receptors. A low level of DNA binding by the AaEcR-AaUSP heterodimer
was detected in the absence of any ligand (Fig. 1A, lane
1), and this activity was dramatically stimulated by 20E addition (Fig. 1A, lane 2). Ecdysone also
significantly stimulated AaEcR-AaUSP DNA binding activity (Fig. 1A,
lane 3), although less strongly than 20E. Other ecdysteroids enhanced
AaEcR-AaUSP DNA binding activity with the following decreasing potency
order: MurA > PonA > PolB > 20E > 22A > 2DE > ecdysone (Fig. 1A).

View larger version (84K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Differential effects of ecdysteroids on receptor DNA
binding activities. (A) In vitro-translated AaEcR and AaUSP proteins
were incubated with 32P-labeled
IRhsp-1 EcRE in the absence of ligand (lane 1)
or in the presence of 5 × 10 5 M 20E (lane 2),
ecdysone (lane 3), 2DE (lane 4), 22A (lane 5), PolB (lane 6), PonA
(lane 7), or MurA (lane 8). The reaction mixtures were subjected to
EMSA and autoradiography. (B) Same as panel A except that DmEcR and
DmUSP were used as receptor proteins. The molar amount of DmEcR and
DmUSP proteins was 50 times more than that of AaEcR and AaUSP so that
any trace DNA binding activity of DmEcR-DmUSP could be detected.
|
|
We then tested the effect of these ecdysteroids on the DmEcR-DmUSP
complex. Unlike the mosquito AaEcR-AaUSP heterodimer, the
DmEcR-DmUSP
heterodimer exhibited extremely low hormone-independent
DNA binding.
Even when the molar amounts of DmEcR and DmUSP were
50 times greater
than the amounts used for the mosquito receptors,
no
hormone-independent DNA binding was detected (Fig.
1B, lane
1).
Detection of hormone-independent DNA binding by the
Drosophila receptor required 100-fold more DmEcR and DmUSP
proteins (data
not shown). The DmEcR-DmUSP heterodimer exhibited robust
activation
of its DNA binding in response to 20E, PonA, MurA, and PolB
(Fig.
1B, lanes 2 and 6 to 8). The ligand 22A induced appreciable
binding
of the
Drosophila heterodimer, while the effect of
2DE was weak
(Fig.
1B, lanes 4 and 5). In stark contrast to what was
observed
for the mosquito heterodimer, though, ecdysone had no
detectable
effect on the DNA binding of the
Drosophila
receptor heterodimer
(Fig.
1B, lane 3). Thus, our EMSA results
demonstrated a clear
differential effect of ecdysone on the DNA binding
activity of
the AaEcR-AaUSP and DmEcR-DmUSP
heterodimers.
To determine the concentration of ecdysone and 20E required to
stimulate DNA binding, AaEcR and AaUSP lysates were incubated
with
increasing concentrations of ecdysone or 20E, ranging from
5 × 10
12 to 5 × 10
5 M, and subjected to
EMSA. The effect of 20E on the DNA binding
of the AaEcR-AaUSP
heterodimer was first evident at 5 × 10
8 M (not
shown). DNA binding activity increased proportionally
with increasing
concentration of 20E and reached its maximal level
at 5 × 10
5 M (not shown). The effect of 20E on the
Drosophila heterodimer
was similar (not shown). Ecdysone was
considerably weaker than
20E, with visible stimulation of the
AaEcR-AaUSP DNA binding at
5 × 10
6 M hormone (not
shown). No stimulation of DNA binding by the DmEcR-DmUSP
heterodimer
was detected in the EMSA even with 5 × 10
5 M
ecdysone (Fig.
1B, lane
3).
EcR protein, not USP protein, conferred specific response to
ecdysone.
To determine whether EcR or USP dictates the ligand
specificity of the heterodimer, we next conducted subunit-swapping
experiments. These experiments demonstrated that the behavior of
heterodimers with respect to both hormone-independent DNA binding and
ligand specificity are determined by the EcR subunit. When AaEcR was paired with DmUSP, the heterodimer exhibited a level of
hormone-independent binding similar to that of the AaEcR-AaUSP
heterodimer (Fig. 2, lanes 1 and 7).
Likewise, the DNA binding activity of the AaEcR-DmUSP heterodimer was
highly stimulated by both 20E and ecdysone (Fig. 2, lanes 8 and 9).
Testing different concentrations of these two hormones further
demonstrated that the AaEcR-DmUSP heterodimer behaved similarly to the
AaEcR-AaUSP heterodimer, responding to 10
8 M 20E and
10
6 M ecdysone (not shown). The reciprocal combination of
DmEcR and AaUSP had no detectable hormone-independent binding activity
(Fig. 2, lane 10). The binding of the DmEcR-AaUSP was stimulated only by 20E and not by ecdysone, as observed for the DmEcR-DmUSP complex (Fig. 2, lanes 11 and 12).

View larger version (101K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
AaEcR conferred specific response to ecdysone. In
vitro-translated proteins AaEcR and AaUSP (lanes 1 to 3), DmEcR and
DmUSP (lanes 4 to 6), AaEcR and DmUSP (lanes 7 to 9), or DmEcR and
AaUSP (lanes 10 to 12) were incubated with 50 fmol of
32P-labeled IRhsp-1 EcRE probe
either in the absence of hormone (lanes 1, 4, 7, and 10) or in the
presence of 5 × 10 5 M 20E (lanes 2, 5, 8, and 11)
or ecdysone (lanes 3, 6, 9, and 12). The reaction mixtures were
subjected to EMSA and autoradiography. The molar amount of DmEcR and
DmUSP proteins was 50 times more than that of AaEcR and AaUSP so that
any trace DNA binding activity of DmEcR-DmUSP could be detected. Free
probe is indicated by an asterisk. Complexes containing AaEcR and DmEcR
proteins are indicated by solid and open arrowheads, respectively.
|
|
Differential ecdysteroid-stimulated transactivation by mosquito and
Drosophila receptors in Drosophila S2
cells.
To investigate the effects of 20E and ecdysone on target
gene transactivation by the mosquito and Drosophila
heterodimers, we used a cell transfection assay. The reporter plasmid
Eip-Luc was transfected into Drosophila S2 cells alone or
along with pairwise combinations of expression plasmids carrying AaEcR,
AaUSP, DmEcR, or DmUSP cDNA. After transfection, cells were incubated
either in the absence of hormone or in the presence of 20E or ecdysone at 10
5 M. When challenged with 20E or ecdysone, cells
receiving Eip-Luc alone exhibited a low level of activation, which was
presumably mediated by the endogenous Drosophila DmEcR (Fig.
3A, column 1). After cotransfection along
with AaEcR and AaUSP, the signal was considerably more robust in
response to both 20E and ecdysone. Substitution of AaUSP with DmUSP did
not change the response (Fig. 3A, columns 2 and 3). The DmEcR-DmUSP and
DmEcR-AaUSP heterodimers each responded strongly to 20E and very weakly
to ecdysone (Fig. 3A, columns 4 and 5). These results corroborated our
finding, from the EMSA subunit swapping experiments, that the
specificity of hormonal response is determined by EcR and not by USP.
To minimize the variability of conditions, we have used DmUSP as a
partner in all subsequent experiments used to characterize functional differences between mosquito and Drosophila EcRs.

View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
(A) Ecdysone (10 5 M) more potently
activated AaEcR than DmEcR in S2 cells. S2 cells were transfected with
25 ng of reporter pAc5-LacZ and 100 ng of reporter plasmid Eip-Luc with
no expression plasmid (column 1) or with 12.5 ng each of AaEcR, AaUSP,
DmEcR, and DmUSP expression vectors in pairwise combinations: AaEcR and
AaUSP (column 2), AaEcR and DmUSP (column 3), DmEcR and AaUSP (column
4), and DmEcR and DmUSP (column 5). After transfection, cells were
incubated either in the absence of hormone or in the presence of 5 × 10 5 M 20E or ecdysone for 36 h and harvested for
-galactosidase and luciferase activities. (B) Ecdysone
(10 6 M) highly activated only the Aedes
receptor, not the Drosophila receptor. S2 cells (2.5 × 105) were transfected with 12.5 ng of reporter pAc5-LacZ
and 50 ng of reporter plasmid Eip-Luc (columns 1 to 3) or Hsp-Luc
(columns 4 to 6) together with no expression plasmid (columns 1 and 4)
or with 6.5 ng each of AaEcR and DmUSP (columns 2 and 5) or DmEcR and
DmUSP (columns 3 and 6) expression vectors. After transfection, cells
were incubated in the absence of hormone or in the presence of
10 6 M ecdysone (Ecd) or 20E for 24 h and harvested
for -galactosidase and luciferase activities. Luciferase activity
was normalized with -galactosidase activity. The results are
expressed as fold induction of the luciferase activity from cells
treated with hormone over that from cells treated with control vehicle
ethanol.
|
|
We also compared transactivation of a reporter construct containing the
HSP-27 EcRE with that of EIP. We used 10
6 M 20E and
ecdysone, as this amount of ecdysone provided clear
discrimination
between the strong response of the mosquito receptor
and the very weak
response of the
Drosophila receptor (Fig.
4).
These experiments, using the mosquito
or
Drosophila EcR in combination
with DmUSP, showed that
responses were, for the most part, similar
for different types of
reporters. However, both the endogenous
receptor and transfected
Drosophila receptor did show modestly
stronger ecdysone
activation of the inverted repeat containing
the HSP-27 reporter (Fig.
3B).

View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 4.
Dose-dependent transactivation by 20E and ecdysone in
the presence of AaEcR or DmEcR. S2 cells (5 × 105
cells/well) were transfected with 25 ng of reporter pAc5-LacZ and 100 ng of reporter plasmid Eip-Luc with 12.5 ng each of DmEcR and DmUSP (A)
or AaEcR and DmUSP (B) expression vectors. After transfection, cells
were incubated in the absence of hormone or in the presence of
increasing concentrations (from 10 10 to 10 5
M) of 20E or ecdysone for 24 h, and harvested for
-galactosidase and luciferase activities. Luciferase activity was
normalized with -galactosidase activity. The results are expressed
as fold induction of the luciferase activity from cells treated with
hormone over that from cells treated with control vehicle ethanol.
Error bars for some points are too small to be visible on the graph.
|
|
When S2 cells were cotransfected with the reporter plasmid along with
the DmEcR and DmUSP plasmids, they responded to 10
7 M
20E. However, only a very weak response to ecdysone could be
detected
at 10
6 M, with strong response seen only at a
concentration of 10
5 M (Fig.
4A). When S2 cells were
cotransfected with AaEcR and
DmUSP plasmids along with the reporter,
they responded to 20E
at the same concentration, 10
7 M. In contrast, these cells exhibited a markedly enhanced responsiveness
to ecdysone relative to cells transfected with DmEcR, showing
a clearly
detectable level of reporter gene induction at 10
7 M and
a relatively high level of transactivation at 10
6 M
ecdysone (Fig.
4B).
Taken together, these results established that in transfection assays,
DmEcR and AaEcR exhibited similar responsiveness to
20E. In contrast,
the
Aedes receptor was nearly 2 logs more sensitive
than the
Drosophila receptor to stimulation with
ecdysone.
Mapping the EcR domain responsible for differential recognition of
20E and ecdysone.
EMSA and transfection assays demonstrated that
the EcR protein, and not USP, was responsible for the ligand
specificity of the EcR complex. Next, we attempted to identify the EcR
domain responsible for differential ligand recognition. The EcR protein possess five functional domains, an N-terminal domain A/B, DBD C, hinge
domain D, LBD E, and C-terminal domain F (10, 34). To locate
the ligand specificity determinants, we made five chimeric EcR
constructs by swapping the appropriate Aedes and
Drosophila EcR domains. The AEBsrG1
chimera contained the A/B domain and most of the C domain from AaEcR
and the remainder of the C domain along with domains D, E, and F from
DmEcR. Reciprocally, DEBsrG1 included the A/B
domain and most of the C domain from DmEcR and the rest of domain C
along with domains D, E, and F from AaEcR (Fig.
5A). By swapping at the predicted
boundaries between domains C and D, domains D and E, and domains E and
F, we constructed three additional chimeras with N termini from DmEcR
and C termini from AaEcR, namely, DEXma3,
DEKpn1, and DEBgl2. These
chimeric proteins were produced by in vitro transcription-translation, paired with DmUSP protein, and subjected to EMSA. As seen for DmEcR, the AEBsrG1 and
DEBgl2 DNA binding activities were stimulated by
20E, not by ecdysone. These two chimeras did not display any detectable
hormone-independent DNA binding activity (not shown). In contrast, the
DEBsrG1, DEXma3, and
DEKpn1 chimeric proteins, containing AaEcR C
termini, exhibited clearly detectable hormone-independent DNA binding
activity and significant stimulation by both 20E and ecdysone (Fig.
5A). These results unambiguously mapped the determinants allowing
responsiveness to ecdysone to domain E, the LBD. Furthermore, the same
region of the AaEcR receptor appeared to be responsible for an
increased level of hormone-independent DNA binding activity.

View larger version (51K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 5.
(A) Localization of the ecdysone-specific region to the
LBD: schematic diagram shows domain-swapping chimeric proteins and
their responsiveness to ecdysone. 32P-labeled probe
IRhsp-1 EcRE was incubated with in
vitro-synthesized DmUSP protein paired with chimeric protein
AEBsrG1, DEBsrG1,
DEXma3, DEKpn1, or
DEBgl2 in the absence of hormone or in the
presence of 5 × 10 5 M 20E or ecdysone. Bound and
free probes were resolved by EMSA followed by autoradiography. (B)
C-terminus of EcR LBD determined ecdysone binding specificity:
schematic diagram of subdomain-swapping (within LBD) chimeric EcR
proteins and their responsiveness to 20E and ecdysone.
32P-labeled probe IRhsp-1 was
incubated with in vitro-synthesized DmUSP protein paired with
AESac1, AENru1,
DEBbs1, DETthIII1,
DECsp1, DESpe1, or
DEBsiW1 in the absence of hormone or in the
presence of 5 × 10 5 M 20E or ecdysone. Bound and
free probes were resolved by EMSA followed by autoradiography.
Constructs whose EMSA results are shown in panel D are in bold. (C)
Transferable ligand specificity subdomains in AaEcR and DmEcR.
32P-labeled probe IRhsp-1 was
incubated with in vitro-synthesized DmUSP protein paired with in
vitro-translated AENB or
DESS in the absence of hormone or in the
presence of 5 × 10 5 M 20E or ecdysone. Bound and
free probes were resolved by EMSA followed by autoradiography.
Responsiveness to 20E and ecdysone (Ecd) is indicated by a plus sign,
while lack of responsiveness is indicated by a minus sign in the
schematic diagrams. Solid bars denote DmEcR sequence, and open bars
denote AaEcR sequences. Domains A/B, C (DBD), D, E (LBD), and F are
pointed out above AaEcR and below DmEcR sequences. (D) Ecdysone
responsiveness of critical chimeric proteins revealed by EMSA. The
wild-type proteins AaEcR (lanes 1 to 3) and DmEcR (lanes 16 to 18) and
chimeric proteins AESac1 (lanes 4 to 6),
AENru1 (lanes 7 to 9),
DESpe1 (lanes 10 to 12), and
DEBsiW1 (lanes 13 to 15) were paired with in
vitro-synthesized DmUSP protein and then incubated with
32P-labeled probe IRhsp-1 in the
absence of hormone (lanes 1, 4, 7, 10, 13, and 16) or in the presence
of 5 × 10 5 M 20E (lane 2, 5, 8, 11, 14, and 17) or
ecdysone (lanes 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, and 18). The reaction mixtures were
resolved by EMSA followed by autoradiography.
|
|
Identification of the subdomain responsible for the ligand
specificity and hormone-independent DNA binding activity.
Next,
using receptor fragments prepared by a combination of restriction
digestion and PCR amplification, we prepared nine additional chimeric
constructs, swapped at various points within the E domain. Tests with
two chimeras, AESac1 and
AENru1, containing carboxy-terminal sequences
from DmEcR, suggested that the functional differences between the EcRs
mapped to the C-terminal portion of the E domain and that the F domain
did not play a role in the ligand recognition and heterodimerization
(Fig. 5B and D, lanes 4 to 9). These results implied that the region governing ligand specificity and hormone-independent DNA binding activity was located between the NruI and SacI
sites in the AaEcR cDNA.
Five more chimeric constructs were produced, proceeding from the
NruI site to the
SacI site, with N-terminal
sequences from
DmEcR and C-terminal sequences from AaEcR; these
constructs were
DE
Bbs1,
DE
TthIII1, DE
Csp1,
DE
Spe1, and DE
BsiW1
(Fig.
5B). Four of these chimeric proteins,
DE
Bbs1, DE
TthIII1,
DE
Csp1, and DE
Spe1,
behaved similarly to the mosquito EcR, showing significant
hormone-independent
DNA binding activity and strong stimulation by
either 20E or ecdysone
(Fig.
5B and D, lanes 10 to 12). In contrast,
the DE
BsiW1 chimera failed to show any
hormone-independent DNA binding activity,
and its DNA binding activity
was not enhanced by ecdysone (Fig.
5B and D, lanes 13 to
15).
To further confirm the functionality of the subdomains corresponding to
NruI-
BsiWI in DmEcR and
SacI-
SpeI in AaEcR, we constructed
two more
chimeric receptors, AE
NB and
DE
SS (Fig.
5C). The chimera
AE
NB, consisting primarily of a AaEcR protein
with only the
NruI and
BsiWI fragment from DmEcR,
was highly responsive to 20E, yet this
protein displayed no detectable
level of hormone-independent DNA
binding activity and only trace
activity to ecdysone (Fig.
5C).
In contrast, the
DE
SS chimera, which was DmEcR containing only
the short
SacI-
SpeI
amino acid sequence from
AaEcR, exhibited detectable hormone-free
DNA binding activity as well
as a strong response to 20E and ecdysone
(Fig.
6C).
Hence, we concluded that the region of the AaEcR LBD falling between
the
SpeI and
BsiWI restriction sites was
responsible
for the enhanced levels of hormone-independent DNA binding
activity
and sensitivity to
ecdysone.
AaEcR Phe529/DmEcR Tyr611 is the critical determinant of functional
differences in ligand recognition and hormone-independent DNA
binding.
Comparing AaEcR and DmEcR protein sequences revealed that
8 out of the 36 amino acids (aa) residing between the SpeI
and BsiWI sites were different. These AaEcR/DmEcR amino acid
differences were His502/Ala584, Ala520/Cys602, Pro523/Ser605,
Lys524/Met606, Cys525/Ser607, Ser526/leu608, Ile528/Phe610, and
Phe529/Tyr611 (Fig. 6A). To identify the
critical amino acid or amino acids conferring ligand specificity, we
created 16 site-directed mutants by replacing each amino acid in AaEcR
with the corresponding residue in DmEcR one by one, and vice versa.

View larger version (71K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 6.
Identification of the critical amino acid affecting
heterodimerization and responsiveness to ecdysone. (A) I box in EcR
proteins. DmEcR (34) and AaEcR (12) protein
sequences are aligned by GCG Bestfit. SpeI and
BsiWI sites in AaEcR and DmEcR cDNAs are indicated by
arrows. Nonconserved residues which were subjected to site-directed
mutagenesis between SpeI and BsiWI sites are in
bold. The critical residues F529 in AaEcR and Y611 in DmEcR are
indicated by an asterisk. (B) F529 in AaEcR is critical for ligand
specificity and hormone-free DNA binding activity.
32P-labeled probe IRhsp-1 was
incubated with in vitro-synthesized DmUSP protein paired with the
wild-type AaEcR (lanes 1 to 3) or point mutant
AEA520C (lanes 4 to 6),
AEP523S (lanes 7 to 9),
AEK524M (lanes 10 to 12),
AEC525S (lanes 13 to 15),
AES526L (lanes 16 to 18),
AEI528F (lanes 19 to 21), or
AEF529Y (lanes 22 to 24) in the absence of
hormone (lanes 1, 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, and 22) or in the presence of
5 × 10 5 M 20E (lanes 2, 5, 8, 11, 14, 17, 20, and
23) or ecdysone (lanes 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24). (C) Tyr611 in
DmEcR is critical for ligand specificity and hormone-free DNA binding
activity. 32P-labeled probe IRhsp-1
was incubated with in vitro-synthesized DmUSP protein paired with the
wild-type protein DmEcR (lanes 1 to 3) or point mutant
DEC602A (lanes 4 to 6),
DES605P (lanes 7 to 9),
DEM606K (lanes 10 to 12),
DES607C (lanes 13 to 15),
DEL608S (lanes 16 to 18),
DEF610I (lanes 19 to 21), or
DEY611F (lanes 22 to 24) in the absence of
hormone (lanes 1, 4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 19, and 22) or in the presence of
5 × 10 5 M 20E (lanes 2, 5, 8, 11, 14, 17, 20, and
23) or ecdysone (lanes 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18, 21, and 24). Bound and free
probes were resolved by EMSA followed by autoradiography. The molar
amount of DmEcR and DE mutants protein was 10 times more than that of
the molar amount of AaEcR and AE mutants in the EMSA.
|
|
First, we constructed eight AaEcR site-directed mutants, in which
His502, Ala520, Pro523, Lys524, Cys525, Ser526, Ile528,
and Phe529 were
mutated to Ala, Cys, Ser, Met, Ser, Leu, Phe,
and Tyr, respectively.
These mutant proteins were transcribed
in vitro, paired with DmUSP, and
subjected to EMSA. Four of the
site-directed mutants,
AE
H502A (not shown),
AE
A520C, AE
C525S, and
AE
1528F, exhibited strong hormone-free DNA
binding activity as well as
robust responses to 20E and ecdysone,
resembling the wild-type
AaEcR (Fig.
6B, lanes 1 to 6, 13 to 15, and 19 to 21). Three of
these mutants, AE
P523S,
AE
K524M, and
AE
S526L, displayed decreased level of
hormone-free DNA binding activity,
although they still responded
potently to ecdysone (Fig.
6B, lanes
7 to 9, 10 to 12, and 16 to 18).
Notably, the mutant AE
F529Y exhibited no
detectable level of hormone-free DNA binding activity;
its response to
ecdysone was dramatically reduced compared with
other mutants, although
its response to 20E was unaltered (Fig.
6B, lanes 22 to 24), indicating
that F529 in AaEcR is most critical
for conferring high-level
hormone-free DNA binding activity as
well as a specific response to
ecdysone.
We then created eight reciprocal site-directed mutants by
converting an amino acid in DmEcR to its corresponding residue
in
AaEcR; Ala584, Cys602, Ser605, Met606, Ser607, Leu608, Phe610,
and Tyr611 in DmEcR were mutated to His, Ala, Pro, Lys, Cys, Ser,
Ile,
and Phe, respectively, yielding DmEcR mutants
DE
A584H, DE
C602A,
DE
S605P, DE
M606K,
DE
S607C, DE
L608S,
DE
F610I, and DE
Y611F.
These mutant constructs were translated in vitro and paired
with DmUSP
for EMSA. DE
A584H (data not shown),
DE
C602A, DE
S607C,
DE
L608S, and DE
F610I
proteins did not display any hormone-independent heterodimerization,
and their DNA binding activity was detected only in the presence
of
20E, as observed for the DmEcR parent protein (Fig.
6C, lanes
1 to 6 and 13 to 21). Likewise, the DE
S605P and
DE
M606K proteins showed no DNA binding activity
in the absence of hormone,
strong activity with 20E, and only trace
activity with ecdysone
(Fig.
6C, lanes 7 to 12), suggesting that the
corresponding residues
in AaEcR, Pro523 and Lys524, might play a minor
role in ligand
recognition. Remarkably, a strong effect on both
hormone-independent
DNA binding and ligand recognition was observed
with one of the
single amino acid substitutions; the
DE
Y611F protein exhibited significant DNA
binding activity in the absence
of hormone, and this activity was
strongly amplified not only
with 20E but also with ecdysone, as
observed for the AaEcR protein
(Fig.
6C, lanes 22 to 24). These
findings suggest a critical role
for AaEcR Phe529/DmEcR Tyr611 as a
determinant of functional differences
between the
Drosophila
and mosquito EcRs. This single amino acid
difference affects both
hormone-independent heterodimeric DNA
binding and species-specific
ligand
discrimination.
 |
DISCUSSION |
In contrast to most nuclear receptors, EcRs are characterized by a
relatively low level of amino acid conservation (10, 18,
23). While the DBD is highly conserved among EcRs of different insects, the rest of the EcR protein shows substantial divergence relative to other members of nuclear hormone receptor superfamily. It
is particularly surprising that even the LBD/heterodimerization domain,
presumably recognizing the same hormone, 20E, varies from 87% identity
between Drosophila and Aedes to 67% between
Drosophila and Bombyx. Although no dramatic
differences in the binding affinities for 20E or PonA have been
observed among EcRs, the nonsteroidal agonist tebufenozide (RH-5992)
binds different EcRs with strikingly different affinities (16,
17). Using gel mobility shift and transactivation assays, Suhr et
al. (59) identified determinants in EcR of the silkworm
Bombyx mori (BmEcR) which are responsible for activation of
this receptor by tebufenozide. Construction of chimeric BmEcR-DmEcRs
revealed that the tebufenozide sensitivity of BmEcR was correlated with
a high level of hormone-independent heterodimer complex formation and
DNA binding relative to that of the DmEcR. Discrete determinants within
the hinge region (D) and the middle and C-terminal portions of the LBD
(E2 and E3) of the BmEcR protein are presumably involved in both
heterodimerization and increased affinity to tebufenozide
(59).
In this report, we present the first molecular evidence of the
differential effect of two natural insect steroid hormones on EcRs. Gel
mobility shift and transfection assays indicated that the mosquito EcR
was considerably more sensitive to ecdysone than was the
Drosophila receptor; we show here that while 20E activated
both DmEcR-DmUSP and AaEcR-AaUSP with equal efficiency, ecdysone
activated AaEcR-AaUSP with significantly higher efficiency. The
differential responsiveness of the mosquito and fly EcR-USP heterodimers to ecdysteroids was determined by the EcR subunit and not
by USP. Furthermore, domain-swapping experiments mapped the high
responsiveness to a 36-aa region in the C-terminal portion of the EcR
LBD. Interestingly, we found that the increased responsiveness to a
natural insect steroid hormone, ecdysone, also correlates with the
enhanced hormone-independent DNA binding activity of the mosquito EcR.
This specific region lies in E3, one of the regions involved in high
level hormone-independent DNA binding activity of the BmEcR
(59). However, in contrast to what was observed for BmEcR,
our detailed domain swapping did not show any significant involvement
of the hinge (domain D) or the middle region of the LBD (E2) in
hormone-independent DNA binding activity and ligand sensitivity of the
mosquito EcR.
EMSA indicated that ecdysone failed to stimulate discernible DNA
binding activity of DmEcR, although this steroid exhibited only
moderately lower activity than 20E in experiments using AaEcR. In
transfection assays in S2 cells, ecdysone was capable of activating both receptors, DmEcR and AaEcR, but ecdysone was still much weaker than 20E in activating DmEcR. One possibility is that the effect of
ecdysone on DmEcR in cell transfection assays could result from
conversion of ecdysone to 20E or other more active ecdysteroids. However, neither time courses of ecdysone response nor preincubation experiments show changes in the relative efficacy of ecdysone over time
(data not shown). Thus, it seems plausible that in vivo, other factors
may act to stabilize the receptor-ligand complex on at least some
targets enough to allow detection of weak interactions between ecdysone
and DmEcR.
Analysis of Aedes-Drosophila EcR chimeras revealed that the
region responsible for significantly augmented hormone-independent DNA
binding activity and ecdysone responsiveness is located between aa 502 and 529 in AaEcR, corresponding to aa 584 to 611 in DmEcR. This
region of EcR corresponds to helices 9 and 10 within other nuclear
hormone receptors for which crystal structure data are available
(4, 6, 48, 62, 68, 73). In estrogen receptor and RXR
homodimers, helices 9 and 10 are located at the dimerization interface
(4, 62). Using domain-swapping techniques, Perlmann et al.
(45) localized a dimerization box, designated the identity (I) box, within this interval and demonstrated its critical role in the
formation of RXR-retinoic acid receptor (RAR) and RXR-thyroid hormone
receptor heterodimers. We aligned the I-box sequence of EcRs with that
of human RAR
, which displays highest identity with EcRs among those
receptors with available crystal structures. This region contains the
predicted helices 9 and 10 as well as the loop connecting these two
helices. Between the SpeI and BsiWI sites
flanking the region responsible for functional differences in the
Drosophila and mosquito EcRs, there are eight amino acid differences between these two proteins, seven of which are clustered within the loop region of the I box (Fig. 6). Interestingly, the predicted loop region in the I box of BmEcR, which has been shown to
differ significantly from DmEcR with respect to its hormone-independent heterodimerization and agonist recognition (59), has seven
amino acids different from those of DmEcR. Indeed, alignment of other cloned EcRs shows that the loop region is the most diverged portion of
the putative I boxes in these receptors (Fig.
7). It remains to be tested whether the
synergistic action of several amino acids or the critical Phe/Tyr
residue determines the ligand specificity in EcRs of different
arthropods.

View larger version (56K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 7.
Putative I boxes in EcR proteins. I boxes of EcR protein
sequences from 15 arthropod species are aligned by GCG Pileup. Helices
9 and 10 in human RAR (HsRAR ) (48) are indicated by
dotted lines. Residues affecting hormone-free DNA binding activity and
ecdysone responsiveness in AaEcR and DmEcR are in bold. The most
critical residue, Phe/Tyr, is in bold italics. DmEcR, CfEcR, BaEcR, and
BmEcR are underlined as their proteins contain a Tyr at the critical
ligand specificity site. Data bank search yielded EcR protein sequences
from 16 species: 6 Diptera species, the Mediterranean fruit
fly Ceratitis capitata (CcEcR [67]), the
sheep blowfly Lucilia cuprina (LcEcR [23]),
the yellow fever mosquitoes A. aegypti (AaEcR, 12) and
A. albopictus (not shown, as its EcR I box is 100%
identical to AaEcR [28]), the midge Chironomus
tentans (CtEcR [27]), and D. melanogaster (DmEcR [34]); 6 Lepidoptera species, the spruce budworm C. fumiferana (CfEcR [35]), squinting bush brown
Bicyclus anynana (BaEcR [R. K. Reinhardt, P. Weber,
and P. B. Koch, submitted to GenBank, accession no. CAB63236]),
the silkworm B. mori (BmEcR [32, 60]), the
tobacco budworm Heliothis virescens (HvEcR
[41]), the tobacco hornworm M. sexta (MsEcR
[18]), and the buckeye Junonia coenia
(JcEcR [R. K. Reinhardt, P. Weber, and P. B. Koch submitted
to GenBank, accession no. CAB63485]); 1 Orthoptera species,
the migratory locust Locusta migratoria (LmEcR
[55]); 1 Coleoptera species, the yellow
mealworm Tenebrio moliter (TmEcR [42]); 1 crustacean species, the Atlantic sand fiddler crab Celuca
pugilator (CpEcR [13]); and 1 Ixodidae
species, the tick Amblyomma americanum (AamEcR
[20]).
|
|
EMSA analysis of the effects of single amino acid substitutions
revealed that substitution of a single residue, corresponding to Phe529
of AaEcR, for Tyr611 of DmEcR renders the Drosophila receptor responsive to ecdysone. Reciprocally, converting the Phe529 to
Tyr dramatically reduces the mosquito receptor responsiveness to
ecdysone while concurrently abolished its ligand-free DNA binding activity. The ability of the less polar residue, Phe, to confer enhanced sensitivity to the less polar ligand, ecdysone, is consistent with the possibility of direct interaction between Phe529/Tyr611 and
ecdysteroids; crystal structure data for related receptors suggest,
however, that this residue is unlikely to lie within the ligand binding
pocket. In light of the correlation between ecdysone sensitivity and
hormone-independent DNA binding, it therefore seems more likely that
the primary effect of Phe529 is in establishing a more stable
hydrophobic dimerization interface. Stabilization of the heterodimer
would in turn facilitate ligand binding and kinetically favor the
establishment of the ternary complex containing receptor, ligand, and
DNA (75). While 20E is capable of driving the formation of
complexes involving either the Drosophila or mosquito
EcR-USP-ecdysone appears to require a prestabilized dimer to ensure
productive ligand-receptor interaction.
Hagedorn et al. (21) have shown that in the adult mosquito,
neuroendocrine signals triggered by a blood meal cause the ovaries to
secrete ecdysone, which is presumably converted into 20E by peripheral
tissues. The secretion of ovarian ecdysone reaches in maximal levels at
16 h post-blood meal, with hemolymph ecdysteroid levels closely
following with a peak at 18-h post-blood meal (21). Further
analysis of hemolymph ecdysteroids showed that they consist of ecdysone
and 20E at a 1:1.5 ratio, with the ratio of ecdysone to 20E in the
hemolymph remaining approximately constant throughout the vitellogenic
cycle (3). Taken together with our findings of a high level
of AaEcR sensitivity to ecdysone, these observations suggest the
possibility that ecdysone is an active hormone in the mosquito. Further
studies will be required to determine whether ecdysone is involved in
distinct physiological responses, as appears to be the case in
Manduca eye development (7, 8), and to characterize those responses.
In conclusion, our study revealed at the molecular level, for the first
time, that ecdysone could act as a potent ligand for an EcR.
Furthermore, we have established differential responses of insect EcRs
to natural ecdysteroids, previously demonstrated only for synthetic
nonsteroid agonists (59). We have identified the molecular
determinants defining hormone-independent DNA binding activity/heterodimerization as well as differential ecdysteroid responses. By furnishing new insights into the structural and functional properties of insect EcRs, these studies are expected to
pave the way for the development of new EcR ligand-based pesticides for
use in the control of important disease vectors and other pest species.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
We thank H. H. Rees for help in purification of ecdysone and
M. McKeown for providing reporter constructs; we thank Michael J. Mienaltowski and Richard J. Miksicek for critical reading of the manuscript.
This work was supported by grant AI 36959 from the National Institutes
of Health.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: S-150 Plant
Biology Building, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824. Phone: (517) 353-7144. Fax: (517) 353-3396. E-mail:
araikhel{at}pilot.msu.edu.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Antoniewski, C.,
M. Laval,
A. Hahan, and J.-A. Lepesant.
1994.
The ecdysone response enhancer of the Fbp 1 gene of Drosophila melanogaster is a direct target for the EcR/USP nuclear receptor.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14:4465-4474[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 2.
|
Antoniewski, C.,
M. S. O'Grady,
R. G. Edmondson,
S. M. Lassieur, and H. Benes.
1995.
Characterization of an EcR/USP heterodimer target site that mediates ecdysone responsiveness of the Drosophila Lsp-2 gene.
Mol. Gen. Genet.
249:545-556[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 3.
|
Borovsky, D.,
L. R. Whisenton,
B. R. Thomas, and M. S. Fuchs.
1986.
Biosynthesis and distribution of ecdysone and 20-OH-ecdysone in Aedes-aegypti.
Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol.
3:19-30.
|
| 4.
|
Bourguet, W.,
M. Ruff,
P. Chambon,
H. Gronemeyer, and D. Moras.
1995.
Crystal structure of the ligand-binding domain of the human nuclear receptor RXR-alpha.
Nature
375:377-382[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 5.
|
Bownes, M.
1986.
Expression of the genes coding for vitellogenin (yolk protein).
Annu. Rev. Entomol.
31:507-531[CrossRef].
|
| 6.
|
Brzozowski, A. M.,
A. C. Pike,
Z. Dauter,
R. E. Hubbard,
T. Bonn,
O. Engstrom,
L. Ohman,
G. L. Greene,
J. A. Gustafsson, and M. Carlquist.
1997.
Molecular basis of agonism and antagonism in the oestrogen receptor.
Nature
389:753-758[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 7.
|
Champlin, D. T., and J. W. Truman.
1998.
Ecdysteroids govern two phases of eye development during metamorphosis of the moth, Manduca sexta.
Development
125:2009-2018[Abstract].
|
| 8.
|
Champlin, D. T., and J. W. Truman.
1998.
Ecdysteroid control of cell proliferation during optic lobe neurogenesis in the moth Manduca sexta.
Development
125:269-277[Abstract].
|
| 9.
|
Cherbas, L.,
K. Lee, and P. Cherbas.
1991.
Identification of ecdysone response elements by analysis of the Drosophila Eip28/29 gene.
Genes Dev.
5:120-131[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 10.
|
Cherbas, P., and L. Cherbas.
1996.
Molecular aspects of ecdysteroid hormone action, p. 175-222.
In
L. I. Gilbert, J. R. Tata, and B. G. Atkinson (ed.), Metamorphosis, postembryonic reprogramming of gene expression in amphibian and insect cells. Academic Press, San Diego, Calif.
|
| 11.
|
Cherbas, P.,
L. Cherbas,
S. S. Lee, and K. Nakanishi.
1988.
26-[125I]iodoponasterone A is a potent ecdysone and a sensitive radioligand for ecdysone receptors.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
85:2096-2100[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 12.
|
Cho, W.-L.,
M. Z. Kapitskaya, and A. S. Raikhel.
1995.
Mosquito ecdysteroid receptor: analysis of the cDNA and expression during vitellogenesis.
Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol.
25:19-27[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 13.
|
Chung, A. C.,
D. S. Durica,
S. W. Clifton,
B. A. Roe, and P. M. Hopkins.
1998.
Cloning of crustacean ecdysteroid receptor and retinoid-X receptor gene homologs and elevation of retinoid-X receptor mRNA by retinoic acid.
Mol. Cell. Endocrinol.
139:209-227[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 14.
|
D'Avino, P. P.,
S. Crispi,
L. Cherbas,
P. Cherbas, and M. Furia.
1995.
The moulting hormone ecdysone is able to recognize target elements composed of direct repeats.
Mol. Cell. Endocrinol.
113:1-9[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 15.
|
Dhadialla, T. S., and A. S. Raikhel.
1994.
Endocrinology of mosquito vitellogenesis, p. 275-281.
In
K. G. Davey, R. E. Peter, and S. S. Tobe (ed.), Perspectives in comparative endocrinology. National Research Council, Toronto, Canada.
|
| 16.
|
Dhadialla, T. S.,
G. R. Carlson, and D. P. Le.
1998.
New insecticides with ecdysteroidal and juvenile hormone activity.
Annu. Rev. Entomol.
3:545-569[CrossRef].
|
| 17.
|
Dhadialla, T. S., and G. Tzertzinis.
1997.
Characterization and partial cloning of ecdysteroid receptor from a cotton boll weevil embryonic cell line.
Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol.
35:45-57[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 18.
|
Fujiwara, H.,
M. Jindra,
R. Newitt,
S. R. Palli,
K. Hiruma, and L. M. Riddiford.
1995.
Cloning of an ecdysone receptor homolog from Manduca sexta and the developmental profile of its mRNA in wings.
Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol.
25:845-856[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 19.
|
Gilbert, L. I.,
R. Rybczynski, and S. S. Tobe.
1996.
Endocrine cascade in insect metamorphosis, p. 60-108.
In
L. I. Gilbert, J. R. Tata, and B. G. Atkinson (ed.), Metamorphosis, postembryonic reprogramming of gene expression in amphibian and insect cells. Academic Press, San Diego, Calif.
|
| 20.
|
Guo, X.,
M. A. Harmon,
V. Laudet,
D. J. Mangelsdorf, and M. J. Palmer.
1997.
Isolation of a functional ecdysteroid receptor homologue from the ixodid tick Amblyomma americanum (L.).
Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol.
27:945-962[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 21.
|
Hagedorn, H. H.,
J. D. O'Connor,
M. S. Fuchs,
B. Sage,
D. A. Schlaeger, and M. K. Bohm.
1975.
The ovary as a source of alpha-ecdysone in an adult mosquito.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
72:3255-3259[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 22.
|
Hagedorn, H. H.
1989.
Physiological roles of hemolymph ecdysteroids in adult insect, p. 279-289.
In
J. Koolman (ed.), Ecdysone, from chemistry to mode of action. Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc., New York, N.Y.
|
| 23.
|
Hannan, G. N., and R. J. Hill.
1997.
Cloning and characterization of LcEcR: a functional ecdysone receptor from the sheep blowfly Lucilia cuprina.
Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol.
27:479-488[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 24.
|
Henrich, V. C., and N. E. Brown.
1995.
Insect nuclear receptors: a developmental and comparative perspective.
Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol.
25:881-897[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 25.
|
Henrich, V. C.,
T. J. Sliter,
D. B. Lubahn,
A. MacIntyre, and L. I. Gilbert.
1990.
A steroid/thyroid hormone receptor superfamily member in Drosophila melanogaster that shares extensive sequence similarity with a mammalian homologue.
Nucleic Acids Res.
18:4143-4148[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 26.
|
Henrich, V. C.,
R. Rybczynski, and L. I. Gilbert.
1999.
Peptide hormones, steroid hormones, and puffs: mechanisms and models in insect development.
Vitam. Horm.
55:73-125[Medline].
|
| 27.
|
Imhof, M. O.,
S. Rusconi, and M. Lezzi.
1993.
Cloning of a Chironomus tentans cDNA encoding a protein (cEcR) homologous to the Drosophila melanogaster ecdysteroid receptor (dEcR).
Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol.
23:115-124[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 28.
|
Jayachandran, G., and A. M. Fallon.
2000.
Evidence for expression of EcR and USP components of the 20-hydroxyecdysone receptor by a mosquito cell line.
Arch. Insect Biochem. Physiol.
43:87-96[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 29.
|
Jindra, M.,
F. Malone,
K. Hiruma, and L. M. Riddiford.
1996.
Developmental profiles and ecdysteroid regulation of the mRNAs for two ecdysone receptor isoforms in the epidermis and wings of the tobacco hornworm, Manduca sexta.
Dev. Biol.
180:258-272[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 30.
|
Jindra, M.,
J. Y. Huang,
F. Malone,
M. Asahina, and L. M. Riddiford.
1997.
Identification and mRNA developmental profiles of two ultraspiracle isoforms in the epidermis and wings of Manduca sexta.
Insect Mol. Biol.
6:41-53[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 31.
|
Kapitskaya, M.,
S.-F. Wang,
D. E. Cress,
T. S. Dhadialla, and A. S. Raikhel.
1996.
The mosquito ultraspiracle homologue, a partner of ecdysteroid receptor heterodimer: cloning and characterization of isoforms expressed during vitellogenesis.
Mol. Cell. Endocrinol.
121:119-132[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 32.
|
Kamimura, M.,
S. Tomita, and H. Fujiwara.
1996.
Molecular cloning of an ecdysone receptor (B1 isoform) homologue from the silkworm, Bombyx mori, and its mRNA expression during wing disc development.
Comp. Biochem. Physiol. B
113:341-347[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 33.
|
Kiriishi, S.,
D. B. Rountree,
S. Sakurai, and L. I. Gilbert.
1990.
Prothoracic gland synthesis of 3-dehydroecdysone and its hemolymph 3 beta-reductase mediated conversion to ecdysone in representative insects.
Experientia
46:716-721[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 34.
|
Koelle, M. R.,
W. S. Talbot,
W. A. Segraves,
M. T. Bender,
P. Cherbas, and D. S. Hogness.
1991.
The Drosophila EcR gene encodes an ecdysone receptor, a new member of the steroid receptor superfamily.
Cell
67:59-77[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 35.
|
Kothapalli, R.,
S. R. Palli,
T. R. Ladd,
S. S. Sohi,
D. Cress,
T. S. Dhadialla,
G. Tzertzinis, and A. Retnakaran.
1995.
Cloning and developmental expression of the ecdysone receptor gene from the spruce budworm, Choristoneura fumiferana.
Dev. Genet.
17:319-330[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 36.
|
Lan, Q.,
K. Hiruma,
X. Hu,
M. Jindra, and L. M. Riddiford.
1999.
Activation of a delayed-early gene encoding MHR3 by the ecdysone receptor heterodimer EcR-B1-USP-1 but not by EcR-B1-USP-2.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
19:4897-4906[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 37.
|
Luo, Y.,
J. Amin, and R. Voellmy.
1991.
Ecdysterone receptor is a sequence-specific transcription factor involved in the developmental regulation of heat shock genes.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
11:3660-3675[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 38.
|
Mangelsdorf, D. J., and R. M. Evans.
1995.
The RXR heterodimers and orphan receptors.
Cell
83:841-850[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 39.
|
Mangelsdorf, D. J.,
C. Thummel,
M. Beato,
P. Herrlich,
G. Schutz,
K. Umesono,
B. Blumberg,
P. Kastner,
M. Mark,
P. Chambon, and R. M. Evans.
1995.
The nuclear receptor superfamily: the second decade.
Cell
83:835-839[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 40.
|
Maroy, P.,
R. Dennis,
C. Beckers,
B. A. Sage, and J. D. O'Connor.
1978.
Demonstration of an ecdysteroid receptor in a cultured cell line of Drosophila melanogaster.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
75:6035-6038[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 41.
|
Martinez, A.,
D. Scanlon,
B. Gross,
S. C. Perara,
S. R. Palli,
A. J. Greenland,
J. Windass,
O. Pongs,
P. Broad, and I. Jepson.
1999.
Transcriptional activation of the cloned Heliothis virescens (Lepidoptera) ecdysone receptor (HvEcR) by muristeroneA.
Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol.
29:915-930[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 42.
|
Mouillet, J. F.,
J. P. Delbecque,
B. Quennedey, and J. Delachambre.
1997.
Cloning of two putative ecdysteroid receptor isoforms from Tenebrio molitor and their developmental expression in the epidermis during metamorphosis.
Eur. J. Biochem.
248:856-863[Medline].
|
| 43.
|
Oro, A. E.,
M. McKeown, and R. M. Evans.
1990.
Relationship between the product of the Drosophila ultraspiracle locus and the vertebrate retinoid X receptor.
Nature
347:298-301[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 44.
|
Pak, M. D., and L. I. Gilbert.
1987.
A developmental analysis of ecdysteroids during the metamorphosis of Drosophila melanogaster.
J. Liq. Chromatogr.
10:2591-2611.
|
| 45.
|
Perlmann, T.,
K. Umesono,
P. N. Rangarajan,
B. M. Forman, and R. M. Evans.
1996.
Two distinct dimerization interfaces differentially modulate target gene specificity of nuclear hormone receptors.
Mol. Endocrinol.
10:958-966[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 46.
|
Raikhel, A. S.,
K. Miura, and W. A. Segraves.
1999.
Nuclear receptors in mosquito vitellogenesis.
Am. Zool.
39:722-735.
|
| 47.
|
Redfern, C. P. F.
1984.
Evidence for the presence of makisterone-a in Drosophila larvae and the secretion of 20-deoxymakisterone-a by the ring gland.
P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
81:5643-5647[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 48.
|
Renaud, J. P.,
N. Rochel,
M. Ruff,
V. Vivat,
P. Chambon,
H. Gronemeyer, and D. Moras.
1995.
Crystal structure of the RAR-gamma ligand-binding domain bound to all-trans retinoic acid.
Nature
378:681-689[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 49.
|
Riddihough, G., and H. R. B. Pelham.
1987.
An ecdysone response element in the Drosophila hsp27 promoter.
EMBO J.
6:3729-3734[Medline].
|
| 50.
|
Riddiford, L. M.
1993.
Hormone and Drosophila development, p. 899-939.
In
M. Bate, and A. Martinez (ed.), The development of Drosophila melanogaster, vol. 2. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, N.Y.
|
| 51.
|
Riddiford, L. M.,
K. Hiruma,
Q. Lan, and B. H. Zhou.
1999.
Regulation and role of nuclear receptors during larval molting and metamorphosis of lepidoptera.
Am. Zool.
39:736-746.
|
| 52.
|
Robinow, S.,
W. S. Talbot,
D. S. Hogness, and J. W. Truman.
1993.
Programmed cell death in the Drosophila CNS is ecdysone-regulated and coupled with a specific ecdysone receptor isoform.
Development
119:1251-1259[Abstract].
|
| 53.
|
Sage, B. A.,
M. A. Tanis, and J. D. O'Connor.
1982.
Characterization of ecdysteroid receptors in cytosol and naive nuclear preparations of Drosophila-Kc cells.
J. Biol. Chem.
257:6373-6379[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 54.
|
Sakurai, S., and C. M. Williams.
1989.
Short-loop negative and positive feedback on ecdysone secretion by prothoracic gland in the tobacco hornworm, Manduca sexta.
Gen. Comp. Endocrinol.
75:204-216[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 55.
|
Saleh, D. S.,
J. Zhang,
G. R. Wyatt, and V. K. Walker.
1998.
Cloning and characterization of an ecdysone receptor cDNA from Locusta migratoria.
Mol. Cell. Endocrinol.
143:91-99[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 56.
|
Segraves, W. A.
1994.
Steroid receptors and orphan receptors in Drosophila development.
Semin. Cell Biol.
5:105-113[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 57.
|
Shea, M. J.,
D. L. King,
M. J. Conboy,
B. D. Mariani, and F. C. Kafatos.
1990.
Proteins that bind to Drosophila chorion cis-regulatory elements: a new C2H2 zinc finger protein and a C2C2 steroid receptor-like component.
Genes Dev.
4:1128-1140[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 58.
|
Smith, S. L.,
W. E. Bollenbacher, and L. I. Gilbert.
1983.
Ecdysone 20-monooxygenase activity during larval-pupal development of Manduca sexta.
Mol. Cell. Endocrinol.
31:227-251[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 59.
|
Suhr, S. T.,
E. B. Gil,
M. C. Senut, and F. H. Gage.
1998.
High level transactivation by a modified Bombyx ecdysone receptor in mammalian cells without exogenous retinoid X receptor.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
95:7999-8004[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 60.
|
Swevers, L.,
J. R. Drevet,
M. D. Junke, and K. Iatrou.
1995.
The silkmoth homolog of the Drosophila ecdysone receptor (B1 isoform): cloning and analysis of expression during follicular cell differentiation.
Insect Biochem. Mol. Biol.
25:857-866[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 61.
|
Talbot, W. S.,
E. A. Swyryd, and D. S. Hogness.
1993.
Drosophila tissues with different metamorphic responses to ecdysone express different ecdysone receptor isoforms.
Cell
73:1323-1337[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 62.
|
Tanenbaum, D. M.,
Y. Wang,
S. P. Williams, and P. B. Sigler.
1998.
Crystallographic comparison of the estrogen and progesterone receptor's ligand binding domains.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
95:5998-6003[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 63.
|
Thomas, H. E.,
H. G. Stunnenberg, and A. F. Stewart.
1993.
Heterodimerization of the Drosophila ecdysone receptor with retinoid X receptor and ultraspiracle.
Nature
362:471-475[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 64.
|
Thummel, C. S.
1996.
Files on steroids Drosophila metamorphosis and the mechanisms of steroid hormone action.
Trends Genet.
12:306-310[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 65.
|
Thummel, C. S.
1997.
Dueling orphans interacting nuclear receptors coordinate Drosophila metamorphosis.
Bioessays
19:669-672[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 66.
|
Tsai, M. J., and B. W. O'Malley.
1994.
Molecular mechanisms of action of steroid/thyroid receptor superfamily members.
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
63:451-486[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 67.
|
Verras, M.,
M. Mavroidis,
G. Kokolakis,
P. Gourzi,
A. Zacharopoulou, and A. C. Mintzas.
1999.
Cloning and characterization of CcEcR. An ecdysone receptor homolog from the mediterranean fruit fly ceratitis capitata.
Eur. J. Biochem.
265:798-808[Medline].
|
| 68.
|
Wagner, R. L.,
J. W. Apriletti,
M. E. McGrath,
B. L. West,
J. D. Baxter, and R. J. Fletterick.
1995.
A structural role for hormone in the thyroid hormone receptor.
Nature
378:690-697[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 69.
|
Wang, S.-F.,
C. Li,
J. Zhu,
K. Miura,
R. J. Miksicek, and A. S. Raikhel.
2000.
Differential expression and regulation by 20-hydroxyecdysone of mosquito Ultraspiracle isoforms.
Dev. Biol.
218:99-113[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 70.
|
Wang, S.-F.,
K. Miura,
R. J. Miksicek,
W. A. Segraves, and A. S. Raikhel.
1998.
DNA binding and transactivation characteristics of the mosquito ecdysone receptor-ultraspiracle complex.
J. Biol. Chem.
273:27531-27540[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 71.
|
Warren, J. T.,
S. Sakurai,
D. B. Rountree, and L. I. Gilbert.
1988.
Synthesis and secretion of ecdysteroids by the prothoracic glands of Manduca-sexta.
J. Insect Physiol.
34:571-576[CrossRef].
|
| 72.
|
Warren, J. T.,
S. Sakurai,
D. B. Rountree,
L. I. Gilbert,
S. S. Lee, and K. Nakanishi.
1988.
Regulation of the ecdysteroid titer of Manduca sexta: reappraisal of the role of the prothoracic glands.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
85:958-962[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 73.
|
Williams, S. P., and P. B. Sigler.
1998.
Atomic structure of progesterone complexed with its receptor.
Nature
393:392-396[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 74.
|
Yao, T.-P.,
W. A. Segraves,
A. E. Oro,
M. McKeown, and R. M. Evans.
1992.
Drosophila ultraspiracle modulates ecdysone receptor function via heterodimer formation.
Cell
71:63-72[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 75.
|
Yao, T.-P.,
B. M. Forman,
Z. Jlang,
L. Cherbas,
J.-D. Chen,
M. McKeown,
P. Cherbas, and R. M. Evans.
1993.
Functional ecdysone receptor is the product of EcR and Ultraspiracle genes.
Nature
336:476-479.
|
| 76.
|
Yund, M. A.,
D. S. King, and J. W. Fristrom.
1978.
Ecdysteroid receptors in imaginal discs of Drosophila melanogaster.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
75:6039-6043[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
Molecular and Cellular Biology, June 2000, p. 3870-3879, Vol. 20, No. 11
0270-7306/00/$04.00+0
Copyright © 2000, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Kim, H.-W., Chang, E. S., Mykles, D. L.
(2005). Three calpains and ecdysone receptor in the land crab Gecarcinus lateralis: sequences, expression and effects of elevated ecdysteroid induced by eyestalk ablation. J. Exp. Biol.
208: 3177-3197
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Kumar, M. B., Potter, D. W., Hormann, R. E., Edwards, A., Tice, C. M., Smith, H. C., Dipietro, M. A., Polley, M., Lawless, M., Wolohan, P. R. N., Kethidi, D. R., Palli, S. R.
(2004). Highly Flexible Ligand Binding Pocket of Ecdysone Receptor: A SINGLE AMINO ACID CHANGE LEADS TO DISCRIMINATION BETWEEN TWO GROUPS OF NONSTEROIDAL ECDYSONE AGONISTS. J. Biol. Chem.
279: 27211-27218
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Bonneton, F., Zelus, D., Iwema, T., Robinson-Rechavi, M., Laudet, V.
(2003). Rapid Divergence of the Ecdysone Receptor in Diptera and Lepidoptera Suggests Coevolution Between ECR and USP-RXR. Mol Biol Evol
20: 541-553
[Abstract]
[Full Text]