Received 29 January 2001/Returned for modification 8 March
2001/Accepted 23 July 2001
Adhesion of cells to extracellular matrix is mediated by integrin
family receptors. The process of receptor-ligand binding is dependent
on metabolic energy and is regulated by intracellular signals, termed
inside-out signals. The strength of the initial
5
1-mediated
adhesion of v-src-transformed chicken embryo fibroblasts (v-srcCEF) was
similar to that of normal CEF. A chemically cross-linked fibronectin
substrate was able to restore cell spreading and the ability of
v-srcCEF to assemble a fibronectin matrix. Over time, v-srcCEF showed
decreased adhesion due to the reduction of
5
1-fibronectin bonds
consequent on the reduction of substrate-bound fibronectin due to the
secretion of proteases by v-srcCEF. Excess synthesis of hyaluronic acid
by v-srcCEF also reduced the
5
1-fibronectin bonds and contributed
to cell detachment at later times in culture. Thus, the adhesion
defects were not due to a failure of
5
1 function and adhesion of
the v-srcCEF was
5
1 dependent. Integrin-mediated adhesion also
produces signals that affect cell proliferation and cell
differentiation. An early consequence of these "outside-in" signals
was the phosphorylation of FAK Y397 in direct proportion to the number
of
5
1-fibronectin bonds formed. In contrast, v-srcCEF had an
increased level of phosphorylation on five different tyrosines in FAK,
and none of these phosphorylation levels were sensitive to the number
of
5
1-fibronectin bonds. In the absence of serum, CEF
proliferation was sensitive to changes in
5
1-mediated adhesion levels. Transformation by v-src increased the serum-free proliferation rate and made it insensitive to
5
1-mediated adhesion. Thus, the
v-srcCEF were insensitive to the normal outside-in signals from
5
1 integrin.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Despite the role of v-src as the
prototype oncogene, analysis of the mechanism by which v-src transforms
cells has lagged behind that for other oncogenes. One school of thought
linked src to the growth factor signaling pathways through its
potential to interact with the receptors for epidermal growth factor
and platelet-derived growth factor (36, 61). The
alternative hypotheses centered on the initial discovery that v-src was
localized to focal adhesions (48). Using a screen for
proteins which showed increased tyrosine phosphorylation in v-src
transformed cells, Parsons and coworkers identified a series of
adhesion and cytoskeletal associated proteins that were
overphosphorylated in v-src-transformed cells, suggesting a role for
v-src in the regulation of cell adhesion and cytoskeletal assembly
(26, 31). More recently, work with src family knockout
mice has provided further support to the idea that c-src controls cell
adhesion-mediated signals and suggested that it does not play an
essential role in the growth factor-mediated signals (32,
33).
Integrins are heterodimeric cell surface receptors that serve to attach
cells to extracellular ligands. The conformation of the extracellular
cell binding domain of the hererodimer can be regulated by
intracellular signals (16, 55). This control of
integrin-ligand interactions by intracellular signals has been called
inside-out signaling, and it regulates the affinity of the integrin for
its ligand, adhesion to extracellular matrix, and extracellular matrix
assembly (29, 64). Transformation of cells by v-src
results in a less-spread, fusiform, or round cell morphology, which
appears to be less adherent to the substrate. One way to achieve this
morphologic change would be to reduce the adhesion of the cells to
their extracellular matrix substrate by the modulation of integrin
inside-out signaling. Ligand binding by integrins can also act to
control cell differentiation and cell proliferation (21,
68) mediated by intracellular signaling systems that appear to
include FAK, cas, paxillin, and the mitogen-activated protein kinase
(MAPK) cascade (4, 26, 51). The cytoplasmic domains of
both
1 and
3 integrins contain a membrane-proximal tyrosine in an
NPXY motif that represents a known v-src phosphorylation target and a
more distal tyrosine that also is in a similar motif and hence a
potential target for v-src (57). Both
1 and
3 tyrosine phosphorylation are increased in cells transformed by v-src
(28, 58) (A. Datta, unpublished results). Mutation of this
tyrosine in
1 altered the adhesion of cells to laminin but showed
little effect on adhesion to either fibronectin or vitronectin substrates (50). Analysis of
1 integrin mutants and
differential detergent extraction of
1 integrin from v-src
transformed cells suggested that phosphorylation of the proximal
tyrosine in
1 tended to redistribute the
1 away from the adhesion
structures and therefore make it nonfunctional (25, 50,
58). This led to the hypothesis that integrin function may be
controlled by phosphorylation of the
-cytoplasmic domain and that
v-src could result in a disregulation of integrin function.
Phosphorylation of FAK is increased either by adhesion of the cells to
extracellular matrix or by transformation with v-src (8, 24, 34,
38). Phosphorylation of FAK is linked to numerous downstream
signaling pathways and thus may govern the specific alterations in
growth control that are central to the transformed phenotype.
Analysis of integrin function in v-src-transformed cells is complicated
by the large increase in secretion of both plasminogen activator-type
and metalloproteases (2, 56). Some of these secreted
proteases are specifically localized to the focal contact regions of
chicken embryo fibroblasts (CEF) (6). Since the number of
integrin-ligand bonds would be reduced by the proteolytic cleavage and
removal of the ligand, this would have the effect of reducing
integrin-mediated adhesion independently of integrin activation and
inside-out signals. Protease inhibitors have been shown to suppress
morphologic aspects of v-src transformation (62). However,
given the multiplicity of extracellular matrix molecules available from
the serum and synthesized by the cells, it was not clear which matrix
molecules were responsible for the protease effects. High
concentrations of fibronectin also caused some morphologic reversion,
but again the mechanism was not analyzed (1, 65). The
experiments described here employ a chemically cross-linked fibronectin
matrix to reduce the effects of protease cleavage and to provide an
analysis of integrin function without the confounding simultaneous
effects of the proteases that are upregulated in the process of cell transformation.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Cell culture and transformation.
Primary CEF were isolated
from 11-day-old chicken embryos (B&E Eggs, Inc., Stevens, Pa.) and
cultured in Dulbecco modified Eagle medium supplemented with 1%
chicken serum (Life Technologies, Inc.), 4% fetal calf serum
(Sigma), L-glutamine, penicillin, and streptomycin (Life
Technologies, Inc.). For transformation by v-src, cells were
trypsinized and replated. Two hours after the replating, the culture
medium was removed and the cells were infected with the Rous sarcoma
virus strain Schmidt-Ruppin subtype A (SRA), which expresses the
v-src oncogene. Normal medium was replaced 2 h later.
Transformation-associated morphologic changes were usually observable
within 48 h after infection. Cells were used between the second
and fifth passages.
Deposition and cross-linking of fibronectin.
Cover glasses
were coated with 10 µg of human plasma fibronectin (Life
Technologies, Grand Island, N.Y.)/ml for 30 min and washed with
Dulbecco phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) three times. After absorption
to the glass surface, some cover glasses were treated with 0.1%
glutaraldehyde in PBS for 10 min to cross-link the deposited
fibronectin. The cover glasses were incubated in Tris-dextrose (25 mM
Tris, 135 mM NaCl, 0.4 mM
Na2HPO4, 5 mM KCl, 5 mM
dextrose) for 10 min to quench the cross-linking reaction and washed
twice with Tris-dextrose. Cells were plated at low density on normal
and cross-linked fibronectin in the presence or absence of
hyaluronidase (20 µg/ml) in Dulbecco modified Eagle medium without
serum for up to 7 days.
Immunofluorescence.
Cells were seeded on fibronectin-coated
cover glasses in serum-free medium for 48 h. The cover glasses
were then washed twice with Dulbecco PBS. Cells were fixed with 3.7%
formaldehyde, washed twice with PBS and permeabilized with 0.5% Triton
X-100 for 15 min. The cover glasses were blocked with 0.1% bovine
serum albumin (BSA). HFN7.1 monoclonal antibody (American Type Culture
Collection, Rockville, Md.) hybridoma supernatant against human
fibronectin was added at a 1:5 dilution, or B3D6 monoclonal antibody
(Developmental Studies Hybridoma Bank, Iowa City, Iowa [submitted by
D. M. Fambrough]) purified ascites fluid against chick
fibronectin was added at 1:500. The primary antibody was detected by
fluorescein-conjugated secondary anti-mouse antibody (Jackson
ImmunoResearch, West Grove, Pa.). For actin staining, cells were
prepared as described above and stained with fluorescein-conjugated
phalloidin (Molecular Probes).
Fibronectin enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA).
Cover
glasses (25 mm in diameter) were coated with human plasma fibronectin
at different concentrations ranging from 0 to 10 µg/ml with or
without cross-linking as described earlier. A total of 5 × 105 cells were seeded per cover glass in the
absence of serum and incubated for 48 h. The cover glasses were
washed twice with PBS and treated briefly with 0.1% sodium dodecyl
sulfate (SDS) in PBS to remove the cells. The cover glasses were then
washed twice in PBS and blocked with blocking buffer (0.05% Tween 20, 0.25% BSA, and 1 mM EDTA in PBS [pH 7.4]). Residual fibronectin was detected with either HFN7.1 or rabbit anti-fibronectin antibody (Cappel, West Chester, Pa.) and then with fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC)-conjugated secondary antibody. The cover glasses were scanned in
a Storm fluorescent imager (Molecular Dynamics, Sunnyvale, Calif.) at a
photomultiplier tube voltage of 900 V. The relative fluorescence
intensities were determined by densitometry using ImageQuant software
(Molecular Dynamics).
Spinning disk assay.
The spinning disk assay was performed
as described by Garcia et al. (19). Briefly, the cells
were detached by trypsinization, and the trypsin neutralized by
treatment with 0.05 mg of soybean trypsin inhibitor (Sigma)/ml. The
cells were either pretreated with CSAT function-blocking monoclonal
antibody to chick
1 integrin (a gift from A. F. Horwitz) for 15 min or left untreated. The cells were then allowed to adhere to the
deposited extracellular matrix on a coverslip placed on the spinning
disk for 15 min. The chamber containing the disk was then filled with
buffer, and the disk was spun at a constant angular velocity. After the
spinning step, the cells were fixed with ice-cold 95% ethanol and
stained with ethidium homodimer. Cell numbers at different radial
positions were determined by using a motorized stage and Phase 3 image
analysis software version 3.0, and the shear stress corresponding to
50% cell detachment (
50) was calculated by
fitting the data to a sigmoid curve by using SigmaPlot software.
Cross-linking of bound integrins.
A total of 2 × 106 cells were seeded on fibronectin-coated
dishes (10 µg/ml) for 1 h and cross-linked with 1 mM
Sulfo-BSOCOES (Pierce, Rockford, Ill.) in PBS for 30 min. The cells
were extracted with 0.1% SDS in PBS containing protease inhibitors.
After detergent extraction, the extracted proteins were quantified by a
BCA Assay (Pierce). The cross-links were reversed by adding carbonate
buffer (50 mM Na2CO3, 0.1%
SDS; pH 11.6) for 2 h at 37°C. The cross-linked pool of
integrins was detected by Western blotting using a polyclonal antibody
against
1 integrin (10) and monoclonal antibodies A21F7
and D71E2 against avian
5 integrin (Developmental Studies Hybridoma
Bank, Iowa City, Iowa [submitted by A. F. Horwitz]).
Analysis of FAK and general tyrosine phosphorylation.
Normal
and v-src-transformed CEF were serum starved overnight, trypsinized,
neutralized with soybean trypsin inhibitor, washed, and plated on
fibronectin at densities of 0, 15, 100, 250, and 350 ng/cm2 blocked with 1% heat-inactivated BSA.
Cells were incubated for 1 h at room temperature in PBS with 1 mM
Ca2+-1 mM Mg2+ and 2 µg
of dextrose/ml (adhesion buffer). Cells were extracted with ice-cold
lysis buffer (100 mM NaCl, 10 mM Tris-HCl, 1 mM EDTA, 1 mM EGTA, 20 mM
Na2P2O7,
1 mM NaF, 1% Triton X-100, 0.1% SDS, 2 mM
Na3VO4, 350 µg of
phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride/ml, 10 µg of leupeptin/ml, and
10 µg of aprotinin/ml). Total cellular protein was quantified by the
BCA Assay. Equal amounts of total protein were loaded in each lane, and
the proteins were resolved by SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis.
The levels of phosphorylation of FAK(Y397), FAK(Y407), FAK(Y577),
FAK(Y861), and FAK(Y925) were detected by phosphorylation
state-specific polyclonal antibodies (Biosource International,
Camarillo, Calif.). Total FAK was detected by a monoclonal antibody
from Transduction Laboratories (Lexington, Ky.). Primary antibody was
detected by using horseradish peroxidase-conjugated secondary
antibodies (Calbiochem, San Diego, Calif.), followed by incubation with
enhanced chemiluminescence reagent (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech,
Piscataway, N.J.). The bands were visualized by Fuji LAS-1000plus
luminescent image analyzer and analyzed with ScienceLab v2.5 software.
Analysis of cell proliferation.
Cells were plated on
fibronectin (350 ng/cm2), cross-linked
fibronectin (350 ng/cm2), or polylysine coated at
100 µg/ml in serum-free medium for 48 h and 10 µg of
bromodeoxyuridine (BrdU)/ml was added for the next 24 h. At
72 h, the cells were washed with PBS and stained as described by
Foster et al. (15). The cells were treated with 2 N HCl
for 20 min and washed three times for 20 min with 100 mM Tris-50 mM
NaCl (pH 7.6). The cover glasses were blocked with 1% BSA and 5%
fetal calf serum in PBS for 15 min and then incubated with anti-BrdU
monoclonal antibody G3G4. The primary antibody was detected with
FITC-conjugated anti-mouse antibody. Nuclei were counterstained with
ethidium homodimer. The anti-BrdU-stained and total nuclei were counted
by fluorescence microscopy.
 |
RESULTS |
Adhesion of v-src-transformed CEF is dependent on
5
1
integrin.
From the early observations, oncogenic transformation of
cells in culture has been recognized by altered cell morphology
(60). The transformed cells appear to be rounder and more
refractile, suggesting a reduction in their adhesion to the culture
dish. To analyze the receptors involved in these adhesion differences, normal CEF and cells transformed by Rous sarcoma virus encoding the
v-src oncogene were plated and allowed to spread. CSAT
monoclonal antibody that blocks
1 integrin was added for 6 h,
and the effect on the spread cells was examined. Figure
1 shows that CSAT caused a slight
retraction of the normal cells but they remained largely spread,
whereas the transformed cells were dramatically retracted and many
cells detached. This demonstrates that the adhesion of the transformed
cells was dependent on
1 integrins while the normal cells appear to
have additional adhesion mechanisms that operate when
1
integrin-mediated adhesion is blocked.

View larger version (142K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 1.
Cells were allowed to spread and then were treated for
6 h with CSAT monoclonal antibody at 30 µg/ml. CSAT is a
function-blocking anti-chicken 1 antibody. (A) Normal CEF.
(B) Normal CEF treated with CSAT. (C) v-src-transformed CEF. (D)
v-src-transformed CEF treated with CSAT.
|
|
To dissect this problem, we developed a system for the quantitative
analysis of cell adhesion. The spinning disk analysis allows the
measurement of adhesion strength for intact cells, and hence the assay
is sensitive to inside-out signaling (18, 22, 29), which
is likely to differ between the normal and the transformed cells. In
addition, this remains the only adhesion assay in which a direct
quantitative relationship between the number of receptor-ligand bonds
and the strength of cell adhesion has been demonstrated. Because of
this direct relationship the differences in adhesion strength represent
the product of differences in the strengths of the integrin-ligand
bonds and the number of those bonds (19). Figure
2A shows that there was no significant difference in the strength of adhesion for v-src-transformed CEF compared to normal CEF after 15 min of plating on a fibronectin substrate. This adhesion was dependent on
1 integrin since CSAT antibody reduced the adhesion to background levels for both cell populations. This demonstrates that the
1 integrin receptors for
fibronectin, principally
5
1, are functioning reasonably normally
in the v-src-transformed cells. The spinning disk also provides the
unique ability to measure the strength of adhesion for cells which have
been plated for several hours or days (20). Figure 2B
shows a separate experiment in which normal and v-src-transformed CEF
were allowed to adhere to fibronectin for 6 or 48 h before analysis in the spinning disk device. At these times, the
v-src-transformed CEF were only 3- to 4-fold more adherent than they
were at 15 min, whereas the normal CEF were 10-fold more adherent.
Thus, although the cells still demonstrate reasonable strength of
adhesion, the transformed cell adhesion was compromised at the later
time points.

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Adhesion assays for normal and v-src-transformed CEF
obtiained by using the spinning disk assay. (A) Mean adhesion strength
for normal CEF and v-src-transformed CEF [CEF(SRA)] for adhesion to
fibronectin (160 ng/cm2) for 15 min in the absence or
presence of CSAT antibody (*; <2 dynes/cm2).
Error bars indicate the standard deviation (n = 3).
(B) Mean adhesion strength for normal CEF (white bars) and
v-src-transformed CEF (black bars) for cells were allowed to adhere to
fibronectin for 6 or 48 h before analysis by using the spinning
disk. Error bars indicate the standard deviation (n = 3).
|
|
Another approach to the analysis of the integrins involved in adhesion
to substrate involves the use of cell-impermeant chemical cross-linkers
to cross-link the bound receptors to their substrate-adsorbed ligands
(11). Only active integrins can be cross-linked, and cross-linking requires the availability of the correct ligand (11, 21). For
5
1 integrin, there is a direct linear
relationship between the proportion of
5 and
1 cross-linked and
the number of
5
1-fibronectin bonds (17) (Q. Shi and
D. E. Boettiger, unpublished results). The proportion of
5 and
1 integrin that could be cross-linked to fibronectin 1 h after
plating was examined for normal and v-src-transformed cells (Fig.
3). The lower band represents
intracellular forms of
5 and
1 integrin, which are not fully
processed and hence were seen only for the supernatant pool which
includes the intracellular integrin. Quantification of the data show
that the cross-linked
5
1 was reduced by ca. 20% for the
v-src-transformed cells.

View larger version (65K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 3.
Chemical cross-linking of fibronectin-bound 5 1.
Level of substrate-bound 1 and 5 integrins after 1 h of
attachment of cells to fibronectin was detected by Western blot of 1
and 5 integrins. X-link, recovered integrin subunits after cleavage
of the cross-linker; Supernatant, extract of non-cross-linked
integrins; CEF, normal cells; SRA, v-src-transformed cells.
|
|
These analyses demonstrate that, at least for early times after plating
on a fibronectin substrate, the adhesion of the v-src-transformed CEF
is very similar to that for normal CEF. Differences in the multiplicity
of adhesion mechanisms and in the strength of adhesion were observed
for later times. Since the initial interaction between integrin and
fibronectin requires inside-out signals to activate binding to
fibronectin, this implies that these inside-out signals are still
functional in the presence of v-src. The data point to the importance
of
1 integrins in mediating substrate adhesion for v-src-transformed
CEF. Unfortunately, specific function-blocking antibodies are not
available to distinguish between different avian
1 integrin types,
but the cross-linking data supplied here and previously
(11), and similar analyses of primary fibroblasts of human
origin, strongly implicate
5
1 (Datta and Boettiger, unpublished).
Reduced adhesion of v-src-transformed CEF is caused by reduced
fibronectin on the substrate and reduced accessibility to the
fibronectin.
The analyses performed focused on the
5
1-fibronectin bond because this appears to be the dominant
mechanism of adhesion of v-src-transformed CEF in culture. Since the
strength of integrin-mediated adhesion is determined by the number of
receptor-ligand bonds, changes in the surface density of fibronectin
would alter the overall strength of the adhesion. Oncogenically
transformed cells in general, and v-src transformed cells in
particular, produce increased levels of both metalloproteases and
plasminogen activator-type proteases (2, 56). To test the
hypothesis that the digestion of fibronectin by proteases led to a
decreased density of fibronectin on the substrate and hence to a
decrease in integrin-mediated adhesion, a model was developed using
chemically cross-linked fibronectin to reduce the ability of proteases
to remove it from the substrate.
v-src-transformed cells were plated on normal or chemically
cross-linked fibronectin in the absence of serum. The adsorbed fibronectin appears as a diffuse staining and was not assembled into
fibrils. The presence of fibronectin on the surface was analyzed after
48 h by using a monoclonal antibody, HFN7.1, which recognizes the
cell-binding domain of human fibronectin (52). Figure
4A to D shows that chemical
cross-linking of the fibronectin led to its
retention, whereas the bulk of the non-cross-linked fibronectin was
removed. To quantify this removal of fibronectin, densitometric analysis of the remaining fibronectin was performed by using both the
HFN7.1 monoclonal antibody and a rabbit polyclonal anti-fibronectin antibody (Fig. 4E and F). By both antibodies, >90% of the
non-cross-linked fibronectin was removed. After cross-linking, HFN7.1
detected 63% of the control level, whereas the polyclonal antibody
showed no decrease relative to the control. The difference between
these two measurements could be due to the presence of newly
synthesized chick fibronectin deposited on the surface and/or to a
preferential loss of the HFN7.1 epitope in the presence of transformed
cell proteases.

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 4.
Chemical cross-linking inhibits proteolytic removal of
fibronectin. v-src-transformed CEF were plated on fibronectin-coated or
chemically cross-linked fibronectin-coated cover glasses. (A) Cells
plated for 48 h on cross-linked fibronectin and stained with
HFN7.1 monoclonal antibody showing diffuse staining of the initial
human fibronectin. (B) Same field as panel A but stained with ethidium
homodimer. (C) Cells plated on normal fibronectin for 48 h and
stained with HFN7.1 showing that most of the fibronectin has been removed by the cells. (D) Same field as panel C but stained
with ethidium homodimer. (E and F) Quantification of residual
fibronectin levels after 48 h by using HFN7.1 antibody (E) or
rabbit anti-fibronectin (F). Fn, fibronectin only; X-Fn, cross-linked
fibronectin only; Fn-C, fibronectin plus transformed cells; X-Fn-C,
cross-linked fibronectin plus transformed cells. (G and
H) Modified enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay showing the removal of
normal ( ) or cross-linked ( ) fibronectin by transformed cells as
a function of fibronectin density by using HFN7.1 antibody (G) and
rabbit anti-fibronectin antibody (H). Error bars indicate the standard
deviation (n = 3).
|
|
To determine whether intramolecular cross-linking was sufficient to
render the fibronectin resistant to protease removal, fibronectin was
deposited at different densities ranging from 5 to 350 ng/cm2 and then cross-linked. Cells were seeded
on the cross-linked fibronectin and on corresponding densities of
non-cross-linked fibronectin. After 48 h of cell culture, cells
were removed and the remaining human fibronectin was detected with both
HFN7.1 and rabbit anti-fibronectin antibodies (Fig. 4G and H).
Retention of the HFN7.1
5
1 integrin-binding epitope was seen only
at the highest coating density. This shows that intermolecular
cross-linking was particularly important for the retention of the
cell-binding domain of fibronectin. Retention of the wider range of
epitopes recognized by the polyclonal antibody was less sensitive to
fibronectin density, suggesting that intramolecular cross-linking also
plays a role in immobilization of the fibronectin.
The ability of the chemical-cross-linking procedure to reverse this
reduction of adhesion by the v-src-transformed cells was analyzed. To
reduce the complicating effects of serum factors and the presence of
proteases and protease precursors in serum, these experiments were all
performed serum free. v-src cells were able to survive periods of at
least a week in the complete absence of serum without observable
effects of apoptosis. After 12 h, v-src-transformed cells plated
on normal or cross-linked fibronectin remained well adherent and
spread; however, by 48 h the cells on normal fibronectin had
retracted into rounded, loosely adherent cell clusters, whereas the
cells on cross-linked fibronectin remained largely spread (Fig.
5A to D). After more than 72 h, even
the cells on the cross-linked fibronectin retracted into cell clusters.

View larger version (97K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 5.
Effects of fibronectin cross-linking and hyaluronidase
on the morphology of v-src transformed CEF. (A) Plated for 12 h in
the absence of serum on cover glasses coated with fibronectin. (B)
Plated for 12 h in the absence of serum on cover glasses coated
with glutaraldehyde cross-linked fibronectin. (C) Plated for 48 h
on fibronectin. (D) Plated for 48 h of glutaraldehyde cross-linked
fibronectin. (E) Plated for 7 days on glutaraldehyde cross-linked
fibronectin in the presence of hyaluronidase and phalloidin stained.
(F) Corresponding phase micrograph (i.e., for panel E). (G) Plated for
7 days on fibronectin in the presence of hyaluronidase and phalloidin
stained. (H) Corresponding phase micrograph (i.e., for panel G).
|
|
In addition to the secretion of proteases by transformed cells, there
are changes in the proteoglycans produced (54) and an
increase in the synthesis of hyaluronic acid (30). The
biological effects of these differences had not been investigated. To
determine whether the synthesis of hyaluronic acid and altered
proteoglycans affected adhesion, hyaluronidase was added to the
cultures. Figure 5E and F shows v-src-transformed cells after 7 days in
serum-free medium plated on cross-linked fibronectin in the presence of
hyaluronidase. These cells maintained their spread appearance and show
actin staining in podosomes, a finding characteristic of
v-src-transformed cells, and some filamentous actin staining near the
tips of the cells. The actin staining pattern was not reverted to the
intense actin cables seen in normal CEF (3). Figure 5G and
H shows the parallel staining for cells plated on non-cross-linked
fibronectin. The majority of the cells had retracted into small
clusters. Shown here is one of the more spread clusters to reveal the
peripheral actin staining seen most prominently in the round cell.
Whether one expects the induced spreading of the transformed cells to restore actin stress fibers depends on whether this assembly is part of
the activation process, i.e., inside-out signaling, or part of the
response, i.e., "outside-in" signaling. Note that there still is
assembled actin at the cell periphery that could fulfill the actin
assembly requirements associated with integrin activation
(67). Since stress fibers appear relatively late in the
spreading process and accumulate with time, it would appear more likely
that the failure to restore these structures is a consequence of
defective outside-in signaling.
Thus, the analysis of integrin-mediated adhesion for transformed cells
is confounded both by the secretion of proteases which removes the
substrate-bound ligands necessary for integrin-mediated adhesion and by
the secretion of proteoglycans and hyaluronic acid which can act to
insulate the integrin receptors from the substrate-bound ligands, as
shown previously for normal chondroblasts (10).
Fibronectin assembly by v-src-transformed cells.
In tissues,
most of the fibronectin is assembled into fibrils in a process that
requires activated integrins (63, 64). In contrast,
transformed cells in culture tend to have very little assembled
fibronectin and this has been interpreted as a failure of integrin
activation or function (3, 49). Since the results presented above failed to find a problem with the ability of
5
1 expressed on v-src-transformed cells to be activated and to mediate strong adhesion to fibronectin, we hypothesized that the failure to
observe assembled fibronectin by transformed cells was due to its
digestion by the secreted proteases rather than due to a failure of
integrin function. v-src-transformed cells plated on cross-linked
fibronectin were able to assemble an extensive fibrillar fibronectin
matrix, whereas v-src-transformed cells plated on normal fibronectin
show only a diffuse fibronectin in the region of the cells (Fig.
6). Thus, the previous failures to
observe fibronectin assembly by the v-src-transformed cells (49) are likely to be due to the specific proteases
secreted by the transformed cells and not to a failure of integrin
function in fibronectin assembly.

View larger version (79K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 6.
v-src-transformed cells can assemble a fibronectin
matrix. v-src-transformed CEF were incubated for 48 h on coated
cover glasses. (A) Cross-linked fibronectin stained with anti-chicken
fibronectin monoclonal antibody B3D6. (B) Same field as panel A but
stained with ethidium homodimer. (C) Non-cross-linked fibronectin
stained with B3D6. (D) Same field as panel C but stained with ethidium
homodimer.
|
|
How does v-src affect integrin?
The data presented above show
that the reduced adhesion and spreading of v-src-transformed cells can
be explained by effects of protease and extracellular matrix secretion,
which is altered in the transformed cells. However, changes in the
level of integrin expression could also contribute to the reduced
adhesion. Control and v-src-transformed CEF were examined by flow
cytometry to determine whether there were differences in the level of
expression of
1 and
3 integrin and whether these levels were
affected by culture on cross-linked fibronectin substrates. Figure
7 shows that cross-linked substrates had
no effect on integrin surface expression levels, but the
v-src-transformed cells had about twice as much surface
1 compared
to normal CEF. Unfortunately, antibodies to determine whether this also
results in an increase in
5 were not available. It has been reported
that v-src-transformed cells have increased
3
1 and reduced
5
1 (45), so the increase in
1 integrin may not
reflect an increase in
5
1 on the surface of the transformed cells.
3
1 is primarily a receptor for laminin 5. Given the
quantitative results presented above that show very little difference
in total adhesion, this raises the possibility that a portion of the
5
1 on the v-src-transformed cells could be in an inactive form.

View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 7.
Mean fluorescence index (calculated as geometric mean
integrin - geometric mean control/geometric mean control) as
determined by flow cytometry for expression of 1 and 3 integrin
after 48 h on normal fibronectin (black bars) or glutaraldehyde
cross-linked fibronectin (white bars).
|
|
v-src blocks outside-in signals.
In addition to its function
in cell adhesion, integrin also provides signals to cells that affect
normal cellular processes including differentiation and proliferation
(41, 69). While many downstream signals that result from
the plating of cells on a fibronectin substrate have been investigated,
the actual link between integrin and these signaling processes remains
to be defined. To address this issue, we have taken a kinetic approach. The basic assumption in this analysis is that a linear range of signals
will generate a similar range of responses or an accelerated range of
responses (ultrasensitivity) as it is passed down a signaling pathway.
Ultimately, the cell will have to integrate the signals and provide a
single response, usually an "all-or-none" response. We have shown
that the strength of adhesion is directly related to the number of
5
1 receptors bound (17, 19). Thus, providing a range
of fibronectin densities will result in a similar range of
5
1
bound and initiate a range of integrin signaling.
To look for the next step in this chain, we analyzed the level of
phosphorylation of FAK at tyrosines 397, 407, 577, 861, and 925 in
normal CEF plated for 1 h at room temperature on different densities of fibronectin (Fig. 8A to C).
In the absence of pretreatment of CEF with vanadate to block
phosphatases, significant phosphorylation of only Y397 and Y861 could
be detected. The phosphorylation levels were normalized to total FAK in
each sample to derive the phosphorylation plots. Y397 showed a linear
increase in phosphorylation as a function of fibronectin density with
almost a 1:1 ratio of phosphorylation level to fibronectin density,
suggesting that each
5
1 bound to fibronectin produced one pY397.
The phosphorylation of Y861 showed a weaker dependence on fibronectin
density rising only twofold for a sevenfold increase in fibronectin
density. According to the experimental rationale, phosphorylation of
Y397 is likely to be a close downstream response to
5
1-fibronectin binding and signaling. In contrast, for
v-src-transformed CEF, phosphorylation of all five tyrosines was
detected, but there was no significant change in the level of
phosphorylation of FAK at any of these sites as a function of
fibronectin density (Fig. 8D to F). Thus, while FAK was able to sense
integrin-mediated adhesion in normal cells, it was not able to do so in
the transformed cells. At this point, phosphorylation levels on FAK are
the only reported markers that show this type of a dose response.

View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 8.
Specific induction of FAK phosphorylation by
5 1-mediated adhesion to fibronectin. Cells were serum starved
overnight, trypsinized, neutralized with soybean trypsin inhibitor, and
plated on fibronectin-coated plates at densities of 0, 50, 100, 150, and 350 ng/cm2 for 60 min at room temperature (without
phosphatase inhibitors). (A) Normal CEF extracts were analyzed by for
phosphorylation of FAK(Y397), FAK(Y407), FAK(Y577), FAK(Y861),
FAK(Y925), and total FAK protein. (B) Quantification of relative
phosphorylation of Y397 in CEF; phosphorylated pY397/total FAK for each
point. (C) Similar quantification of relative phosphorylation of
Y861. (D) v-src-transformed CEF extracts were analyzed for specific
phosphorylation of FAK(Y397), FAK(Y407), FAK(Y577), FAK(Y861),
FAK(Y925), and total FAK. (E) Quantification of relative
phosphorylation of Y397, Y861, and Y925 normalized for total FAK in
each extract. (F) Similar quantification of Y407 and Y577. Error bars
indicate the standard deviations (n = 3). Symbols:
, pY397; , pY407; , pY577; , pY861; , pY925.
|
|
In the presence of serum, or growth factors, normal fibroblasts require
adhesion to a substrate for proliferation (39, 69). Since
v-src-transformed cells proliferate in suspension, they appear to have
bypassed the requirement for integrin-mediated adhesion. The
adhesion-mediated control of proliferation of cells in the absence of
serum is less well studied. Myoblasts do proliferate in the absence of
serum, and their proliferation was reduced as adhesion was increased
(21). Normal CEF showed a similar adhesion control of cell
proliferation. Figure 9 shows two
experiments that analyze the effect of adhesion on the growth of normal
and v-src-transformed CEF under serum-free conditions. The cells were plated on different substrates in the absence of serum and incubated for 2 days to minimize the effects of trypsinization and residual serum
and then labeled with BrdU for 24 h. The first experiment shows
that polylysine increased the rate of proliferation of CEF ~4-fold
compared to fibronectin, demonstrating that normal CEF do respond to
differences in their adhesive substrate and that this can control the
rate of proliferation. In the second experiment, normal and
v-src-transformed CEF were plated on normal or cross-linked fibronectin. It was expected that the transformed cells would remove
the fibronectin substrate during the initial 2-day incubation period as
shown above. Nevertheless, the transformed cells maintained the higher
proliferation rate that is characteristic of the transformed cells and
showed no response to the differences in fibronectin. As expected, the
normal CEF also showed no difference, but these cells do not remove
their fibronectin matrix even in the absence of cross-linking. Thus,
the transformed cells appear to be insensitive to differences in
integrin-mediated adhesion for regulation of their proliferation rate.
This may explain why the transformed cells are able to proliferate in
suspension.

View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 9.
Adhesion-dependent control of cell growth rate in the
absence of serum. Cells were plated on substrates for 48 h in
serum-free medium. BrdU was added from 48 to 72 h, the cells were
stained with anti-BrdU, and the proportion of BrdU positive nuclei was
counted. In experiment 1, normal CEF were plated on polylysine (1-CEF
PL) or fibronectin (1-CEF-Fn). In experiment 2, normal CEF were plated
on normal (2-CEF-Fn) or cross-linked (2-CEF-X-Fn) fibronectin, and
v-src-transformed CEF were plated on normal (2-src-Fn) or cross-linked
(2-src-X-Fn) fibronectin. Error bars indicate the standard deviations
(n = 3).
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
The change in cell morphology from a flattened, spread shape to a
more rounded, less spread, or fusiform shape is a widely used indicator
of in vitro oncogenic transformation (60). While many of
the elements that contribute to the altered phenotype have been
previously identified, analysis of the role of integrin receptor
function provides a missing link that now allows the elements to be
assembled into a consistent model. The experiments described here
employ the original avian CEF cell model and focus on the role for
5
1 integrin because that is the dominant fibronectin receptor in
these cells. In contrast to previous work, we find that the activation
of
5
1 and its ability to function in cell adhesion and
fibronectin assembly were not significantly impaired by v-src-mediated
cell transformation. However, control of downstream events in cell
signaling and control of cell proliferation is no longer linked to cell adhesion.
Inside-out signaling to
5
1 in v-src-transformed cells.
On normal fibroblasts
5
1, integrin is expressed in a form that
does not bind significantly to soluble fibronectin, and
5
1-mediated adhesion of these cells to a fibronectin substrate is
dependent on signaling and metabolic energy (12, 20). The
intracellular events that contribute to the conformational change in
the integrin to allow or induce strong adhesion has been referred to as
inside-out integrin signaling (22). A number of indirect
assays of integrin adhesion function have been applied, such as cell
migration, cell spreading, and formation of focal adhesions, but these
assays depend on aspects of cytoskeleton assembly in addition to
adhesion functions. The more direct assays of integrin function are
adhesion strength and assembly of a fibronectin matrix (19,
64). The experiments described here showed no significant
difference in adhesion after transformation by v-src in short-term
assays. The adhesion data are supported by chemical cross-linking data
showing that
5
1 can be cross-linked to a similar extent in normal
and v-src-transformed cells. Previous experiments have shown that only
activated, fibronectin-bound
5
1 could be cross-linked in this
assay (11, 19). The absence of a difference in adhesion for v-src-transformed cells in the short term is in agreement with the
data of Plantefaber and Hynes, who showed no temperature dependence of
adhesion for cells carrying a temperature-sensitive v-src mutant
(45). Sakai et al. (49) used
1-integrin-transfected GD25 cells to analyze the effect of v-src on
1 integrin and also show very little difference in adhesion for the
normal and v-src-transformed cells to fibronectin, although it is not
clear which integrin is functioning in the assays.
In contrast with the short-term assays, v-src-transformed cells do
become less adherent at longer times after plating. Unlike the earlier
assays, the spinning disk assay can apply sufficient force to measure
long-term adhesion (20). Data are presented showing that
the v-src-transformed cells have a reduced adhesion by 6 h after
plating. This is consistent with the accumulation of cellular products
accounting for the difference. Here we define two factors that
contribute to this reduced adhesion over time. First, v-src-transformed
CEF have increased production of both metalloproteinase and plasminogen
activator-type protease (2, 6, 56). These proteases remove
the fibronectin ligand required for cell adhesion. A reduction in
ligand causes a proportionate reduction in the number of
integrin-ligand bonds and consequently a proportionate reduction in the
strength of adhesion (19). The removal of fibronectin
could be inhibited by chemical cross-linking of the fibronectin, and
this partially reversed the transformed morphology, permitting the
cells to remain spread. Second, v-src-transformed cells have altered
glycosaminoglycans and secrete high levels of hyaluronic acid
(30, 54). Chicken chondroblasts in culture also synthesize
high levels of glycosaminoglycans which accumulate on the cell surface
and block
5
1-mediated adhesion to fibronectin. Removal of these
glycosaminoglycans with hyaluronidase restored
5
1-mediated
adhesion (10, 43). In a similar manner, addition of
hyaluronidase was necessary to retain the spread morphology of
v-src-transformed cells on a cross-linked fibronectin matrix for longer
than 2 days. Thus, increased, or altered, secretion of proteases and
glycosaminoglycans presents a confounding factor in assigning the
reduced adhesion of transformed cells to differences in integrin
receptor function.
It has been reported that transformation of cells by v-src blocks their
ability to assemble fibronectin into fibrils (49). We were
able to restore this defect by cross-linking the substrate fibronectin
before plating the cells. The assembly of fibronectin is thought to
involve the physical stretching of the fibronectin molecules to provide
an open conformation and reveal sites in the first type III repeat
necessary for the intermolecular assembly (42, 44). In
order to generate the force on the fibronectin by the pulling of
integrin linked to the actin cytoskeleton, it is necessary to restrain
one end of the fibronectin to provide the stress (66).
Based on immunofluorescence localization, it has been suggested that
this is the function of
v
3 integrin retained at the tips of spreading cells (44). Our data
offer a simpler explanation. Fibronectin adsorbed to the surface binds to the newly synthesized fibronectin and provides the necessary anchor.
Removal of this fibronectin by proteases secreted selectively at these
adhesion points by the v-src-transformed cells (5) would
remove the anchor point, and thus the failure to assemble fibronectin
fibrils would be due to the protease action and not to a failure of
integrin function. Here we show that, after the removal of confounding
factors, all of the direct assays demonstrate that
5
1 is
functioning normally in the v-src-transformed cells.
Nevertheless, several laboratories have demonstrated an increase in the
level of phosphorylation of
1 integrin in v-src-transformed cells
(25, 49, 58). Mutational analysis of
1 integrin
demonstrates that substitution of phenylalanines for tyrosines in the
cytoplasmic domain tends to retain
1 integrins in focal adhesions
and to retain
1 function. In contrast, mutation to glutamate to
mimic the phosphorylated state tends to keep
1 out of focal
adhesions (46, 50). Biochemical analysis of the
distribution of phosphorylated
1 in v-src-transformed cells
demonstrated that the increase in phosphorylated
1 occurred in
cellular fractions which were not associated with cell adhesion
(25). These data are consistent with a model in which the
phosphorylation of
1 causes it to leave the focal adhesion or in
which phosphorylation of
1 occurs outside the focal adhesion due to
the large excess of v-src kinase in the cells. If this is the case,
increased phosphorylation would have the effect of reducing the pool of
1 available to join focal adhesions. The increase in
1 integrin
phosphorylation in the v-src-transformed cells would thus reduce the
pool of
1 available for cell adhesion. However, for most cells in
culture,
1 integrin is produced in excess, and there are multiple
-chain species which can form heterodimers with
1 integrin. Thus,
reducing the pool of usable
1 integrin would have only a modest
effect on cell adhesion.
A second, intracellular factor that can affect the strength of adhesion
is the assembly of actin (19, 67). Even the
v-src-transformed cells, which retained a spread morphology being
plated on cross-linked fibronectin in the presence of hyaluronidase,
showed very few actin stress fibers, although shorter actin filaments
were detected at the periphery of the cell and in podosomes
(59). While it is not known which specific actin
structures contribute to strong integrin-mediated adhesion, one would
expect that the reduction of actin filaments would contribute to a
weaker adhesion. This reduced assembly of actin filaments would be
expected to have a later and cumulative effect on integrin-mediated
adhesion because they assemble later during cell spreading and in
spread cells. Hence, this would also contribute the relative reduction
in adhesion of the v-src-transformed cells with time.
Outside-in signaling by v-src-transformed cells.
The earliest
demonstration of the involvement of integrin in cell signaling was the
reversible block to myogenic differentiation by an antibody that
blocked
1 integrin function (41). This effect of
blocking
1 integrin paralleled the effect of expressing a
temperature-sensitive v-src in these avian myogenic cells
(14). Subsequent studies have revealed that many cellular
signaling pathways are dependent on integrin-mediated adhesion
(7, 37, 53). However, the critical link between the
adhesion mediated by integrin and intracellular signals has remained
elusive. We have used a signaling kinetic approach based on the
original work of Ferrel and coworkers (13, 23). In this
model, cells detect extracellular signals through the binding of
specific ligands to surface receptors. The initial signaling responses
in the cell are proportionate to the number of bound receptors. Within
the individual cell these signals are converted to an all-or-none response based on an increasing Hill coefficient (sharper sigmoid dose-response curve) as the message is passed down the signaling pathway. This model was applied to the
5
1 integrin-mediated signals by varying the fibronectin density and thus the number of
5
1 integrins bound.
Attachment of fibroblasts to fibronectin or the aggregation of
fibronectin receptors with antibodies resulted in the phosphorylation of FAK (24, 35). The initial phosphorylation appears to be an autophosphorylation of Y397 by FAK itself, which provides a binding
site for the SH2 domain of src. This phosphorylation event was
dependent on ligand binding, and the level of phosphorylation was
proportional to the number of
5
1-fibronectin bonds formed (17). The proportion of FAK phosphorylated on Y397
provides a direct readout of integrin binding. In normal CEF,
phosphorylated Y397 provides a binding site for c-src, which can then
provide the next stage in signal transduction by phosphorylation of
additional sites on FAK that bind downstream targets (8).
In one system, the activation of v-src resulted in a reduction of
phosphorylated Y397, although other sites on FAK remained
phosphorylated (40). Since the function of phosphorylation
of Y397 is to form complexes between FAK and src, underphosphorylation
of Y397 can be compensated for either by the high level of v-src
expression or by the ability to form complexes between FAK and v-src
that are not dependent on Y397. v-src isolated from several strains of
Rous sarcoma virus contains mutations in the RT loop in the SH3 domain,
which provides an alternate mechanism for binding between the v-src and
FAK that involves the v-src SH3 domain and the proline-rich domain in
the C-terminal domain of FAK (27). Although these
mutations in v-src may contribute to cell transformation, they are not
essential since the single Y527F mutation in the C terminus of c-src is sufficient to activate transforming potential (47).
Several elements contribute to the adhesion-independent phosphorylation
of FAK that in turn can provide constitutive signals to activate cell
proliferation. The increased level of v-src over that of the normal
c-src leads to an increase in v-src-FAK complex formation by
increasing the background level of phosphorylation of Y397 and by
driving the binding of v-src to FAK to stabilize the phosphorylated
Y397. v-src could also bind to the proline-rich region of FAK to
further increase complex formation. Complex formation leads to
increased, src-mediated, phosphorylation of other tyrosines on FAK. The
high level of v-src and the increased kinase activity lead to an
inability to reset the system, and thus the cells become insensitive to
integrin outside-in signaling.
The effect of adhesion signals on cellular behavior is complex. For
example, the rate of cell migration shows a biphasic dependence on
adhesion, with maximum rates of cell movement occurring at intermediate
adhesion levels (9). Similarly, cell proliferation can be
either stimulated or inhibited by integrin-mediated adhesion (21,
69). It has been challenging to separate out longer-term effects
that depend on adhesion from those that depend on growth factors, in
part because cells can produce autocrine growth factors and in part
because the intracellular signaling pathways contain many common
elements. One of the clearer results is the dependence of myogenic
differentiation on the
5
1-fibronectin binding (21). For the case of v-src transformation of CEF, it is clear that the
transformed cells are able to proliferate in suspension, whereas the
normal CEF do not, even in the presence of serum. This illustrates a
difference in adhesion dependence, but it is not very informative about
the role of specific adhesion mechanisms and the reasons for the
independence. The negative regulation of proliferation of CEF by
increased or specific adhesion to fibronectin compared to polylysine
provides an alternative model system. We have tried numerous approaches
in addition to the use of cross-linked fibronectin to modify the
fibronectin substrate to reduce the proliferation rate of the
v-src-transformed cells without success. This provides an additional
demonstration of the failure of the v-src-transformed cells to respond
to fibronectin-integrin-mediated signals.
In summary,
5
1 integrin activation, adhesion function, and the
ability to assemble a fibronectin matrix are not strongly affected by
v-src-mediated cell transformation. A minor portion of
1 integrin
does show increased phosphorylation and the phosphorylated
1
integrin may not participate in these functions due to its diffuse
location and failure to concentrate in adhesion structures. In
contrast, the v-src-transformed cells show complete insensitivity to
integrin-mediated outside-in signals both at the level of FAK phosphorylation and in the specific adhesion-mediated events involved in myogenic differentiation and inhibition of cell proliferation in the
absence of serum. These data demonstrate a functional and mechanistic
separation of the inside-out and outside-in signaling pathways for
1 integrin.
| 1.
|
Ali, I. U.,
V. Maunter,
R. Lanza, and R. O. Hynes.
1977.
Restoration of normal morphology, adhesion and cytoskeleton in transformed cells by addition of a transformation-sensitive surface protein.
Cell
11:115-126[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 2.
|
Bell, S. M.,
R. W. Brackenbury,
N. D. Leslie, and J. L. Degen.
1990.
Plasminogen activator gene expression is induced by the src oncogene product and tumor promoters.
J. Biol. Chem.
265:1333-1338[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 3.
|
Boschek, C. B.,
B. M. Jockusch,
R. R. Friis,
R. Back,
E. Grundmann, and H. Bauer.
1981.
Early changes in the distribution and organization of microfilament proteins during cell transformation.
Cell
24:175-184[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 4.
|
Burridge, K.,
C. E. Turner, and L. H. Romer.
1992.
Tyrosine phosphorylation of paxillin and pp125FAK accompanies cell adhesion to extracellular matrix: a role in cytoskeletal assembly.
J. Cell Biol.
119:893-903[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 5.
|
Chen, W.-T.,
J.-M. Chen,
S. J. Parsons, and J. T. Parsons.
1985.
Local degradation of fibronectin at sites of expression of the transforming gene product pp60src.
Nature
316:156-158[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 6.
|
Chen, W.-T.,
K. Olden,
B. A. Bernard, and F.-F. Chu.
1984.
Expression of transformation-associated protease(s) that degrade fibronectin at cell contact sites.
J. Cell Biol.
98:1546-1555[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 7.
|
Clark, E. A., and J. S. Brugge.
1995.
Integrins and signal transduction pathways: the road taken.
Science
268:5208.
|
| 8.
|
Cobb, B. S.,
M. D. Schaller,
T. H. Leu, and J. T. Parsons.
1994.
Stable association of pp60src and pp59fyn with the focal adhesion-associated protein tyrosine kinase, pp125FAK.
Mol. Cell. Biol.
14:147-155[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 9.
|
DiMilla, P. A.,
J. A. Stone,
J. A. Quinn,
S. M. Albelda, and D. A. Lauffenburger.
1993.
Maximal migration of human smooth muscle cells on fibronectin and type IV collagen occurs at an intermediate attachment strength.
J. Cell Biol.
122:729-737[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 10.
|
Enomoto, M.,
P. S. Leboy,
A. S. Menko, and D. Boettiger.
1993.
Beta 1 integrins mediate chondrocyte interaction with type I collagen, type II collagen, and fibronectin.
Exp. Cell Res.
205:276-285[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 11.
|
Enomoto-Iwamoto, M.,
A. S. Menko,
N. Philp, and D. Boettiger.
1993.
Evaluation of integrin molecules involved in substrate adhesion.
Cell Adhes. Commun.
1:191-202[Medline].
|
| 12.
|
Faull, R. J.,
N. L. Kovach,
J. M. Harlan, and M. H. Ginsberg.
1993.
Affinity modulation of integrin 5 1: regulation of the functional response by soluble fibronectin.
J. Cell Biol.
121:155-162[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 13.
|
Ferrell, J. E., Jr.
1998.
How regulated protein translocation can produce switch-like responses.
Trends Biochem. Sci.
23:461-465[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 14.
|
Fiszman, M. Y., and P. Fuchs.
1975.
Temperature-sensitive expression of differentiation in transformed myoblasts.
Nature
254:429-431[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 15.
|
Foster, R. F.,
J. M. Thompson, and S. J. Kaufman.
1987.
A laminin substrate promotes myogenesis in rat skeletal muscle cultures: analysis of replication and development using antidesmin and anti-BrdUrd monoclonal antibodies.
Dev. Biol.
122:11-20[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 16.
|
Frelinger, A. L.,
X. P. Du,
E. F. Plow, and M. H. Ginsberg.
1991.
Monoclonal antibodies to ligand-occupied conformers of integrin IIb 3 (glycoprotein IIb-IIIa) alter receptor affinity, specificity, and function.
J. Biol. Chem.
266:17106-17111[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 17.
|
Garcia, A. J., and D. Boettiger.
1999.
Integrin-fibronectin interactions at the cell-material interface: initial integrin binding and signaling.
Biomaterials
20:2427-2433[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 18.
|
Garcia, A. J.,
P. Ducheyne, and D. Boettiger.
1997.
Quantification of cell adhesion using a spinning disc device and application to surface-reactive materials.
Biomaterials
18:1091-1098[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 19.
|
Garcia, A. J.,
F. Huber, and D. Boettiger.
1998.
Force required to break 5 1 integrin-fibronectin bonds in intact adherent cells is sensitive to integrin activation state.
J. Biol. Chem.
273:10988-10993[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 20.
|
Garcia, A. J.,
J. Takagi, and D. Boettiger.
1998.
Two-stage activation for alpha5beta1 integrin binding to surface-adsorbed fibronectin.
J. Biol. Chem.
273:34710-34715[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 21.
|
Garcia, A. J.,
M. D. Vega, and D. Boettiger.
1999.
Modulation of cell proliferation and differentiation through substrate-dependent changes in fibronectin conformation.
Mol. Biol. Cell
10:785-798[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 22.
|
Ginsberg, M. H.,
X. Du, and E. F. Plow.
1992.
Inside-out integrin signalling.
Curr. Opin. Cell Biol.
4:766-771[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 23.
|
Guadagno, T. M., and J. E. Ferrell, Jr.
1998.
Requirement for MAPK activation for normal mitotic progression in Xenopus egg extracts.
Science
282:1312-1315[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 24.
|
Guan, J. L.,
J. E. Trevithick, and R. O. Hynes.
1991.
Fibronectin/integrin interaction induces tyrosine phosphorylation of a 120-kDa protein.
Cell Regul.
2:951-964[Medline].
|
| 25.
|
Haimovich, B.,
B. Aneskievich, and D. Boettiger.
1991.
Cellular partitioning of 1 integrins and their phosphorylated forms is altered after transformation by Rous sarcoma virus or treatment with cytochalaisin D.
Cell Regul.
2:271-283[Medline].
|
| 26.
|
Harte, M. T.,
J. D. Hildebrand,
M. R. Burnham,
A. H. Bouton, and J. T. Parsons.
1996.
p130Cas, a substrate associated with v-Src and v-Crk, localizes to focal adhesions and binds to focal adhesion kinase.
J. Biol. Chem.
271:13649-13655[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 27.
|
Hauck, C. R.,
T. Hunter, and D. D. Schlaepfer.
2001.
The v-src SH3 domain facilitates a cell adhesion-independent association with focal adhesion kinase.
J. Biol. Chem.
276:17653-17662[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 28.
|
Hirst, R.,
A. F. Horwitz,
C. A. Buck, and L. Rohrschneider.
1986.
Phosphorylation of the fibronectin receptor complex in cells transformed by oncogenes that encode tyrosine kinases.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
83:6470-6474[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 29.
|
Hynes, R. O.
1992.
Integrins: versatility, modulation, and signaling in cell adhesion.
Cell
69:11-25[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 30.
|
Ishimoto, N.,
H. M. Temin, and J. L. Strominger.
1966.
Studies of carcinogenesis by avian sarcoma viruses. II. Virus-induced increase in hyaluronic acid synthetase in chicken fibroblasts.
J. Biol. Chem.
241:2052-2057[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 31.
|
Kanner, S. B.,
A. B. Reynolds,
R. R. Vines, and J. T. Parsons.
1990.
Monoclonal antibodies to individual tyrosine-phosphorylated protein substrates of oncogene-encoded tyrosine kinases.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
87:3328-3332[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 32.
|
Kaplan, K. B.,
J. R. Swedlow,
D. O. Morgan, and H. E. Varmus.
1995.
c-Src enhances the spreading of src / fibroblasts on fibronectin by a kinase-independent mechanism.
Genes Dev.
9:1505-1517[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 33.
|
Klinghoffer, R. A.,
C. Sachsenmaier,
J. A. Cooper, and P. Soriano.
1999.
Src family kinases are required for integrin but not PDGFR signal transduction.
EMBO J.
18:2459-2471[CrossRef][Medline].
|
| 34.
|
Kornberg, L.,
H. S. Earp,
J. T. Parsons,
M. Schaller, and R. L. Juliano.
1992.
Cell adhesion or integrin clustering increases phosphorylation of a focal adhesion-associated tyrosine kinase.
J. Biol. Chem.
267:23439-23442[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 35.
|
Kornberg, L. J.,
H. S. Earp,
C. E. Turner,
C. Prockop, and R. L. Juliano.
1991.
Signal transduction by integrins: increased protein tyrosine phosphorylation caused by clustering of 1 integrins.
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
88:8392-8396[Abstract/Free Full Text].
|
| 36.
|
Kypta, R. M.,
Y. Goldberg,
E. T. Ulug, and S. A. Courtneidge.
1990.
Association between the PDGF receptor and members of the src family of tyrosine kinases.
Cell
62:481-492[CrossRef] |