|
|
|
|
Vol. 11, Issue 3, 1023-1035, March 2000





§
Department of Physiological Chemistry, Biocenter,
University of Würzburg, 97074 Würzburg, Germany; and
*Department of Neurobiochemistry, The George S. Wise Faculty of Life
Sciences, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv 69978, Israel
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
The bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) play important roles in
embryogenesis and normal cell growth. The BMP receptors belong to the
family of serine/threonine kinase receptors, whose activation has been
investigated intensively for the transforming growth factor-
(TGF-
) receptor subfamily. However, the interactions between the BMP
receptors, the composition of the active receptor complex, and the role
of the ligand in its formation have not yet been investigated and were
usually assumed to follow the same pattern as the TGF-
receptors.
Here we demonstrate that the oligomerization pattern of the BMP
receptors is different and is more flexible and susceptible to
modulation by ligand. Using several complementary approaches, we
investigated the formation of homomeric and heteromeric complexes
between the two known BMP type I receptors (BR-Ia and BR-Ib) and the
BMP type II receptor (BR-II). Coimmunoprecipitation studies detected
the formation of heteromeric and homomeric complexes among all the BMP
receptor types even in the absence of ligand. These complexes were also
detected at the cell surface after BMP-2 binding and cross-linking.
Using antibody-mediated immunofluorescence copatching of epitope-tagged
receptors, we provide evidence in live cells for
preexisting heteromeric (BR-II/BR-Ia and BR-II/BR-Ib) and homomeric
(BR-II/BR-II, BR-Ia/ BR-Ia, BR-Ib/ BR-Ib, and also BR-Ia/ BR-Ib)
oligomers in the absence of ligand. BMP-2 binding significantly
increased hetero- and homo-oligomerization (except for the BR-II
homo-oligomer, which binds ligand poorly in the absence of BR-I). In
contrast to previous observations on TGF-
receptors, which were
found to be fully homodimeric in the absence of ligand, the BMP
receptors show a much more flexible oligomerization pattern. This novel
feature in the oligomerization mode of the BMP receptors allows higher
variety and flexibility in their responses to various ligands as
compared with the TGF-
receptors.
| |
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Bone morphogenetic proteins (BMPs) are secreted signaling
molecules that belong to the transforming growth factor-
(TGF-
) superfamily. BMPs control many temporally distinct and
tissue-specific aspects of vertebrate development (Hogan, 1996
).
Gene-targeting experiments and naturally occurring mutations within the
BMPs have shown the substantial effect of BMPs on the regulation of gastrulation, neurogenesis, chondrogenesis, interdigital cell death,
and bone morphogenesis (Storm et al., 1994
; Storm and
Kingsley, 1996
; Reddi, 1995
; Winnier et al., 1995
; Zhang and
Bradley, 1996
; Dunn et al., 1997
).
Signaling by BMP, much like signaling by TGF-
, involves two types of
transmembrane serine/threonine kinases, termed type I and type II
receptors (Kawabata et al., 1995
; Liu et al.,
1995
; Nohno et al., 1995
; Rosenzweig et al.,
1995
; Hoodless et al., 1996
). The human BMP type II receptor
(BR-II) is similar to the TGF-
type II receptor (T
R-II) but has
in addition a long C-terminal extension of unknown function. There are
two known BMP type I receptors (BR-Ia and BR-Ib) that reveal similar
signaling characteristics in cell culture (Liu et al., 1995
;
Rosenzweig et al., 1995
; Hoodless et al., 1996
;
Kretzschmar et al., 1997
). Analysis of the expression patterns of BR-Ia and BR-Ib in the developing chicken limb have shown
that BR-Ib regulates programmed cell death whereas BR-Ia is essential
to the maintenance of the later chondrocyte differentiation program
(Zou and Niswander, 1996
; Zou et al., 1997
). In addition, studies in bone-derived mesenchymal precursor cells have shown that
overexpression of BR-Ia induces adipocyte differentiation whereas BR-Ib
transmits signals for the osteoblast lineage (Chen et al.,
1998
). The signaling specificity might be determined at least in part
by the particular BR-I complexed with BR-II, as well as by the identity
of the specific BMP ligand associated with the active receptor complex.
It can also involve the differential usage of several substrates (such
as Smads 1 and 5), which might distinguish between activated
forms of different type I receptors.
Ligand-cross-linking experiments have shown that BMP ligands,
including BMP-2, bind effectively to BR-Ia or BR-Ib but only weakly to
singly expressed BR-II; binding to BR-II is enhanced by coexpression
with a type I receptor (Liu et al., 1995
; Rosenzweig et al., 1995
). This situation differs from the one
encountered in the case of the TGF-
receptors, in which T
R-II
binds TGF-
1 on its own and recruits the TGF-
type I receptor
(T
R-I; which by itself does not bind ligand) into a signaling
complex (Wrana et al., 1994
; Massague, 1998
). TGF-
2 and
growth and differentiation factor-5, on the other hand, bind
very weakly to their respective type II receptors unless the latter are
coexpressed with the type I receptors (Lin et al., 1995
; Liu
et al., 1995
; Nohno et al., 1995
; Rodriguez
et al., 1995
; Rosenzweig et al., 1995
; Nishitoh et al., 1996
; Massague, 1998
).
Several lines of evidence suggest both heteromeric and homomeric
complex formation among T
R-II and T
R-I, which are closely related
to the BMP receptors (Wrana et al., 1992
; Moustakas et al., 1993
; Chen and Derynck, 1994
; Henis et al., 1994
;
Gilboa et al., 1998
; Huse et al., 1999
; Wells
et al., 1999
). Both T
R-II and T
R-I were shown to be
present as homodimers in the absence of ligand (Henis et
al., 1994
; Gilboa et al., 1998
), and recent crystallographic data suggest that the cytoplasmic domain of T
R-I in
complex with the FK506-binding protein (FKBP12) is a dimer (Huse
et al., 1999
). Heterocomplexes between the two TGF-
receptor types were detected to a low degree in the absence of ligand
and were enhanced significantly by TGF-
1 binding (Wells et
al., 1999
). Both heteromeric and homomeric complexes appear to be
relevant for signaling. Thus, several chimeric receptor systems have
established that T
R-II/T
R-I complexes are required for signaling
(Okadome et al., 1994
; Vivien et al., 1995
;
Anders and Leof, 1996
; Luo and Lodish, 1996
; Muramatsu et
al., 1997
). Studies performed on either chimeric or mutated
T
R-I or T
R-II suggested that at least two type I receptors should
be present within the signaling complex (Luo and Lodish, 1996
;
Weis-Garcia and Massague, 1996
) and that homo-oligomerization of
T
R-II is involved in regulating signal transduction via
intermolecular autophosphorylation (Luo and Lodish, 1997
).
In spite of the importance of oligomerization for activation and
signaling of the TGF-
family of receptors, these issues were not
thoroughly investigated for the BMP receptors. In this article, we
report studies on the homo- and hetero-oligomerization of BMP receptors
(types II, Ia, and Ib). Our studies demonstrate that preformed
homomeric and heteromeric complexes of the various BMP receptors exist
at the surface of live cells in the absence of ligand. In contrast to
the TGF-
receptors, only a fraction of each receptor type resides in
homo-oligomers, and BMP-2 binding significantly increases homo-oligomer
formation. Ligand-independent heterocomplex formation between BR-II and
BR-Ia or BR-Ib occurs at a significant level and is augmented by BMP-2
binding. These findings suggest that the BMP and TGF-
receptor
systems differ in their tendency to form oligomeric complexes. The BMP
receptor systems exhibit a more flexible oligomerization pattern,
reflected not only in the availability of two different type I
receptors that can each interact with BR-II but also in the modulation
of their homomeric complexes by the ligand.
| |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Materials
Recombinant human BMP-2 was prepared as described (Ruppert
et al., 1996
). 9E10 (
-myc, directed against the myc tag
[Evan et al., 1985
]) mouse ascites was purchased from
Babco (Richmond, CA). HA.11 rabbit serum directed against the influenza
hemagglutinin (HA) tag (Wilson et al., 1984
) and 12CA5 mouse
ascites against this tag (
-HA) were from Babco (Richmond, CA). The
immunoglobulin G (IgG) fractions were purified from the mouse ascites
using standard protocols (Harlow and Lane, 1988
). Polyclonal antisera
(rabbit) were raised against the following specific peptides from the
BMP receptors: LEQDEAFIPVGESLKDLC (human BR-Ia; FB15),
KRQEARPRYSIGLEQDET (mouse BR-Ib; FB63), and SMNMMEAAASEPSLDLDN (human
BR-II; FB60). Peroxidase-coupled goat anti-mouse (G
M) IgG was
obtained from Dianova (Hamburg, Germany). Indocarbocyanine
(Cy3)-labeled goat IgG anti-rabbit (G
R) IgG, biotinylated
G
M IgG, and FITC-streptavidin were from Jackson ImmunoResearch
Laboratories (West Grove, PA). NHS-biotin, protein A-Sepharose,
and protein G-Sepharose CL-4B were from Sigma (St. Louis, MO).
Disuccinimidyl suberate (DSS) was from Pierce Chemical (Rockford, IL).
The cell lines COS7 (CRL 1651), C3H10T1/2 (CCL 226), and C2C12
(CRL 1772) were purchased from American Type Culture Collection
(Rockville, MD).
Epitope Tagging of BMP Receptors
The human BR-II construct was supplied by M. Kawabata (Cancer
Institute, Tokyo, Japan). The constructs encoding human BR-Ia and mouse
BR-Ib were gifts from P. ten Dijke (Ludwig Institute for Cancer
Research, Uppsala, Sweden). The cDNAs of the receptors were subcloned
into the expression vector pcDNA-I (Invitrogen, San Diego, CA) by
double digestion with EcoRI/XbaI for BR-Ib or HindIII/XbaI for BR-Ia and BR-II. The c-myc
epitope (Evan et al., 1985
) or HA epitope (Wilson et
al., 1984
) was introduced by recombinant PCR at the N termini of
the mature receptors. Each tag was inserted in-frame, immediately
downstream of the putative signal sequence. The fragments obtained by
recombinant PCR were subcloned into pcDNA-I containing the appropriate
BMP receptor cDNA, and the sequences of the tagged constructs were
verified by DNA sequencing.
Transfection of COS7 Cells
COS7 cells were grown in DMEM supplemented with 10% FCS and
transfected by the DEAE-dextran method (Seed and Aruffo, 1987
). For
immunoprecipitation or ligand cross-linking, transfections were
performed on cells grown in 10-cm plates, using 7-10 µg of DNA per
construct. For immunofluorescence copatching studies, COS7 cells were
grown on glass coverslips in 30-mm dishes and transfected with
0.25-0.5 µg of DNA of each construct. All experiments were performed
44-48 h after transfection.
Receptor Immunoprecipitation
Transfected COS7 or untransfected C3H10T1/2 cells were washed
and incubated with ligand (BMP-2) in KRH buffer (50 mM HEPES, pH 7.5, 128 mM NaCl, 1.3 mM CaCl2, 5 mM
MgSO4, and 5 mM KCl) at 4°C as described in
Ligand Binding and Cross-linking. Control dishes were incubated with
buffer alone. They were washed twice in ice-cold PBS and solubilized in
lysis buffer (PBS, pH 7.4, containing 0.5% Triton X-100, 1 mM EDTA,
and 10 µg/ml each of leupeptin, aprotinin, soybean trypsin inhibitor,
benzamidine-HCl, pepstatin, and antipain) at 4°C for 40 min.
Epitope-tagged receptors were immunoprecipitated from extracts of
transfected COS7 cells by 12CA5 monoclonal antibodies (
-HA; 20 µg/ml, 4°C, 2 h) followed by incubation with protein
A-Sepharose (30 µl of 1:1 suspension in PBS, 1 h, 4°C) or by
9E10 (
-myc; 20 µg/ml) antibodies followed by protein G-Sepharose.
Endogenous receptors from C3H10T1/2 cells were precipitated using
specific rabbit anti-peptide antisera (FB15 for BR-Ia, FB63 for BR-Ib,
and FB60 for BR-II; 1:500 dilution, 4°C, 2 h) followed by
protein A-Sepharose as above. The beads were washed three times with
PBS. For single immunoprecipitations, the bound protein was eluted by
heating the beads in SDS-PAGE sample buffer containing mercaptoethanol
(3 min, 95°C). For sequential double immunoprecipitation, the bound
protein was eluted from the Sepharose beads in 1% SDS, 50 mM
dithiothreitol, and 10% mercaptoethanol (5 min, 95°C). The
supernatant was diluted with PBS containing 1 mM EDTA to a final SDS
concentration of 0.003%, and the appropriate antibodies were added for
the second immunoprecipitation. The proteins finally eluted from the
beads were run on 10-12% SDS-PAGE.
Biotinylation of Antibodies
Lyophilized IgG (50 µg of 9E10 or 12CA5) was dissolved in 200 µl of 0.1 M sodium citrate buffer, pH 9.1. After addition of 1 µl of NHS-biotin (12 mg/ml in dimethylformamide; Sigma), the reaction was performed for 4 h at 22°C. The reaction was stopped by adding 5 µl of 1 M NH4Cl. The biotinylated antibodies were dialyzed against PBS.
Western Blotting
Western blotting was done according to standard protocols. After
electrotransfer and blocking (10 mM Tris, pH 7.9, 150 mM NaCl, 0.5%
Tween 20, and 3% BSA; 4°C, 1 h), the blot was incubated with
the monoclonal antibodies 9E10 (20 µg/ml) or 12CA5 (10 µg/ml) or
with FB60 rabbit antisera (1:425 dilution) for 12 h at 4°C. Detection of adsorbed antibodies was performed by ECL (Amersham, Arlington Heights, IL), using peroxidase-G
M IgG diluted 1:10,000 in
blocking buffer. Alternatively, biotinylated 9E10 (20 µg/ml) or 12CA5
(10 µg/ml) was used, followed by detection using
peroxidase-streptavidin (0.2 µg/ml) and ECL.
Ligand Binding and Cross-linking
BMP-2 was labeled by 125I using the
chloramine T method as described (Cheifetz et al., 1988
).
Iodination efficiency was 99%.
Confluent 10-cm plates of transfected COS cells or C3H10T1/2 cells were
incubated for 2-6 h at 4°C with 5-20 nM
125I-BMP-2 in KRH buffer containing 0.5% fatty
acid-free BSA. For C3H10T1/2 cells, 0.01% Tween 20 was added.
Cross-linking was performed with DSS as described previously for
TGF-
(Moustakas et al., 1993
). Cross-linking was stopped
by adding sucrose to a final concentration of 7% in KRH. Cell lysis
and immunoprecipitation were performed as described above.
Immunofluorescence Copatching
The method used has been described by us previously (Henis
et al., 1994
; Gilboa et al., 1998
; Wells et
al., 1999
). COS7 cells grown on glass coverslips were transfected
(singly or in various combinations) with BMP receptor constructs.
Forty-eight hours after transfection, cells were washed twice with
serum-free DMEM and incubated 1 h at 37°C to allow endocytosis
of ligand-bound receptors. After washing twice with cold Hanks'
balanced salt solution with 20 mM HEPES, containing 1% fatty
acid-free BSA, the cells were incubated in the same buffer (4°C,
2 h) with normal goat IgG (200 µg/ml) to block nonspecific
binding. This was followed by successive incubations (4°C, 1 h
each, with three washes between incubations; all performed in the cold
to enable exclusive cell-surface labeling by the antibodies and to
eliminate internalization) with the following: 1)
-myc mouse
IgG (20 µg/ml) together with rabbit HA.11
-HA serum (1:250), 2)
Cy3-G
R IgG (20 µg/ml) together with biotinylated G
M IgG (20 µg/ml), and 3) FITC-streptavidin (2 µg/ml). After washing, the
cells were fixed in methanol (5 min,
20°C) and acetone (2 min,
20°C) and mounted with Mowiol (Hoechst, Frankfurt, Germany)
containing 29 mM n-propyl gallate (Sigma). Fluorescence digital images were acquired with the Leica DMR microscope
(100× oil objective; Nussloch, Germany), coupled to a charge-coupled device camera (SenSys; Photometrics, Tucson, AZ), using the PMIS (Photometrics) software. For each field, FITC and Cy3 images were taken
separately using selective filter sets that essentially eliminate
leakage. The images were exported in TIFF format to Photoshop
(Adobe, Mountain View, CA), superimposed, and printed. The numbers of
red, green, and yellow (superimposed red and green) patches were
counted on the computer screen on 20 × 20-µm2 flat cell regions (avoiding the nuclear
region, which is out-of-focus).
Luciferase Reporter Assay
C2C12 cells (2 × 106 cells in a 6-cm
dish) were transfected by electroporation using 18 µg of a luciferase
reporter construct containing two inverted repeats of a Smad-binding
element from the JunB promoter (pSBE-luc [Jonk et al.,
1998
]), 8 µg of renilla luciferase (pRL)-Tk (dual luciferase
kit; Promega, Madison, WI) as a reference for transfection efficiency,
and 10 µg of BMP receptor constructs (in double-receptor
transfections, 5 µg of each receptor; in transfections with a single
BMP receptor, 5 µg of pcDNA-I-
-Gal replaced the second BMP
receptor construct). After 7 h in complete medium, cells were
starved in medium with 0.2% FCS (4-6 h). They were incubated with or
without 10 nM BMP-2 in low serum for 24 h, and luciferase activity
was measured using a dual luciferase assay system (Promega).
| |
RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
BMP Receptors Form Hetero-oligomers in the Absence of Ligand
To study both hetero- and homo-oligomerization of BMP receptors,
we have epitope tagged each BMP receptor (BR-Ia, BR-Ib, and BR-II) with
either the HA epitope tag or the myc tag at the N terminus of the
mature protein (see MATERIALS AND METHODS). The tagged receptors
arrived at the cell surface (see Figures 6 and 7), bound ligand
(see Figures 3 and 5), and transduced signal as tested by
transcriptional activation of a BMP-dependent reporter gene construct
(Jonk et al., 1998
) in a manner similar to that of the
native receptors (our unpublished results).
To study heterocomplex formation of BR-II with BR-Ia or BR-Ib, we
performed coimmunoprecipitation studies on COS7 cells cotransfected with BR-II together with BR-Ia or BR-Ib carrying different epitope tags
(e.g., HA-BR-II together with myc-BR-Ia). After lysis in a mild lysis
buffer (0.5% Triton X-100), lysates were immunoprecipitated with
antibodies directed against the HA tag (
-HA) or against the c-myc
epitope tag (
-myc). The immunoprecipitates were subjected to
SDS-PAGE and Western blotting, and the blots were analyzed with
-myc
or
-HA mouse monoclonal IgG followed by peroxidase-coupled G
M IgG. These experiments showed that BR-II is coprecipitated with BR-Ia (Figure 1A, lanes 7 and 8).
The identity of BR-II was established in control cells transfected with
either myc-BR-II or HA-BR-II alone and immunoprecipitated and blotted
with the same antibody (
-myc or
-HA, respectively; Figure 1A,
lanes 5 and 6). Blots from control cells transfected with
myc-BR-Ia alone and precipitated by
-HA were not stained by
-myc, and HA-BR-Ia could not be detected by
-HA after
immunoprecipitation using
-myc (Figure 1A, lanes 1 and 2), showing
the specificity of the antibodies used for immunoprecipitation. The
specificity of the blotting step is demonstrated in lanes 3 and 4 (Figure 1A), where singly expressed myc-BR-II precipitated by
-myc
was not detected by
-HA and HA-BR-II precipitated by
-HA was not
recognized by
-myc.
|
Analogous experiments using pairs of coexpressed epitope-tagged receptors were conducted to explore the formation of hetero-oligomers of BR-II and BR-Ib and of BR-Ia with BR-Ib. Figure 1B, lanes 3 and 4, depicts the coprecipitation of BR-II with BR-Ib, which was very similar to that observed for BR-II with BR-Ia. The immunoprecipitation of tagged BR-Ib receptors was as specific as that of the BR-Ia receptors (Figure 1B, lanes 1 and 2). Interestingly, the two type I receptors BR-Ia and BR-Ib also associated into heterocomplexes, as shown in Figure 1C. Thus, the coimmunoprecipitation experiments reveal the existence of heterocomplexes between all the BMP receptors in the absence of ligand.
To confirm that hetero-oligomeric complexes are also formed in a cell
line that naturally expresses the BMP receptors, we used the
pluripotent mouse fibroblast cell line C3H10T1/2. These cells were
shown to differentiate into three cell types upon addition of BMP-2 or
BMP-7 (Ahrens et al., 1993
; Wang et al., 1993
;
Asahina et al., 1996
). Lysates of C3H10T1/2 cells were
immunoprecipitated with specific anti-peptide antisera against BR-Ia or
BR-Ib (Figure 2A, lanes 1 and 3) and
blotted using anti-BR-II antiserum. Both lanes depict a clear band,
demonstrating that BR-II was coprecipitated with either type I
receptor. No precipitation of BR-II was observed with preimmune serum
against either BR-Ia or BR-Ib (Figure 2A, lanes 2 and 4). These
experiments, which use a naturally expressing cell line, substantiate
the existence of BMP receptor heterocomplexes in the absence of ligand
and indicate that this observation is not the result of receptor
overexpression.
|
Hetero-oligomerization among Ligand-cross-linked BMP Receptors at the Cell Surface
The above experiments detected heterocomplex formation among BMP
receptors in whole-cell extracts. These include receptors that might
form nonspecific aggregates within the endoplasmic reticulum. To follow
exclusively the cell-surface population, we used two independent
methods: ligand binding and cross-linking followed by
immunoprecipitation (described in this section) and immunofluorescence-copatching studies to explore the state of the
receptors in the intact membrane on live cells (see Figures 6 and 7).
For ligand-cross-linking experiments, COS7 cells were transiently
transfected with different combinations of epitope-tagged BMP receptors
(as indicated in Figure 3). Forty-eight
hours after transfection, they were incubated with 5 nM
125I-BMP-2 at 4°C to eliminate internalization,
cross-linked by DSS, and lysed. Lysates were immunoprecipitated with
-myc or
-HA and analyzed by SDS-PAGE and autoradiography. As
shown in Figure 3, ligand-bound hetero-oligomers of all possible
combinations of the BMP receptors were detected: BR-II with BR-Ia
(lanes 2 and 4), BR-II with BR-Ib (lanes 1 and 3), and BR-Ia with BR-Ib (lane 5, where sequential immunoprecipitation was used). No signal was
detected in lysates from mock-transfected cells precipitated by either
-myc or
-HA (Figure 3, lanes 7 and 8). The specificity of the
sequential immunoprecipitation protocol used in Figure 3, lane 5, is
shown by the lack of signal in cells singly expressing one
epitope-tagged receptor form and subjected to sequential double immunoprecipitation (lane 6). Because under the labeling conditions used only cell-surface receptors are exposed to cross-linking by the
ligand, these experiments demonstrate that the BMP receptors at the
cell surface can form heterocomplexes, at least when bound to BMP-2.
These findings hold also for endogenous BMP receptors in untransfected
cells (Figure 2B). By the use of specific anti-peptide antibodies,
analogous binding and cross-linking studies conducted on naturally
expressing C3H10T1/2 cells detected the existence of ligand-bound
BR-II/BR-Ia and BR-II/BR-Ib complexes at the cell surface (Figure 2B,
lanes 1, 3, and 5).
|
BMP Receptor Homo-oligomers Detected by Coimmunoprecipitation and by Ligand Binding and Cross-linking
The type I and type II TGF-
receptors were shown to form
ligand-independent homo-dimers (Chen and Derynck, 1994
; Henis et al., 1994
; Gilboa et al., 1998
; Huse et al.,
1999
), and there is evidence of the functional importance of the
homomeric complexes (Luo and Lodish, 1996
, 1997
; Weis-Garcia and
Massague, 1996
). However, the homo-oligomeric structure of the BMP
receptors has not been investigated. We therefore explored the
existence of homo-oligomers of each BMP receptor in the absence of
ligand by coimmunoprecipitation. The experiments were performed on COS7 cells cotransfected with pairs of two differently tagged versions of
each receptor (e.g., HA-BR-II together with myc-BR-II). The experimental design was as described in Figure 1. Figure
4A demonstrates coprecipitation of
HA-BR-II with myc-BR-II and vice versa, whereas Figure 4B depicts the
coprecipitation of myc- and HA-tagged BR-Ia pairs and BR-Ib pairs.
Because only pairs of the tagged receptors are overexpressed in the
transfected cells, these results indicate that at least part of each
BMP receptor population resides in homo-oligomers.
|
To ascertain that homo-oligomers of the BMP receptors also exist at the
cell surface, we performed ligand-cross-linking experiments followed
by sequential immunoprecipitation (Figure
5), as well as
immunofluorescence-copatching studies (see the following section). The
cross-linking of 125I-BMP-2 to COS7 cells
cotransfected with pairs of differently tagged versions of each
receptor followed the protocol described in Figure 3. Because the HA-
and myc-tagged versions of the same receptor cannot be distinguished
according to size, the cell lysates were subjected to double
immunoprecipitation before SDS-PAGE and autoradiography. As shown in
Figure 5A, homo-oligomers of both BR-Ia and BR-Ib can be detected
(lanes 3 and 6). These bands match the ones obtained with a positive
control of cells singly transfected with HA- or myc-tagged type I
receptor and immunoprecipitated with the matching antibody (Figure 5A,
lanes 1, 2, 4, and 5). Similar experiments could not be applied to
measure homo-oligomerization of BR-II, because in the absence of
coexpressed type I receptors, BR-II binds ligand very weakly and cannot
be detected by autoradiography after cross-linking with
125I-BMP-2 (Figure 5B, lanes 1-3). Weak binding
can be observed only with high concentrations of
125I-BMP-2 (Figure 5B, lane 4). Similar results
were obtained using untagged BR-II (our unpublished results).
|
Immunofluorescence-copatching Studies Demonstrate a Ligand-induced Increase in BMP Receptor Oligomerization at the Surface of Live Cells
The experiments described above suggest that some fraction of the
BMP receptor population can associate into heteromeric and homomeric
complexes in the absence of ligand and that such complexes can also be
detected among ligand-cross-linked receptors at the cell surface.
However, both methods involve detergent solubilization that might alter
receptor interactions, and their results cannot be compared directly,
thus not enabling a direct estimation of the effect of ligand binding
on receptor complex formation. To overcome these limitations we used
immunofluorescence copatching, a method that we developed and have
described previously (Henis et al., 1994
; Gilboa et
al., 1998
; Wells et al., 1999
). These studies have
several advantages: 1) they are performed on receptors embedded at the
live cell membrane, without any potential detergent interference; 2)
only coexpressing cells are selected for analysis under the microscope,
eliminating the contribution of singly expressing cells that prevents
quantification of immunoprecipitation-based experiments; and 3) they
enable direct comparison of the same parameters in the presence and
absence of ligand, providing a semiquantitative measure of complex
formation (direct or indirect). In this method, two receptors carrying
different tags at their extracellular regions are coexpressed at the
surface of live cells. Each receptor is forced into micropatches at the
surface by labeling with a specific bivalent IgG directed against it,
followed by secondary antibodies coupled to different fluorophores
(FITC and Cy3). The labeling/copatching step is performed in the cold,
to avoid any possible internalization and allow only surface labeling by the antibodies. The cells are then fixed and examined by
fluorescence microscopy to determine whether the two receptors are
swept by the cross-linking antibodies into mutual (yellow) or separate (red or green) micropatches; copatching (yellow patches) will occur
only if the two receptors form mutual complexes. This approach was used
successfully by us to demonstrate homo- and hetero-oligomerization among TGF-
receptors (Henis et al., 1994
; Gilboa et
al., 1998
; Wells et al., 1999
).
Figure 6 shows results of copatching
experiments aimed at analyzing hetero-oligomer formation among BMP
receptors. COS7 cells were cotransfected with different pairs of
receptors (Figure 6, A and B [BR-II and BR-Ia], C and D [BR-II and
BR-Ib], and E and F [BR-Ia and BR-Ib]), each carrying a different
epitope tag. The images reveal a significant amount of copatching
(yellow patches) in the absence of ligand (Figure 6, A, C, and E).
These results are in accord with the coimmunoprecipitation data showing
heterocomplexes of the BMP receptors both in COS7 cells and in
naturally expressing cells (Figures 1 and 2). Importantly, a
substantial increase in the percentage of mutual (yellow) patches was
induced by BMP-2 (Figure 6, B, D, and F). The calculated percentages of
each receptor type in mutual patches is depicted (see Figure 8). The
percentage of a receptor carrying one tag (e.g., the tag labeled with
FITC-coupled antibodies) in heterocomplexes is proportional to the
number of yellow patches (resulting from overlapped green and red
labeling, because of the presence of receptors containing both tags)
divided by the sum of yellow and green patches. Similarly, the number of yellow over yellow plus red patches is proportional to the percentage of the red-labeled receptors in heterocomplexes. As can be
seen (see Figure 8), this percentage for the pair BR-II and BR-Ia was
~30%, whereas the equivalent number for BR-II and BR-Ib was 40%.
Approximately 25% of coexpressed BR-Ia and BR-Ib appeared in mutual
patches. Exposure to ligand increased the percentage of copatching in
all cases to 50-60% (see Figure 8).
|
To investigate the tendency of each BMP receptor type to form homomeric
complexes, we conducted analogous studies on COS7 cells expressing two
differently tagged versions of the same receptor. Typical results are
depicted in Figure 7, A and B (BR-Ia), C
and D (BR-Ib), and E and F (BR-II). For all of the BMP receptor types, a significant but relatively low amount appeared in mutual patches in
the absence of ligand (Figure 7, A, C, and E). Patch-counting analysis
of many such experiments indicated that ~20-25% of each receptor
type reside in mutual patches (Figure 8).
Ligand binding mediated a significant increase in the formation of
mutual patches for either BR-Ia or BR-Ib (Figure 7, B and D), whose
percentage in yellow patches increased to 45-50% (Figure 8). It
should be noted that for homo-oligomers, the percentage of copatching
underestimates the actual percentage of receptors in homomeric
complexes, because oligomers containing identically tagged receptors
may also form but would not be swept into mutual patches (Henis
et al., 1994
; Gilboa et al., 1998
). This
underestimate is the highest in the case of dimer formation
(approximately one-third of the percentage of copatching); thus, if all
the receptors (100%) are in homodimers, the maximal percentage of
copatching that will be obtained is 66.6%.
|
|
Notably, BR-II, which binds ligand very poorly on its own, was shown clearly in these experiments to form homomeric complexes at the surface of live cells (Figure 7E). Incubation with BMP-2 failed to increase significantly the percentage of BR-II in yellow patches (Figures 7F and 8), in accord with its ineffective binding to this receptor type.
Signaling via BMP Receptor Complexes
To investigate signaling via BMP receptor complexes, we studied
the transcriptional activation of a luciferase reporter construct containing a BMP-2-responsive promoter (pSBE-luc), which is a measure
for BMP signaling via the Smad pathway (Jonk et al., 1998
). These studies used the murine mesenchymal C2C12 cells, which express endogenously all three BMP receptor types at low levels and respond to
BMP-2 by differentiating into osteoblasts (Katagiri et al., 1994
). Figure 9 depicts the results of
such experiments conducted with various combinations of BMP receptor
constructs. Comparison of the basal levels (in the absence of BMP-2;
Figure 9, open bars) of pSBE-luc transcriptional activation reveals
that single transfection with one receptor type had only a marginal
effect on the basal activity, whereas cotransfection of BR-II with a
BR-I subtype significantly elevated the luciferase activity. As shown
in Figure 9, transfection with BR-Ia or BR-Ib alone increased the basal luciferase activity very slightly, suggesting that the homomeric complexes that can form under the overexpression conditions are not
active in this assay. Similar results (our unpublished results) were
obtained for BR-II. On the other hand, cotransfection of BR-II with
BR-Ia or BR-Ib raised the basal transcriptional activation level by a
factor of 5-6 (Figure 9, compare open bars), demonstrating that the
preformed type II/type I receptor complexes do have signaling capability. The ligand-mediated induction of the reporter gene activity
was similar (6- to 7-fold) in the mock-infected cells (expressing only
endogenous receptors) and in cells transfected with a single BMP
receptor type and was ~2-fold weaker in cells cotransfected with type
II and type I receptors. This is most likely caused by the higher basal
activity in the cotransfected cells (as a result of higher
heterocomplex formation before ligand binding), which would reduce the
scale for ligand-mediated association into heterocomplexes.
|
| |
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
BMPs are a family of related molecules within the TGF-
superfamily. They regulate a broad spectrum of processes ranging from cell proliferation, lineage determination, differentiation, to cell
death (Hogan, 1996
). As in the related TGF-
receptor system, BMP
signaling requires both type I and type II BMP receptors (Kawabata et al., 1995
; Liu et al., 1995
; Nohno et
al., 1995
; Rosenzweig et al., 1995
; Hoodless et
al., 1996
), suggesting the relevance of heteromeric and homomeric
interactions among the BMP receptors for their functional responses.
TGF-
signaling depends on homocomplex and heterocomplex formation
between the TGF-
receptors, and these interactions have been studied
extensively (Wrana et al., 1992
; Moustakas et
al., 1993
; Chen and Derynck, 1994
; Henis et al., 1994
;
Gilboa et al., 1998
; Huse et al., 1999
; Wells
et al., 1999
). However, the oligomeric state of the BMP
receptors was not thoroughly studied and was inferred to be similar to
that of the TGF-
receptors. This may not be the case, as indicated
by several observations. First, there are two BMP type I receptors
versus one type I receptor for TGF-
, enabling a larger repertoire of
interactions among BMP receptors. Second, the two systems differ in the
basic characteristics of ligand binding: T
R-II binds ligand on its
own, whereas BR-II does not, and the type I BMP receptors (but not
T
R-I) bind ligand in the absence of the type II receptor (Wrana
et al., 1994
; Liu et al., 1995
; Rosenzweig
et al., 1995
; Massague, 1998
). These differences emphasize
the need for direct studies on the oligomeric state of the BMP
receptors. In the current work, we used several independent methods to
investigate this issue. Our findings demonstrate that the
oligomerization pattern of the BMP receptors differs from that of the
TGF-
receptors, especially in homomeric complex formation, and is
more flexible and susceptible to modulation by ligand.
The current studies demonstrate for the first time the formation of
homomeric BMP receptor oligomers. These complexes were detected by
coimmunoprecipitation studies and, on the cell surface, by both
ligand-cross-linking and immunofluorescence-copatching experiments
(Figures 4, 5, and 7, respectively). The latter studies enable us to
evaluate the extent of receptor oligomerization. The percentage of
copatching of two differently tagged forms of each receptor (BR-II,
BR-Ia, and BR-Ib) was ~20-25% in the absence of ligand, increasing
to 45-50% for BR-Ia and BR-Ib (but not for BR-II) upon binding of
BMP-2 (Figures 7 and 8). The simplest interpretation is that only a
minor fraction of each BMP receptor type resides in homo-oligomers
before ligand binding and that the ligand shifts the equilibrium
strongly toward the homodimeric form. As discussed in RESULTS, the
percentage of copatching underestimates the percentage of a given
receptor that is in homodimers by one-third. Thus, assuming that the
homomeric complexes detected are dimeric, these results suggest that
30% of each BMP receptor is in homodimers, increasing to ~75% in
the presence of ligand for the two type I receptors. This is in
contrast to the type I and type II TGF-
receptors, which are
essentially all in homodimers before ligand binding and whose
dimerization is therefore ligand independent (Henis et al.,
1994
; Gilboa et al., 1998
). The validity of these observations is reinforced by the lack of effect of BMP-2 on BR-II homo-oligomerization (Figures 7 and 8), in accord with the inefficient binding of the ligand to this receptor when singly expressed (Figure 5B).
The homo-oligomerization of the BMP receptors and its dependence on
ligand in the case of the type I receptors may have functional relevance, because homo-oligomerization of both type I and type II
TGF-
receptors was found to play important roles in TGF-
signal
transduction. Thus, homodimerization of T
R-II was shown to be
involved via intermolecular autophosphorylation in both positive and
negative regulation of TGF-
signaling (Luo and Lodish, 1997
), and
homodimerization of T
R-I appears to be important for functional
interactions between T
R-I subunits in the ligand-induced heterocomplex (Luo and Lodish, 1996
; Weis-Garcia and Massague, 1996
).
The fact that BMP-2 can dramatically increase the homo-oligomerization of BR-Ia and BR-Ib raises the possibility that the homomeric
interactions within these complexes may be distinct and serve to
regulate functional responses. Although we did not detect signaling of
type I BMP receptors when they were transfected into C2C12 cells
without BR-II (Figure 9), it should be noted that the luciferase
reporter construct used to measure transcriptional activation reflects activity via the Smad pathway, and it is still possible that type I BMP
receptor complexes signal via another pathway. Furthermore, even in the
absence of such signaling, formation of homomeric or of BR-Ia/BR-Ib
complexes may modulate the pool of type I BMP receptors available for
heterocomplex formation with BR-II and regulate signaling in this
manner. The ability of the ligand to modulate the homomeric
interactions among the BMP type I receptors (which may also vary
between different ligands) allows an additional level of regulation,
which is absent in the closely related TGF-
receptor system. This
additional variability, manifested by multiple ligands, two type I
receptors, and ligand-induced homo-oligomerization, might underlie at
least part of the multiple biological activities of the BMP receptors.
Hetero-oligomeric complexes between BR-II and BR-Ia or BR-Ib were
clearly detected by the various methods (coimmunoprecipitation, ligand
cross-linking, and copatching) used in the current studies (Figures
1-3 and 6). Quantitation of the copatching studies performed on live
cells (Figure 8) indicated that 30 and 40% of BR-Ia and BR-Ib,
respectively, resided in complexes with BR-II in the absence of ligand,
increasing to 50-60% upon ligand binding. These values of
ligand-independent complexes are significantly higher than those
observed for type I/type II heterocomplex formation among TGF-
receptors (Wells et al., 1999
). These findings demonstrate that type I/type II BMP receptors have an intrinsic affinity for each
other that is markedly elevated after the binding of BMP-2. It should
be noted that although the outcome of ligand binding increases
heterocomplex formation both in the BMP and in the TGF-
receptor
systems, the ligand-binding patterns are opposite: BMP-2 binds to BR-II
very weakly unless it is coexpressed with a type I BMP receptor,
whereas TGF-
1 requires T
R-II to bind to T
R-I. Thus, it is
plausible that BMP-2 binds first to its type I receptors, recruiting
BR-II into the signaling complex. Alternatively, a higher affinity of
BMP-2 to preformed BMP receptor heterocomplexes, as proposed for
TGF-
2 binding to T
R-II/T
R-I (Rodriguez et al., 1995
), could shift the equilibrium toward them and facilitate their formation.
It is important to note that BR-II/BR-Ia and BR-II/BR-Ib
heterocomplexes were detected not only in transiently expressing COS7
cells but also in the naturally expressing cell line C3H10T1/2, which
is responsive to BMP (Ahrens et al., 1993
; Wang et
al., 1993
; Asahina et al., 1996
). The heterocomplexes
were detected both in the absence of ligand by coimmunoprecipitation
(Figure 2A) and at the cell surface after ligand cross-linking (Figure 2B). These findings demonstrate that the oligomerization measured in
COS cells is not attributable to overexpression of the transfected receptors, which is required for fluorescence imaging in the copatching experiments. This idea is further supported by the similar copatching results obtained on cells expressing as low as 15,000-20,000 receptors at the surface (evaluated by quantitative measurement of the
cell-surface fluorescence intensity, using the protocol described by us
previously [Henis et al., 1994
], which although higher is
still of the same order of magnitude as the level on naturally
expressing cells).
The significant subpopulation (~30%) of type I and type II BMP
receptors that reside in heterocomplexes before ligand binding raises
questions as to how spurious, ligand-independent signaling by such
complexes is attenuated. A simple possibility is that heterocomplex
formation per se is not sufficient for activation and that a
ligand-mediated conformational change altering the relative orientation
of the subunits within the complex is needed for activation. Such a
mechanism was proposed for the activation of preformed high-affinity
EGF receptor dimers by EGF (Gadella and Jovin, 1995
) and more recently
for the erythropoietin receptor, whose extracellular domain was shown
to be dimeric in its unliganded form (Livnah et al., 1999
)
and to undergo a ligand-induced conformational change for its
activation (Remy et al., 1999
). Retention of a preformed
heteromeric complex in an inactive conformation may also be aided by
the binding of inhibitory proteins that are released after ligand
binding, as proposed for the binding of the immunophilin FKBP12 to the
type I TGF-
receptor (Chen et al., 1997
; Huse et al., 1999
). Because FKBP12 was also shown to interact with BR-Ia (Wang et al., 1996
), it may play a similar role in the BMP
receptor system. Other proteins that interact with type I BMP
receptors, such as BRAM1 (Kurozumi et al., 1998
) or
XIAP (Yamaguchi et al., 1999
), are also potential
candidates that may be involved in suppression of ligand-independent
signaling. However, the significant enhancement in the basal
transcriptional activation of the reporter gene construct in cells
cotransfected with BR-II together with BR-Ia or BR-Ib in the absence of
ligand (Figure 9) clearly suggests that preformed BMP receptor
heterocomplexes are endowed with some signaling capability.
It is notable that BMP-2 augmented heterocomplex formation not only
between type II and type I BMP receptors but also between BR-Ia and
BR-Ib (from 25 to 50%; Figures 6 and 8). This raises the intriguing
possibility that BR-Ia/BR-Ib heterocomplexes may be functionally
distinct from the homomeric BR-Ia and BR-Ib complexes, either by
themselves or (more likely) when they further complex with BR-II. This
is in-line with the distinct expression patterns of BR-Ib and BR-Ia
during differentiation and maturation of skeletal tissues (Dewulf
et al., 1995
; Rosen et al., 1996
; Zou and
Niswander, 1996
; Zou et al., 1997
) and with recent reports
on synergistic signaling by two BMP type I receptors in
Drosophila dorsal-ventral patterning (Neul and Ferguson,
1998
; Nguyen et al., 1998
).
In conclusion, we have shown that oligomerization of the BMP receptors
at the cell surface follows a different mode than that of the TGF-
receptors. The multiplicity of ligand-independent heterocomplexes and
the induction of homo-oligomers of the type I receptors by BMP-2 are
two major differences between the two related systems. Both systems use
multiple ligands and downstream-signaling molecules to exert their
various effects and display a measurable level of preformed complexes
that is significantly enhanced by ligand binding. However, the
existence of two type I BMP receptors that can interact with the type
II receptor and among themselves along with the ability of the ligand
to augment their homodimerization grants the BMP system a degree of
flexibility that does not exist for the TGF-
receptors. Further
studies are needed to elucidate the role of the various complexes in
conveying the multiple effects of the BMP ligands.
| |
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS |
|---|
We thank Dr. Peter ten Dijke (Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research, Uppsala, Sweden) for the BR-Ia, BR-Ib, and pSBE-luc constructs and Dr. M. Kawabata (Cancer Institute, Tokyo, Japan) for the BR-II construct. We gratefully acknowledge helpful discussions with Dr. Ralph Schreck and Florian Neubauer and thank Wolfgang Hädelt for sequencing. This research was supported in part by a project grant from the Israel Cancer Research Fund (to Y.I.H.). L.G. is a recipient of a fellowship from the Clore Scholars Program.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
These authors contributed equally to this work.
§ Corresponding author. E-mail address: pknaus{at}biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|