| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
|
|
|
|||||||
|
|||||||||
1 Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of British Columbia, Life Sciences Centre, 2350 Health Sciences Mall, Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z4, Canada
2 Banting and Best Department of Medical Research, and Department of Biochemistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1L6, Canada
Correspondence
Gerald Weeks
gerwee{at}interchange.ubc.ca
 |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
 TOP ABSTRACT INTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
|
INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
; Coates & Harwood, 2001). In mammalian cells, cell adhesion receptors, such as cadherins, integrins and selectins, have been linked to the regulation of intercellular signalling pathways (Juliano, 2002). However, there are still many gaps in our understanding of the relationship between cell signalling and cell adhesion and, in particular, the mechanisms by which signalling molecules, such as Ras, affect and are affected by cell adhesion.
The importance of adhesion during Dictyostelium development has been long recognized (Gerisch, 1968). These solitary amoebae feed on bacteria during the vegetative phase but, upon nutrient deprivation, up to 105 cells aggregate, spatially organize and differentiate into multiple cell types (Kessin, 2001). The adhesion protein DdCAD-1 (previously known as contact site B or gp24) is one of the first proteins to be expressed at the cell surface at the onset of starvation (Beug et al., 1973; Yang et al., 1997) and it has been implicated in mediating initial side-to-side contacts during early aggregation (Beug et al., 1973; Sesaki & Siu, 1996). A second adhesion molecule, termed gp80 or contact site A, is induced by cAMP as development proceeds (Muller & Gerisch, 1978; Faix et al., 1992) and mediates a second type of contact in the developing stream (Beug et al., 1973; Choi & Siu, 1987). gp80 allows tight adhesion between cells following on from the initial adhesive event mediated by DdCAD-1. In addition to the differences in developmental timing, gp80 and DdCAD-1 mediated contacts can also be distinguished by their sensitivity to EDTA, since DdCAD-1 forms EDTA-sensitive contacts, while gp80 forms EDTA-insensitive contacts (Coates & Harwood, 2001).
Dictyostelium has a large number of Ras proteins, of which six (RasG, RasC, RasD, RasB, RasS and Rap1) have been partially characterized (Weeks & Spiegelman, 2003). A role for the RasG signalling pathway in early development has been previously suggested by the findings that the expression of a constitutively activated version of RasG, RasG(G12T), blocks development (Khosla et al., 1996) and the initiation of development of rasG null cells is delayed (Tuxworth et al., 1997). This effect appears to be at least partially due to the role of RasG in regulating cAMP production, with both cells expressing RasG(G12T) and lacking rasG showing defects in this essential process (Khosla et al., 1996; P. Bolourani & G. Weeks, unpublished observations). In addition, RasG is activated in response to cAMP stimulation (Kae et al., 2004) and it influences the expression of the discoidin gene (Secko et al., 2001), a known molecular marker of the transition from growth to development (Zeng et al., 2000; Primpke et al., 2000). Recently, we reported the identification of proteins whose phosphorylation state was altered by the ectopic expression of RasG(G12T) (Secko et al., 2004). One of the phosphoproteins identified was DdCAD-1. This identification raises an important question: does DdCAD-1 phosphorylation regulate DdCAD-1-mediated cell adhesion? To address this question, we have analysed DdCAD-1-mediated adhesion in a strain expressing RasG(G12T). These studies suggest that the dephosphorylation of DdCAD-1 is affected by the expression of RasG and thereby influences Dictyostelium cell adhesion.
|
METHODS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
) in rotary-agitated suspension (175 r.p.m.) at 22 °C. The generation of the Ax2 : : MB, Ax2 : : MB-rasG(G12T), rasG null (IR17) and cadA null strains have been described previously (Secko et al., 2004; Tuxworth et al., 1997; Wong et al., 2002). Ax2 : : MB and Ax2 : : MB-rasG(G12T) transformants were maintained and grown in 10 µg G418 ml–1, 5 µg blasticidin S ml–1 and 5 µg ml tetracycline ml–1. For RasG(G12T) induction, cells were centrifuged at 700 g for 4 min, washed three times in HL5 medium and then resuspended in HL5 medium containing no tetracycline (Secko et al., 2004). Strains were incubated in rotary-agitated suspension (175 r.p.m.) at 22 °C during the induction period.
Electrophoretic and immunoblot analysis.
One-dimensional (1D) SDS-PAGE and immunoblot analysis of fractionated proteins was performed as reported previously (Secko et al., 2001), except that 180x160x1 mm SDS-polyacrylamide gels were used. These gels were run at a constant current of 25 mA per gel for 3 h with cooling. Immunoblots were scanned using a UMAX-II scanner and densitometry was then performed using GeneQuant Analysis software (Molecular Dynamics). Two-dimensional (2D) electrophoresis and immunoblot analysis were performed as reported previously (Secko et al., 2004), except that 7 cm, pH 3–10, ready-to-use Immobiline DryStrips were rehydrated overnight in the presence of 100 µg total protein solution. Antibodies used were as follows: phosphothreonine polyclonal antibody (1 : 1000 dilution) (Cell Signalling Technology, cat. #9381), DdCAD-1 specific polyclonal antibody (1 : 3000 dilution) (Sesaki & Siu, 1996) and RasG- and RasC-specific polyclonal antibodies (1 : 2000 dilution) (Khosla et al., 1994; Lim et al., 2001).
Cell cohesion assays.
Cell cohesion assays were performed as described by Wong et al. (2002). To determine developmental cell cohesion, vegetative cells were centrifuged at 700 g for 4 min, washed in KK2, resuspended in KK2 at 2x107 cells ml–1 and starved in rotary-agitated suspension (175 r.p.m.) at 22 °C for 4 h. The cell suspension was diluted to a density of approximately 2·5x106 cells ml–1 and aggregates were dispersed by vigorously vortexing for 15 s. Aggregates were allowed to reform while rotating on a platform shaker at 180 r.p.m. at room temperature. At the indicated times, the number of non-aggregated cells, including singlets and doublets, were scored using a haemocytometer and the number of aggregating cells was determined by subtracting this number from the total number of cells and was expressed as a percentage of the total.
Vegetative cell cohesion was measured following incubation in HL5 medium alone or HL5 medium supplemented with either 10 mM EDTA or 50 µg DdCAD-1-specific antibodies ml–1 (Sesaki & Siu, 1996). After the indicated times, cells were placed in Nunc tissue culture dishes, viewed using an Olympus CK inverted microscope and photographed with a DAGE-100 CCD camera (Dage Corp.).
Indirect immunofluorescence.
Cells were deposited on No. 1 glass cover slips (VWR Scientific) and allowed to adhere for 10 min in HL5 medium. Once adhered, the medium was removed and the cells were gently washed with KK2 to remove the remaining medium. Cells were fixed in 4 % formaldehyde in KK2 for 15 min at room temperature. When cells were to be permeabilized, the formaldehyde was removed and cold methanol (–20 °C) containing 1 % formaldehyde was added for 5 min (Fukui et al., 1987). Non-specific binding was blocked with 1 % (w/v) BSA in PBS for 10 min, prior to incubation with the DdCAD-1 antiserum (1 : 400 dilution in PBS containing 1 % BSA) for 1 h (Sesaki & Siu, 1996). Samples were washed three times in PBS containing 0·05 % Tween 20, stained with 1 : 200 FITC-conjugated goat anti-rabbit IgG (Jackson Laboratories) for 1 h and then washed three times in PBS containing 0·05 % Tween 20. The cover slips were mounted in Prolong Antifade mounting medium (Molecular Probes) on Premium microscope slides (Fisher) and images were acquired using a Zeiss Axioplan fluorescent microscope equipped with x60 objective lenses using a DVC camera (Diagnostic Instruments) and Northern Eclipse imaging software. The specificity of DdCAD-1 antiserum for DdCAD-1 has been confirmed previously (Sesaki & Siu, 1996).
|
RESULTS |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
). The relative levels of these three phosphoproteins was reduced in response to the ectopic expression of constitutively activated RasG, RasG(G12T), from a tetracycline-repressible promoter (Secko et al., 2004). The availability of a strain in which the DdCAD-1-encoding gene (cadA) had been disrupted (Wong et al., 2002) provided an opportunity to confirm that the three phosphoproteins were in fact DdCAD-1. Total protein samples from the cadA null strain (cadA–), along with a control Ax2 strain (Ax2 : : MB) and a strain expressing RasG(G12T) [Ax2 : : MB-rasG(G12T)], were subjected to 2D immunoblot analysis. The three phosphothreonine-reacting spots that had been characterized as DdCAD-1 were all present in Ax2 : : MB (Secko et al., 2004), but were absent from the cadA null strain (Fig. 1A). The corresponding silver-stained protein spots were also absent from the cadA null strain (Fig. 1B). Together these results support the conclusion that the phosphothreonine-reacting spots were phosphorylated DdCAD-1.
|
). The levels of DdCAD-1, detected with a DdCAD-1-specific antibody (Sesaki & Siu, 1996), remained constant. The level of RasC, a protein that was not expected to be affected by RasG(G12T) induction, also showed no change (Fig. 1C) and, as anticipated from a previous study (Secko et al., 2004), the level of RasG protein increased (Fig. 1C). These results indicate that the total level of DdCAD-1 did not change during RasG(G12T) induction and confirmed that the observed changes in the phosphothreonine immunoblots were due to decreases in protein phosphorylation.
RasG(G12T) expression results in vegetative cell clumping
Vegetative Dictyostelium cells are normally not cohesive when grown in shaking suspension in HL5 medium and do not start to adhere to each other until starvation occurs. DdCAD-1 is involved in this initial adhesion (Sesaki & Siu, 1996). When Ax2 : : MB and Ax2 : : MB-rasG(G12T) cells were grown in shaking suspension in the presence of 5 µg tetracycline ml–1, they grew as individual cells and were not cohesive (Fig. 2). In contrast, when Ax2 : : MB-rasG(G12T) cells were grown in the absence of tetracycline to allow the induction of RasG(G12T) expression, some cells formed clumps, whereas, Ax2 : : MB cells grown in the absence of tetracycline did not clump (Fig. 2). These results showed that RasG(G12T) expression, rather than simply the removal of tetracycline, induced cell-to-cell adhesion. The finding that RasG(G12T) expression was associated with cell cohesion in vegetative cells suggested the possibility that the activation of RasG signalling prematurely induced cell adhesion through the dephosphorylation of DdCAD-1.
|
) and by DdCAD-1-specific antibodies (Brar & Siu, 1993). Ax2 : : MB and Ax2 : : MB-rasG(G12T) cells were grown for 3 h in the absence of tetracycline to allow the induction of RasG(G12T), and in the presence of either 10 mM EDTA or 50 µg DdCAD-1 antibodies ml–1. The addition of EDTA or the DdCAD-1 antibodies prevented Ax2 : : MB-rasG(G12T) cells from adhering (Fig. 3), whereas cells incubated in the absence of EDTA or antibody formed clumps as before. These results are consistent with the idea that the observed vegetative cell-to-cell adhesion induced by RasG(G12T) expression is mediated by DdCAD-1.
|
; Sesaki et al., 1997). During development, as cells become more adhesive, some DdCAD-1 becomes localized at the cell surface (Sesaki & Siu, 1996; Sesaki et al., 1997). The observation that cells expressing RasG(G12T) tended to be adhesive during vegetative growth raised the possibility that DdCAD-1 was localized at the surface upon expression of activated RasG.
Indirect immunofluorescence microscopy was used with DdCAD-1-specific antibodies (Sesaki & Siu, 1996) to determine if DdCAD-1 was localized at the surface of induced Ax2 : : MB-rasG(G12T) vegetative cells (Fig. 4). To restrict the staining to DdCAD-1 localized at the cell surface, indirect immunofluorescence microscopy was undertaken using DdCAD-1 antibodies with non-permeabilized cells. Under these conditions, vegetative Ax2 : : MB cells were largely unstained (Fig. 4), consistent with the finding that DdCAD-1 is localized predominately in the cytoplasm in these cells (Sesaki & Siu, 1996). In contrast, strongly stained immunofluorescence structures that often formed rings (Fig. 4, arrows) were observed for the vegetative Ax2 : : MB-rasG(G12T) cells, confirming a surface localization of DdCAD-1. Thus, the expression of RasG(G12T) resulted in the movement of some of the DdCAD-1 to the cell surface, providing an explanation as to why the vegetative Ax2 : : MB-rasG(G12T) cells were more cohesive than the control cells.
|
; Wong et al., 2002). Cells were washed free of tetracycline and starved for 4 h, a time when only EDTA-sensitive DdCAD-1-dependent cell adhesion is occurring (Wong et al., 2002). The cells were dissociated by vigorous vortexing to break up existing aggregates and then allowed to reassociate in rolling tubes (Wong et al., 2002). Some reassociation of the Ax2 : : MB cells was detected after 20 min (Fig. 5). The reassociation of induced Ax2 : : MB-rasG(G12T) cells was much more rapid, with significant adhesion occurring within 5 min (Fig. 5). The addition of 10 mM EDTA during the assay completely prevented reassociation of both sets of cells, indicating that the observed reassociation was in fact due to EDTA-sensitive adhesion (Fig. 5). These results indicate that cells expressing RasG(G12T) exhibit enhanced DdCAD-1-mediated adhesion during early development.
|
; Sesaki et al., 1997) and adhesion appeared to be related to phosphorylation, we determined whether DdCAD-1 phosphorylation decreased during development. We used a 1D SDS-PAGE analysis to facilitate the monitoring of multiple samples and to allow a kinetic analysis. cadA null cells were included in the analysis as a control for other phosphothreonine-containing proteins that might co-migrate with DdCAD-1 in the 1D fractionation. A low intensity band, which increased during the development of the cadA null cells, was found to migrate in the same position as DdCAD-1 (Fig. 6A) and the relative densities of the bands were therefore quantified by densitometry so that the contribution of the non-DdCAD-1 signal could be subtracted. There were relatively constant levels of phosphorylated DdCAD-1 during the first 4 h of development of the Ax2 : : MB cells and then levels decreased about fourfold after 6 h (Fig. 6B).
|
). Total protein samples, taken from the rasG– strain and the control Ax2 strain, were subjected to 2D immunoblot analysis. All three DdCAD-1 phosphoproteins were found in the Ax2 strain as before, but there was a greatly reduced level of phosphorylation in all three DdCAD-1 species in the rasG– strain (Fig. 7), rather than the anticipated increase. However, the total amount of DdCAD-1 was greatly decreased in rasG– cells in comparison to Ax2 control cells (Fig. 7B). These results indicate that the decrease in DdCAD-1 phosphorylation in rasG null cells is due to a decrease in DdCAD-1 protein level, suggesting that RasG is an important regulator of DdCAD-1 expression during vegetative growth.
|
|
DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
), are in fact DdCAD-1 since they are absent in a cadA null cell line. Although DdCAD-1 has long been implicated as a major adhesion molecule during early development (Coates & Harwood, 2001), its phosphorylation has not been previously described. Since DdCAD-1 was resolved into at least three spots by 2D electrophoresis, it is likely that it is phosphorylated at more than one site. In addition, since the separated components were all detected with a phosphothreonine-specific antibody, each must contain a phosphorylated threonine residue, although the pI shift might be due to modification of other amino acid residues. Since total DdCAD-1 protein levels were not significantly different between cells expressing RasG(G12T) and control cells (Fig. 1B), the changes in DdCAD-1 phosphorylation were not a result of changes in protein level. These results suggest the existence of phosphatases and/or kinases that act on DdCAD-1, which are also among the downstream effectors of RasG.
DdCAD-1-mediated adhesion is known to be homophilic (i.e. binding is through DdCAD-1/DdCAD-1 interactions) and requires Ca2+ (Brar & Siu, 1993; Wong et al., 1996). The work reported here suggests that DdCAD-1 is also regulated by phosphorylation. Initial insight into the effect of phosphorylation on DdCAD-1 function came from the observation that cells expressing RasG(G12T) became cohesive during vegetative growth (Fig. 5). Constitutive gp80 overexpression in vegetative cells has been found to induce EDTA-stable contacts in suspension (Faix et al., 1992). However, the RasG(G12T)-induced cohesion was EDTA-sensitive and was blocked with DdCAD-1 antibodies, indicating that it was mediated by DdCAD-1. The fact that the RasG(G12T)-expressing cells were more cohesive and contained less phosphorylated DdCAD-1 suggested the possibility that dephosphorylation of DdCAD-1 was important in facilitating DdCAD-1-mediated adherence. An important regulatory role for phosphorylation in mammalian cell adhesion has been documented (Lickert et al., 2000; Lilien et al., 2002; Nelson & Nusse, 2004), but this is the first time such a role has been implicated in Dictyostelium cell adhesion.
Bacterially grown cells do not express DdCAD-1 until the onset of starvation (Knecht et al., 1987), but axenically grown vegetative cells express high levels of DdCAD-1. These latter cells are not adhesive, because the protein is sequestered in the cytoplasm (Brar & Siu, 1993; Sesaki & Siu, 1996). Axenically grown cells only became adhesive after the onset of starvation and this correlated with the movement of DdCAD-1 to the cell surface. In contrast, axenically grown, RasG(G12T)-expressing vegetative cells were already cohesive and this correlated with the presence of DdCAD-1 at the cell surface in ring-like structures (Fig. 4), suggesting that a RasG(G12T)-dependent signal regulated the movement of DdCAD-1.
Transport of DdCAD-1 to the cell surface has been shown to occur via a non-classical pathway involving contractile vacuoles (Sesaki et al., 1997). Sesaki et al. (1997) have suggested that this occurs by at least four steps, including (1) DdCAD-1 accumulation into contractile vacuoles, (2) the binding of DdCAD-1 to the contractile vacuole membrane, (3) the association of DdCAD-1 with an ‘anchoring’ protein on the luminal surface of the vacuoles, and (4) the fusion of a contractile vacuole with the plasma membrane followed by the subsequent dispersal of DdCAD-1 across the surface of the cell. Our data suggest that RasG(G12T) may affect this transport pathway. This possibility is supported by the fact that, after 3 h of development, DdCAD-1-filled contractile vacuoles appear as ring-like structures when merging with the plasma membrane (Sesaki et al., 1997). These ring-like structures bear a distinct similarity to the immunofluorescence staining in RasG(G12T)-expressing vegetative cells, which is often concentrated into rings (Fig. 4, arrows). Since these structures are not seen until 3 h of development in wild-type cells (Sesaki et al., 1997), this further suggests that RasG(G12T) is prematurely activating this pathway. However, it has yet to be established what role phosphorylation may play in this process and, as such, it is not yet clear whether the phosphorylation of DdCAD-1 regulates its localization or, conversely, whether the localization of DdCAD-1 regulates its phosphorylation.
We previously found that rasG null cells express lower levels of discoidin, a protein normally induced at the onset of development (Secko et al., 2001). We have now demonstrated that rasG null cells have considerably lower levels of the cell adhesion protein DdCAD-1 (Fig. 7). This observation came as something of a surprise based on the fact that the expression of RasG(G12T) did not affect DdCAD-1 protein levels under the short-term induction conditions used here. However, the observed decrease in total levels of DdCAD-1 was much larger than the decrease observed for DdCAD-1 phosphorylation in these cells (see Fig. 7A versus 7B), which argues that, at least qualitatively, DdCAD-1 is more phosphorylated in the rasG null cells. The decrease in levels of both discoidin and DdCAD-1 in rasG null cells also suggests that RasG signalling may play a role in protein expression during early development.
DdCAD-1 shares limited homology with the extracellular domain of metazoan cadherins; in particular, the two middle domains of DdCAD-1 (aa 49–146) share 28 % identity with the first extracellular repeat of E-cadherin, as well as similarities in their Ca2+-binding site (Wong et al., 1996). Cadherins are involved in cell–cell adhesion and the formation of adherence junctions (Nelson & Nusse, 2004). Metazoan cadherins form complexes with catenins to allow their linkage to the actin cytoskeleton (Jamora & Fuchs, 2002) and the stability of these complexes is regulated by phosphorylation. Tyrosine phosphorylation of 
-catenin by Src or Fer results in the disruption of cadherin/-catenin complexes and decreased adhesion (Lilien et al., 2002; Nelson & Nusse, 2004). An unidentified transmembrane linker has been postulated to bind to DdCAD-1 (Sesaki et al., 1997); however, the proteins that interact with DdCAD-1 are currently not known. It is possible that DdCAD-1 phosphorylation performs a similar function. It should be noted that cadherin/-catenin complexes are phosphorylated on serine/threonine residues, which results in increased stabilization of the complexes (Lickert et al., 2000). Since DdCAD-1 also appears to be phosphorylated on several residues (Fig. 1), its regulation by phosphorylation could be equally complex. It must also be pointed out that DdCAD-1 is not a transmembrane protein and thus its mode of adhesion could therefore be distinct from systems described in mammalian cells. Nonetheless, it will be of interest to determine the pathway leading from RasG activation to DdCAD-1 dephosphorylation, as this will not only help in our understanding of Dictyostelium development, but could produce insights into the regulation of metazoan cell–cell adhesion.
|
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
|---|
|
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
TOPABSTRACTINTRODUCTIONMETHODSRESULTSDISCUSSIONREFERENCES |
|---|
Brar, S. K. & Siu, C. H. (1993). Characterization of the cell adhesion molecule gp24 in Dictyostelium discoideum. Mediation of cell–cell adhesion via a Ca2+-dependent mechanism. J Biol Chem 268, 24902–24909.
Choi, A. H. & Siu, C. H. (1987). Filopodia are enriched in a cell cohesion molecule of Mr 80,000 and participate in cell–cell contact formation in Dictyostelium discoideum. J Cell Biol 104, 1375–1387.
Coates, J. C. & Harwood, A. J. (2001). Cell–cell adhesion and signal transduction during Dictyostelium development. J Cell Sci 114, 4349–4358.[Medline]
Faix, J., Gerisch, G. & Noegel, A. A. (1992). Overexpression of the csA cell adhesion molecule under its own cAMP-regulated promoter impairs morphogenesis in Dictyostelium. J Cell Sci 102, 203–214.[Medline]
Fukui, Y., Yumura, S. & Yumura-Kitanishi, T. (1987). Agar-overlay immuno-fluorescence: high resolution studies of cytoskeletal components and their changes during chemotaxis. Methods Cell Biol 28, 347–356.[Medline]
Gerisch, G. (1968). Cell aggregation and differentiation in Dictyostelium. Curr Top Dev Biol 3, 157–197.[Medline]
Jamora, C. & Fuchs, E. (2002). Intercellular adhesion, signalling and the cytoskeleton. Nat Cell Biol 4, E101–E108.[CrossRef][Medline]
Juliano, R. L. (2002). Signal transduction by cell adhesion receptors and the cytoskeleton: functions of integrins, cadherins, selectins, and immunoglobulin-superfamily members. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol 42, 283–323.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kae, H., Lim, C. J., Spiegelman, G. B. & Weeks, G. (2004). Chemoattractant-induced Ras activation during Dictyostelium aggregation. EMBO Rep 5, 602–606.[CrossRef][Medline]
Kessin, R. H. (2001). Dictyostelium – Evolution, Cell Biology, and the Development of Multicellularity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Khosla, M., Spiegelman, G. B., Weeks, G., Sands, T. W., Virdy, K. J. & Cotter, D. A. (1994). RasG protein accumulation occurs just prior to amoebae emergence during spore germination in Dictyostelium discoideum. FEMS Microbiol Lett 117, 293–298.[CrossRef][Medline]
Khosla, M., Spiegelman, G. B. & Weeks, G. (1996). Overexpression of an activated rasG gene during growth blocks the initiation of Dictyostelium development. Mol Cell Biol 16, 4156–4162.[Abstract]
Knecht, D. A., Fuller, D. L. & Loomis, W. F. (1987). Surface glycoprotein, gp24, involved in early adhesion of Dictyostelium discoideum. Dev Biol 121, 277–283.[CrossRef][Medline]
Lam, T. Y., Pickering, G., Geltosky, J. & Siu, C. H. (1981). Differential cell cohesiveness expressed by prespore and prestalk cells of Dictyostelium discoideum. Differentiation 20, 22–28.[CrossRef]
Lickert, H., Bauer, A., Kemler, R. & Stappert, J. (2000). Casein kinase II phosphorylation of E-cadherin increases E-cadherin/-catenin interaction and strengthens cell–cell adhesion. J Biol Chem 275, 5090–5095.
Lilien, J., Balsamo, J., Arregui, C. & Xu, G. (2002). Turn-off, drop-out: functional state switching of cadherins. Dev Dyn 224, 18–29.[CrossRef][Medline]
Lim, C. J., Spiegelman, G. B. & Weeks, G. (2001). RasC is required for optimal activation of adenylyl cyclase and Akt/PKB during aggregation. EMBO J 20, 4490–4499.[CrossRef][Medline]
Muller, K. & Gerisch, G. (1978). A specific glycoprotein as the target site of adhesion blocking Fab in aggregating Dictyostelium cells. Nature 274, 445–449.[CrossRef][Medline]
Nelson, W. J. & Nusse, R. (2004). Convergence of Wnt, beta-catenin, and cadherin pathways. Science 303, 1483–1487.
Primpke, G., Iassonidou, V., Nellen, W. & Wetterauer, B. (2000). Role of cAMP-dependent protein kinase during growth and early development of Dictyostelium discoideum. Dev Biol 221, 101–111.[CrossRef][Medline]
Secko, D. M., Khosla, M., Gaudet, P., Tsang, A., Spiegelman, G. B. & Weeks, G. (2001). RasG regulates discoidin gene expression during Dictyostelium growth. Exp Cell Res 266, 135–141.[CrossRef][Medline]
Secko, D. M., Insall, R. H., Spiegelman, G. B. & Weeks, G. (2004). The identification of Dictyostelium phosphoproteins altered in response to the activation of RasG. Proteomics 4, 2629–2639.[Medline]
Sesaki, H. & Siu, C. H. (1996). Novel redistribution of the Ca2+-dependent cell adhesion molecule DdCAD-1 during development of Dictyostelium discoideum. Dev Biol 177, 504–516.[CrossRef][Medline]
Sesaki, H., Wong, E. F. & Siu, C. H. (1997). The cell adhesion molecule DdCAD-1 in Dictyostelium is targeted to the cell surface by a nonclassical transport pathway involving contractile vacuoles. J Cell Biol 138, 939–951.
Tuxworth, R. I., Cheetham, J. L., Machesky, L. M., Spiegelmann, G. B., Weeks, G. & Insall, R. H. (1997). Dictyostelium RasG is required for normal motility and cytokinesis, but not growth. J Cell Biol 138, 605–614.
Watts, D. & Ashworth, J. (1970). Growth of myxamoebae of the cellular slime mould Dictyostelium discoideum in axenic culture. Biochem J 119, 171–174.[Medline]
Weeks, G. & Spiegelman, G. B. (2003). Roles played by Ras subfamily proteins in the cell and developmental biology of microorganisms. Cell Signal 15, 901–909.[CrossRef][Medline]
Wong, E. F., Brar, S. K., Sesaki, H., Yang, C. & Siu, C. H. (1996). Molecular cloning and characterization of DdCAD-1, a Ca2+-dependent cell–cell adhesion molecule, in Dictyostelium discoideum. J Biol Chem 271, 16399–16408.
Wong, E., Yang, C., Wang, J., Fuller, D., Loomis, W. F. & Siu, C. H. (2002). Disruption of the gene encoding the cell adhesion molecule DdCAD-1 leads to aberrant cell sorting and cell-type proportioning during Dictyostelium development. Development 129, 3839–3850.[Medline]
Yang, C., Brar, S. K., Desbarats, L. & Siu, C. H. (1997). Synthesis of the Ca2+-dependent cell adhesion molecule DdCAD-1 is regulated by multiple factors during Dictyostelium development. Differentiation 61, 275–284.[CrossRef][Medline]
Zeng, C., Anjard, C., Riemann, K., Konzok, A. & Nellen, W. (2000). gdt1, a new signal transduction component for negative regulation of the growth-differentiation transition in Dictyostelium discoideum. Mol Biol Cell 11, 1631–1643.
Received 23 November 2005;
accepted 26 January 2006.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| INT J SYST EVOL MICROBIOL | MICROBIOLOGY | J GEN VIROL |
| J MED MICROBIOL | ALL SGM JOURNALS | |
