FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2056550604> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2056550604 endingPage "15356" @default.
• W2056550604 startingPage "15350" @default.
• W2056550604 abstract "RPTPμ is a receptor-like protein-tyrosine phosphatase (RPTP) whose ectodomain mediates homotypic cell-cell interactions. The intracellular part of RPTPμ contains a relatively long juxtamembrane domain (158 amino acids; aa) and two conserved phosphatase domains (C1 and C2). The membrane-proximal C1 domain is responsible for the catalytic activity of RPTPμ, whereas the membrane-distal C2 domain serves an unknown function. The regulation of RPTP activity remains poorly understood, although dimerization has been proposed as a general mechanism of inactivation. Using the yeast two-hybrid system, we find that the C1 domain binds to an N-terminal noncatalytic region in RPTPμ, termed JM (aa 803–955), consisting of a large part of the juxtamembrane domain (120 aa) and a small part of the C1 domain (33 aa). When co-expressed in COS cells, the JM polypeptide binds to both the C1 and the C2 domain. Strikingly, the isolated JM polypeptide fails to interact with either full-length RPTPμ or with truncated versions of RPTPμ that contain the JM region, consistent with the JM-C1 and JM-C2 interactions being intramolecular rather than intermolecular. Furthermore, we find that large part of the juxtamembrane domain (aa 814–922) is essential for C1 to be catalytically active. Our findings suggest a model in which RPTPμ activity is regulated by the juxtamembrane domain undergoing intramolecular interactions with both the C1 and C2 domain. RPTPμ is a receptor-like protein-tyrosine phosphatase (RPTP) whose ectodomain mediates homotypic cell-cell interactions. The intracellular part of RPTPμ contains a relatively long juxtamembrane domain (158 amino acids; aa) and two conserved phosphatase domains (C1 and C2). The membrane-proximal C1 domain is responsible for the catalytic activity of RPTPμ, whereas the membrane-distal C2 domain serves an unknown function. The regulation of RPTP activity remains poorly understood, although dimerization has been proposed as a general mechanism of inactivation. Using the yeast two-hybrid system, we find that the C1 domain binds to an N-terminal noncatalytic region in RPTPμ, termed JM (aa 803–955), consisting of a large part of the juxtamembrane domain (120 aa) and a small part of the C1 domain (33 aa). When co-expressed in COS cells, the JM polypeptide binds to both the C1 and the C2 domain. Strikingly, the isolated JM polypeptide fails to interact with either full-length RPTPμ or with truncated versions of RPTPμ that contain the JM region, consistent with the JM-C1 and JM-C2 interactions being intramolecular rather than intermolecular. Furthermore, we find that large part of the juxtamembrane domain (aa 814–922) is essential for C1 to be catalytically active. Our findings suggest a model in which RPTPμ activity is regulated by the juxtamembrane domain undergoing intramolecular interactions with both the C1 and C2 domain. protein-tyrosine phosphatase receptor protein-tyrosine phosphatase amino acid(s) juxtamembrane region (aa 803–955) phosphatase domains hemagglutinin Protein-tyrosine phosphatases (PTPs)1 play important roles in signal transduction pathways regulated by tyrosine phosphorylation. Members of the superfamily of PTPs use the same catalytic mechanism and are broadly classified into transmembrane or receptor-like PTPs (RPTPs) and intracellular, nonreceptor PTPs (reviewed in Refs. 1.Fauman E.B. Saper M.A. Trends Biochem. Sci. 1996; 21: 413-417Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (316) Google Scholar and 2.Neel B.G. Tonks N.K. Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 1997; 9: 193-204Crossref PubMed Scopus (731) Google Scholar). Members of the RPTP subfamily are type I membrane proteins consisting of a variable ectodomain, a single membrane-spanning region, and in most cases, two conserved intracellular phosphatase domains. The RPTPs are further classified according to the structure of their ectodomains (reviewed in Refs. 3.Fischer E.H. Charbonneau H. Tonks N.K. Science. 1991; 253: 401-406Crossref PubMed Scopus (862) Google Scholar and 4.Schaapveld R. Wieringa B. Hendriks W. Mol. Biol. Rep. 1997; 24: 247-262Crossref PubMed Scopus (45) Google Scholar). The large variety in ectodomain structure suggests the existence of an equal number of putative ligands, yet in most cases the corresponding ligands have not been identified. RPTPμ is the prototype member of a subfamily of RPTPs that mediate homophilic cell-cell interactions via their ectodomains and, hence, are thought to play a role in cell adhesion-mediated processes (5.Gebbink M.F.B.G. Zondag G.C.M. Wubbolts R.W. Beijersbergen R.L. van Etten I. Moolenaar W.H. J. Biol. Chem. 1993; 268: 16101-16104Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Google Scholar, 6.Brady-Kalnay S.M. Flint A.J. Tonks N.K. J. Cell Biol. 1993; 122: 961-972Crossref PubMed Scopus (239) Google Scholar, 7.Sap J. Jiang Y.-P. Friedlander D. Grumet M. Schlessinger J. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1994; 14: 1-9Crossref PubMed Google Scholar, 8.Cheng J. Wu K. Armanini M. O'Rourke N. Dowbenko D. Lasky L.A. J. Biol. Chem. 1997; 272: 7264-7277Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (82) Google Scholar). The ectodomain of RPTPμ shows similarities with that of cell-cell adhesion molecules and consists of an N-terminal “MAM” domain, which is critical for mediating cell-cell adhesion (9.Zondag G.C.M. Koningstein G.M. Jiang Y.-P. Sap J. Moolenaar W.H. Gebbink M.F.B.G. J. Biol. Chem. 1995; 270: 14247-14250Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (147) Google Scholar), followed by an Ig-like domain and four fibronectin type III repeats (10.Gebbink M.F.B.G. van Etten I. Hateboer G. Suijkerbuijk R. Beijersbergen R.L. Geurts van Kessel A. Moolenaar W.H. FEBS Lett. 1991; 290: 123-130Crossref PubMed Scopus (110) Google Scholar). Its intracellular part consists of a juxtamembrane domain of 158 amino acids (aa), which is relatively long compared with that in other RPTPs, and two tandem phosphatase domains referred to as C1 and C2. As in most other RPTPs, the membrane-proximal C1 domain of RPTPμ is catalytically active, whereas the membrane-distal C2 domain shows no activity, at least in vitro (11.Gebbink M.F.B.G. Verheijen M.H.G. Zondag G.C.M. van Etten I. Moolenaar W.H. Biochemistry. 1993; 32: 13516-13522Crossref PubMed Scopus (34) Google Scholar). The C2 domains of most RPTPs have been proposed to play a regulatory role (12.Streuli M. Krueger N.X. Thai T. Tang M. Saito H. EMBO J. 1990; 9: 2399-2407Crossref PubMed Scopus (267) Google Scholar), but how it might contribute to RPTP activity is not known. One major unresolved question is how ligand binding may influence the catalytic activity of RPTPs to affect signal transduction events. A recently proposed model involves dimerization, as inferred from the crystal structure of RPTPα (13.Bilwes A.M. den Hertog J. Hunter T. Noel J.P. Nature. 1996; 382: 555-559Crossref PubMed Scopus (291) Google Scholar). This model suggests that ligand binding induces the formation of a symmetrical dimer in which the catalytic site of one molecule is blocked by specific interactions with a helix-turn-helix segment (termed the “wedge”) in the juxtamembrane domain of the other (13.Bilwes A.M. den Hertog J. Hunter T. Noel J.P. Nature. 1996; 382: 555-559Crossref PubMed Scopus (291) Google Scholar). There is no wedge-like region present directly upstream of the C2 domain, suggesting a fundamental difference between the C1 and C2 domains. Based on these structural studies, dimerization has been proposed to be a universal mechanism of inactivation of RPTPs (reviewed in Ref. 14.Weiss A. Schlessinger J. Cell. 1998; 94: 277-280Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (337) Google Scholar). Consistent with this, earlier studies had already indicated that the leukocyte-specific RPTP CD45 can form homodimers (15.Takeda A. Wu J.J. Maizel A.L. J. Biol. Chem. 1992; 267: 16651-16659Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Google Scholar) and that artificial induction of CD45 dimerization may lead to loss of function (16.Desai D.M. Sap J. Schlessinger J. Weiss A. Cell. 1993; 73: 541-554Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (240) Google Scholar). Using a epidermal growth factor receptor-CD45 chimera, a part of CD45 homologous to the inhibitory helix-turn-helix wedge in RPTPα was recently shown to inhibit CD45 function after ligation by epidermal growth factor (17.Majeti R. Bilwes A.M. Noel J.P. Hunter T. Weiss A. Science. 1998; 279: 88-91Crossref PubMed Scopus (218) Google Scholar), in support of the dimerization model. On the other hand, however, the crystal structure of RPTPμ does not reveal such intermolecular interactions between a wedge region and the C1 domain (18.Hoffmann K.M.V. Tonks N.K. Barford D. J. Biol. Chem. 1997; 272: 27505-27508Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (103) Google Scholar). It seems that the catalytic site of RPTPμC1 is unhindered and adopts an open conformation similar to what is observed in the cytosolic PTP, PTP1B (19.Barford D. Flint A.J. Tonks N.K. Science. 1994; 263: 1397-1404Crossref PubMed Scopus (678) Google Scholar). It was suggested that the RPTPμ dimer may be the consequence of crystallization, because dimers were not found in solution. Furthermore, some residues important for the proposed dimerization mechanism are less conserved in RPTPμ (18.Hoffmann K.M.V. Tonks N.K. Barford D. J. Biol. Chem. 1997; 272: 27505-27508Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (103) Google Scholar, 20.Barford D. Das A.K. Egloff M.-P. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 1998; 27: 133-164Crossref PubMed Scopus (561) Google Scholar), suggesting that RPTPμ may not be regulated by dimerization (reviewed in Refs. 14.Weiss A. Schlessinger J. Cell. 1998; 94: 277-280Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (337) Google Scholar and20.Barford D. Das A.K. Egloff M.-P. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 1998; 27: 133-164Crossref PubMed Scopus (561) Google Scholar). Here we present evidence for a new type of interdomain interaction involved in the regulation of RPTPμ activity. In a search for potential binding partners of the C1 domain using the yeast two-hybrid system, we isolated a cDNA clone encoding part of RPTPμ itself, consisting of a large part of the juxtamembrane domain and a small part of the C1 domain. We show that this “JM” segment can interact with both the C1 and C2 domain and present evidence suggesting that this interaction is intramolecular rather than intermolecular. We further show that the juxtamembrane domain is essential for catalytic activity of the C1 domain. Based on these findings, we propose a model in which the juxtamembrane domain may contribute to the regulation of RPTPμ activity. COS-7 cells were cultured in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (Life Technologies, Inc.) supplemented with antibiotics and 8% fetal calf serum. Transient transfections of COS-7 cells were performed by the DEAE-dextran method as described in Ref. 21.Zondag G.C.M. Moolenaar W.H. Gebbink M.F.B.G. J. Cell Biol. 1996; 134: 1513-1517Crossref PubMed Scopus (29) Google Scholar. Antibodies against the HA tag (12CA5) and Myc-tag (9E10) were obtained from hybridoma supernatants. Biotinylated anti-HA antibody and anti-FLAG tag monoclonal antibody M2 were purchased from Roche Molecular Biochemicals and Eastman Kodak Co., respectively. Monoclonal antibody 3D7 directed against the extracellular domain of RPTPμ has been described previously (22.Gebbink M.F.B.G. Zondag G.C.M. Koningstein G.M. Feiken E. Wubbolts R.W. Moolenaar W.H. J. Cell Biol. 1995; 131: 251-260Crossref PubMed Scopus (117) Google Scholar). For use as a bait in the two-hybrid screen, the first catalytic domain of RPTPμ (RPTPμC1) was polymerase chain reaction-amplified using primers 5′-TATGTCGACAACAGAATGAAGAACAGATACG and 5′-CCGGAATTCCTCTTTAATCTG. RPTPμC1 was fused to the Gal4 DNA binding domain bySalI-EcoRI subcloning into pMD4 (23.Smit L. van der Horst G. Borst J. J. Biol. Chem. 1996; 271: 8564-8569Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (109) Google Scholar) containing atrp1 marker for selection. pMD4-RPTPμC1 was co-transfected into the lacZ and his3 containing yeast strain Y190, together with a pVP16-based (24.Vojtek A.B. Hollenberg S.M. Cooper J.A. Cell. 1993; 74: 205-214Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (1654) Google Scholar) human testis cDNA library (kindly provided by R. Bernards) that carries the leu2marker. Yeast transformants expressing the reporter genes were selected on medium lacking histidine and supplemented with 25 mm3-amino-1,2,4-triazole. Positive colonies were identified by β-galactosidase filter assays. Plasmid pMT2-HA-cl.2 was constructed by subcloning the insert from pVP16-clone 2 into a modified pMT2 vector containing an HA tag. pMT2-FLAG-RPTPμC1, C1M, and C2 plasmids were constructed by polymerase chain reaction amplification and standard cloning procedures. The wild type and mutant first PTP domain were amplified by sense (5′-TATGTCGACAACAGAATGAAGAACAGATACG) and antisense (5′-GCGTCTAGAATTCCTCTTTAATCTG) primers using hFL and hFLm constructs as template (5.Gebbink M.F.B.G. Zondag G.C.M. Wubbolts R.W. Beijersbergen R.L. van Etten I. Moolenaar W.H. J. Biol. Chem. 1993; 268: 16101-16104Abstract Full Text PDF PubMed Google Scholar), respectively. The second PTP domain was amplified using sense (5′-ATTACTCGAGCGGACGCTAAACATGGTGAC) and antisense (5′-TCATTCTAGAACACCATCAGCCAGAATTCA) primers and hFL as template. All polymerase chain reaction products were verified by sequencing. pMT2-FLAG-RPTPμC1C2 was constructed by inserting an EcoRI fragment containing the second PTP domain into plasmid pMT2-FLAG-RPTPμC1. HA- and Myc-tagged constructs encoding the juxtamembrane region and first catalytic domain (RPTPμJC1) were generated using primers 5′-TATGTCGACCTGAATGGGAGATCTGTGTC and 5′-TATGAATTCCTCATCTTTCTTAGCCGAGT. Amplified product was subcloned into pMT2-SM-HA and pMT2-SM-Myc and verified by sequencing. pMT2-hFL containing full-length RPTPμ cDNA has previously been described (11.Gebbink M.F.B.G. Verheijen M.H.G. Zondag G.C.M. van Etten I. Moolenaar W.H. Biochemistry. 1993; 32: 13516-13522Crossref PubMed Scopus (34) Google Scholar). The pMT2-HA-cl.2/E896R and pMT2-HA-RPTPμJC1/E896R plasmids (mutated glutamate 896 to arginine) were generated by site-directed mutagenesis (Promega) using primers 5′-GATGAAGTGTGCGCGGGGCTACGGCTTC) and 5′-GAAGCCGTAGCCCCGCGCACACTTCATC. Cells were washed once with ice-cold phosphate-buffered saline and lysed on ice in 1 ml (per 10 cm plate) of Nonidet P-40 lysis buffer (50 mmTris-HCl, pH 8.0, 150 mm NaCl, 1.5 mm EDTA, 10% glycerol, 1% Nonidet P-40) supplemented with 5 μg/ml leupeptin, 2.5 μg/ml aprotinin, and PefablocSC (Roche Molecular Biochemicals). After centrifugation, 200 μl of supernatant (for immunoblot analysis) or 1 ml of supernatant (for phosphatase assays) was incubated for 2 h with protein A-Sepharose beads (Amersham Pharmacia Biotech) precoupled to specific antibodies. Immunoprecipitates were washed three times with lysis buffer and analyzed by Western blotting or assayed for phosphatase activity. For expression controls, 10 μl of total lysate was analyzed by Western blotting. Tyrosine phosphatase activity of immunoprecipitates was measured using a nonradioactive protein-tyrosine phosphatase assay kit (Roche Molecular Biochemicals) according to the manufacturer's instructions. Signals on Western blots were detected by chemiluminescence (ECL, Amersham Pharmacia Biotech). In an attempt to identify proteins that interact with the C1 domain of RPTPμ, we used this domain as bait (RPTPμC1, aa 923–1190) in a yeast two-hybrid screen of a human testis cDNA library. Two positive colonies were identified that contained identical testis-derived cDNA clones, termed clone 1 and clone 2. Strikingly, both clones encode a membrane-proximal region of RPTPμ (aa 803–955) consisting of a large part of the juxtamembrane domain (120 aa) and a small part of the C1 domain (33 aa) (Fig.1 A), which we refer to as either cl.2 or the JM region. As shown in Fig. 1 B,co-expression of RPTPμC1 and cl.2/JM in yeast results in the activation of the lacZ reporter gene. These results strongly indicate that the C1 domain undergoes either intermolecular or intramolecular interaction with the JM region. To confirm the observed C1-JM interdomain interaction in mammalian cells, HA-tagged clone 2 (HA-cl.2) encoding the JM polypeptide was transiently expressed together with epitope-tagged C1 (FLAG-RPTPμC1) in COS cells (Fig.2 A). When both proteins were co-expressed, C1 was co-precipitated with the anti-HA monoclonal antibody (not shown), whereas HA-cl.2 was co-precipitated with anti-FLAG monoclonal antibody. Thus, the C1-JM interdomain interaction occurs in both yeast and mammalian cells. Given the sequence similarities between the C1 and C2 domains, we tested whether the C2 domain might also interact with JM. As shown in Fig. 2 A, this is indeed the case; when HA-cl.2 was co-expressed with the isolated C2 domain (FLAG-RPTPμC2; aa 1191–1452) or with both C1 and C2 domains in tandem (FLAG-RPTPμC1C2; aa 923–1452), HA-cl.2 was co-precipitated with anti-FLAG monoclonal antibody. It thus appears that the JM polypeptide does not discriminate between the C1 and C2 domain for binding in COS cells. It is of note that the RPTPμC1C2 construct, containing both phosphatase domains, yields a stronger binding signal than either C1 or C2 (Fig. 2 A, last lane), as one would expect if each catalytic domain binds one HA-cl.2 molecule (JM polypeptide). We next examined whether the nature of the JM-C1 and JM-C2 interactions is intramolecular or intermolecular. To this end, COS cells were transfected with various epitope-tagged RPTPμ constructs and then subjected to immunoprecipitation and blotting assays. Strikingly, whereas HA-cl.2 (JM polypeptide) co-precipitates with the individual phosphatase domains as well as the tandem C1C2 domain (Fig.2 A), HA-cl.2 fails to interact with longer versions of RPTPμ: either a Myc-tagged polypeptide consisting of a large part of the juxtamembrane domain and the C1 domain (JC1, aa 814–1190) (not shown) or full-length RPTPμ (Fig. 2 C). Furthermore, we find that HA-tagged JC1 does not co-precipitate with Myc-tagged JC1 (Fig. 2 B) nor with full-length RPTPμ (Fig. 2 C). The results of the co-immunoprecipitation analysis are summarized in Fig. 2 D. From these findings we conclude that the observed JM-C1/C2 interactions do not occur between different RPTPμ molecules. Thus, our results can only be explained by the JM-C1/C2 interactions being intramolecular rather than intermolecular. To determine which residues are involved in the interaction between the JM and C1 domains, we transfected RPTPμ constructs in which the following critical residues were mutated: cysteine 1095 to a serine (C1095S) and glutamate 896 to an arginine (E896R). The conserved cysteine 1095 is essential for catalytic activity of the C1 domain of RPTPμ. Mutation of cysteine 1095 to a serine (C1095S) was shown to completely abolish phosphatase activity (11.Gebbink M.F.B.G. Verheijen M.H.G. Zondag G.C.M. van Etten I. Moolenaar W.H. Biochemistry. 1993; 32: 13516-13522Crossref PubMed Scopus (34) Google Scholar). Glutamate 896 is analogous to aspartate 228 of RPTPα. In the RPTPα dimer, this residue is located in the N-terminal wedge that inserts into the catalytic pocket of the C1 domain of the juxta-posed RPTPα molecule and thereby may block its activity (13.Bilwes A.M. den Hertog J. Hunter T. Noel J.P. Nature. 1996; 382: 555-559Crossref PubMed Scopus (291) Google Scholar). Glutamate 896 of RPTPμ is also analogous to glutamate 624 in CD45; mutation of this residue was shown to abolish the inhibitory effect on T-cell receptor signaling caused by CD45 dimerization (17.Majeti R. Bilwes A.M. Noel J.P. Hunter T. Weiss A. Science. 1998; 279: 88-91Crossref PubMed Scopus (218) Google Scholar). We find, however, that the mutation C1095S in FLAG-RPTPμC1 did not affect association with HA-cl.2 (Fig. 3 A). We also find that the mutation E896R in HA-cl.2 does not affect the association with the C1 domain (Fig. 3 B). Taken together, catalytic activity and glutamate 896 are not essential for the association between the juxtamembrane and the C1 domain of RPTPμ. To examine how the distinct domains of RPTPμ contribute to catalytic activity, we determined tyrosine phosphatase activity in immune complexes using a nonradioactive tyrosine phosphatase assay (see “Experimental Procedures”). We measured the activity of both full-length RPTPμ and different epitope-tagged constructs of RPTPμ (Fig. 4,A and B) expressed in COS cells. We found that the isolated C1 and C2 domains as well as C1C2 are inactive (Fig.4 B). In marked contrast, however, N-terminal extension of the C1 domain leads to phosphatase activity as inferred from the JC1 polypeptide being active in the assay. In other words, the juxtamembrane domain is required for activity of the C1 domain. This is consistent with reports on LAR and RPTPα, which show that the isolated C1 domains require at least part of the juxtamembrane domain for activity in vitro (12.Streuli M. Krueger N.X. Thai T. Tang M. Saito H. EMBO J. 1990; 9: 2399-2407Crossref PubMed Scopus (267) Google Scholar, 25.Wang Y. Pallen C.J. EMBO J. 1991; 10: 3231-3237Crossref PubMed Scopus (102) Google Scholar). The present data also indicate that the C2 domain is not required for activity of the C1 domain, although we cannot exclude the possibility that the C2 domain may somehow contribute to the activity of C1. Finally, we found that the E896R mutation in the juxtamembrane domain of HA-RPTPμJC1 does not affect phosphatase activity when compared with the wild-type JC1 polypeptide (Fig. 4 B), indicating that glutamate 896 is not essential for activity of the C1 domain. In the present study, we have shown that the juxtamembrane domain of RPTPμ can bind to both the first and the second phosphatase domain (C1 and C2) and that this interaction is likely to be intramolecular rather than intermolecular. Furthermore, we have presented evidence that the juxtamembrane domain is required for the C1 domain to become fully active. Through yeast two-hybrid analysis, we found that the RPTPμC1 domain binds to an RPTPμ segment, termed JM, consisting of a large part of the juxtamembrane domain and a small part of the C1 domain. Our COS cell experiments revealed that the JM segment interacts not only with C1 but also with the C2 domain of RPTPμ. These results would be consistent with RPTPμ forming dimers, in which the JM region of one molecule interacts with the juxtaposed C1 and/or C2 domains in the partner RPTPμ molecule, analogous to what has been proposed for the C1 domain of RPTPα (13.Bilwes A.M. den Hertog J. Hunter T. Noel J.P. Nature. 1996; 382: 555-559Crossref PubMed Scopus (291) Google Scholar). Inconsistent with a homodimerization model, however, is our finding that the JM segment fails to interact with extended, JM-containing versions of RPTPμC1. JM also fails to interact with full-length RPTPμ. We also did not detect any interdomain interactions between versions of RPTPμ that comprise both JM and C1. These results are most readily explained by a model in which JM-C1/C2 binding represents an intramolecular interaction within one single RPTPμ molecule. Mutational analysis indicates that the interaction is independent of RPTPμ catalytic activity and of glutamate 896 in the helix-turn-helix segment, which is analogous to that in the corresponding motif of CD45, where it has been implicated in dimerization-dependent inhibition of CD45 activity caused by dimerization (17.Majeti R. Bilwes A.M. Noel J.P. Hunter T. Weiss A. Science. 1998; 279: 88-91Crossref PubMed Scopus (218) Google Scholar). In a recent crystallographic study on the RPTPμC1 domain (residues 874–1168), it was concluded that the protein behaves as a monomer in solution and that C1-C1 dimerization is most likely a consequence of crystallization (18.Hoffmann K.M.V. Tonks N.K. Barford D. J. Biol. Chem. 1997; 272: 27505-27508Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (103) Google Scholar). The C1 crystal structure revealed that the catalytic site is unhindered and adopts an open conformation. Caution is needed, however, to extrapolate findings obtained with RPTPμC1 to the full-length molecule, particularly because the juxtamembrane domain was excluded from crystallographic analysis and, hence, any JM-C1 interaction would go undetected. The N terminus of the C1 domain used for crystallization starts at the helix-turn-helix segment (at the membrane-distal end) very close to the boundary of the C1 domain. This would imply that a more membrane-proximal part of the juxtamembrane domain (immediately N-terminal to the helix-turn-helix structure) is involved in the observed JM-C1/C2 interaction. Further crystallization studies using N-terminally extended versions of the C1 domain are required to clarify this point. It seems likely that the interdomain interactions found in RPTPμ also occur in other members of the RPTP family. It is of note that the juxtamembrane domain of RPTPμ, in common with the other MAM domain containing RPTPs, is about 70 residues longer than that in all other RPTPs (10.Gebbink M.F.B.G. van Etten I. Hateboer G. Suijkerbuijk R. Beijersbergen R.L. Geurts van Kessel A. Moolenaar W.H. FEBS Lett. 1991; 290: 123-130Crossref PubMed Scopus (110) Google Scholar); the significance of this extension remains unknown. It will be interesting to see whether JM-C1/C2 interactions are a specific feature of the MAM domain-containing subfamily of RPTPs. Our results support the view that dimerization is not involved in the regulation of RPTPμ activity, in contrast to what has been proposed for the regulation of RPTPα and CD45 (14.Weiss A. Schlessinger J. Cell. 1998; 94: 277-280Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (337) Google Scholar, 20.Barford D. Das A.K. Egloff M.-P. Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 1998; 27: 133-164Crossref PubMed Scopus (561) Google Scholar). In fact, there is no direct evidence that RPTPα dimers are catalytically inactive. Parts of RPTPα, containing the inhibitory wedge and the C1 domain, are catalytically active and probably act as active monomers in solution (25.Wang Y. Pallen C.J. EMBO J. 1991; 10: 3231-3237Crossref PubMed Scopus (102) Google Scholar, 26.Wu L. Buist A. den Hertog J. Zhang Z.-Y. J. Biol. Chem. 1997; 272: 6994-7002Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (65) Google Scholar). The RPTP dimerization concept has become even more complex since the C1 domain of RPTPς was reported to interact with the C2 domain of RPTPδ but not the RPTPςC2 with RPTPδC1 (27.Wallace M.J. Fladd C. Batt J. Rotin D. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1998; 18: 2608-2616Crossref PubMed Google Scholar). This apparent C1-C2 heterodimerization requires the wedge region of RPTPς, which was thought to bind the “pseudo-active” site in the juxtaposed RPTPδC2 domain (27.Wallace M.J. Fladd C. Batt J. Rotin D. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1998; 18: 2608-2616Crossref PubMed Google Scholar). Although the precise cellular role of the C2 domain remains unknown, the latter result does suggest that the C2 domain is involved in a variety of protein-protein interactions. Very recently, structural studies on the tandem phosphatase domains of RPTP LAR revealed a monomeric configuration without any indication of dimer formation either in the crystal structure or in solution (28.Nam H.-J. Poy F. Krueger N.X. Saito H. Frederick C.A. Cell. 1999; 97: 449-457Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (154) Google Scholar). The LAR crystal structure further reveals that the N-terminal helix wedge is not involved in any intermolecular interaction and that the catalytic sites of both C1 and C2 are accessible, a configuration that is in direct contrast to the previous model of dimeric-blocked orientation based on the crystal structure of the RPTPαC1 domain alone (28.Nam H.-J. Poy F. Krueger N.X. Saito H. Frederick C.A. Cell. 1999; 97: 449-457Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (154) Google Scholar). We also have shown that the juxtamembrane region of RPTPμ is required for the C1 domain to be catalytically active, consistent with an intramolecular JM-C1 interaction regulating catalytic activity. Previous reports have shown that LAR and RPTPα similarly need the juxtamembrane domain for full catalytic activity (12.Streuli M. Krueger N.X. Thai T. Tang M. Saito H. EMBO J. 1990; 9: 2399-2407Crossref PubMed Scopus (267) Google Scholar, 25.Wang Y. Pallen C.J. EMBO J. 1991; 10: 3231-3237Crossref PubMed Scopus (102) Google Scholar), suggesting a general regulatory mechanism of the juxtamembrane domain among RPTPs. Based on our findings, we propose a model explaining how the observed interdomain interactions may contribute to the regulation of catalytic activity (Fig. 5). In this model, RPTPμ can adopt two different conformations. In one conformation, the juxtamembrane domain interacts with the regulatory, catalytically inactive C2 domain. In this way, the C1 domain lacks interaction with the juxtamembrane domain and thereby remains inactive. When a proper tyrosine-phosphorylated substrate is presented, RPTPμ adopts a new conformation, in which the JM-C2 domain interaction dissociates to promote the formation of a JM-C1 intramolecular complex thereby stimulating catalytic activity and allowing substrate dephosphorylation. The precise function of the juxtamembrane domain remains to be elucidated. It could be important for proper folding of the C1 domain, but it might also be involved in substrate recognition and/or binding. Similarly, the role of the C2 domain remains poorly understood. Interactions between the C2 domain and other signaling molecules might be involved but still remain to be established. Recent mutational analysis has raised the intriguing possibility that C2 might in fact be an active PTPase domain in the correct cellular context (28.Nam H.-J. Poy F. Krueger N.X. Saito H. Frederick C.A. Cell. 1999; 97: 449-457Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (154) Google Scholar). The role of the juxtamembrane domain and the C2 domain are key issues that need to be addressed for better understanding of the regulation of RPTPμ activity. In conclusion, our findings reveal the occurrence of interdomain interactions in RPTPμ, and given the lack of any indication for intermolecular interactions, they support the view that the dimerization model might not be applicable for the regulation of RPTP activity in general and that of RPTPμ in particular." @default.
• W2056550604 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W2056550604 creator A5007446364 @default.
• W2056550604 creator A5061490638 @default.
• W2056550604 creator A5063384864 @default.
• W2056550604 creator A5071741692 @default.
• W2056550604 creator A5091856094 @default.
• W2056550604 date "2000-05-01" @default.
• W2056550604 modified "2023-10-16" @default.
• W2056550604 title "Intramolecular Interactions between the Juxtamembrane Domain and Phosphatase Domains of Receptor Protein-tyrosine Phosphatase RPTPμ" @default.
• W2056550604 cites W136427227 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W1483854545 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W1674557579 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W1692715431 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W1829071486 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W1965700828 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W1994157750 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W1997304990 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W2004356154 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W2012514869 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W2016954161 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W2034685714 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W2035791896 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W2059452371 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W2064426988 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W2066641929 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W2066696278 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W2070701359 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W2082706608 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W2085634797 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W2096756834 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W2113420540 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W2117962961 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W2126658684 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W2153343124 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W2169245276 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W2506293158 @default.
• W2056550604 cites W257338353 @default.
• W2056550604 doi "https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.275.20.15350" @default.
• W2056550604 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10809770" @default.
• W2056550604 hasPublicationYear "2000" @default.
• W2056550604 type Work @default.
• W2056550604 sameAs 2056550604 @default.
• W2056550604 citedByCount "29" @default.
• W2056550604 countsByYear W20565506042013 @default.
• W2056550604 countsByYear W20565506042014 @default.
• W2056550604 countsByYear W20565506042023 @default.
• W2056550604 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2056550604 hasAuthorship W2056550604A5007446364 @default.
• W2056550604 hasAuthorship W2056550604A5061490638 @default.
• W2056550604 hasAuthorship W2056550604A5063384864 @default.
• W2056550604 hasAuthorship W2056550604A5071741692 @default.
• W2056550604 hasAuthorship W2056550604A5091856094 @default.
• W2056550604 hasBestOaLocation W20565506041 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConcept C11960822 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConcept C134306372 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConcept C170493617 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConcept C178666793 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConcept C185592680 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConcept C2776165026 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConcept C33923547 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConcept C36503486 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConcept C389152 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConcept C55493867 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConcept C71240020 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConcept C75079739 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConcept C85528070 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConcept C95444343 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConceptScore W2056550604C11960822 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConceptScore W2056550604C134306372 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConceptScore W2056550604C170493617 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConceptScore W2056550604C178666793 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConceptScore W2056550604C185592680 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConceptScore W2056550604C2776165026 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConceptScore W2056550604C33923547 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConceptScore W2056550604C36503486 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConceptScore W2056550604C389152 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConceptScore W2056550604C55493867 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConceptScore W2056550604C71240020 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConceptScore W2056550604C75079739 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConceptScore W2056550604C85528070 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConceptScore W2056550604C86803240 @default.
• W2056550604 hasConceptScore W2056550604C95444343 @default.
• W2056550604 hasIssue "20" @default.
• W2056550604 hasLocation W20565506041 @default.
• W2056550604 hasOpenAccess W2056550604 @default.
• W2056550604 hasPrimaryLocation W20565506041 @default.
• W2056550604 hasRelatedWork W1995245374 @default.
• W2056550604 hasRelatedWork W1996655478 @default.
• W2056550604 hasRelatedWork W2040045347 @default.
• W2056550604 hasRelatedWork W2041171080 @default.
• W2056550604 hasRelatedWork W2049961020 @default.
• W2056550604 hasRelatedWork W2074680571 @default.
• W2056550604 hasRelatedWork W2135093769 @default.
• W2056550604 hasRelatedWork W2207783143 @default.
• W2056550604 hasRelatedWork W2599760417 @default.
• W2056550604 hasRelatedWork W2791495106 @default.

• next