Membrane-anchored Plakoglobins Have Multiple Mechanisms of Action in Wnt Signaling

In Wnt signaling, β-catenin and plakoglobin transduce signals to the nucleus through interactions with TCF-type transcription factors. However, when plakoglobin is artificially engineered to restrict it to the cytoplasm by fusion with the transmembrane domain of connexin (cnxPg), it efficiently induces a Wnt-like axis duplication phenotype in Xenopus. In Xenopus embryos, maternal XTCF3 normally represses ventral expression of the dorsalizing gene Siamois. Two models have been proposed to explain the Wnt-like activity of cnxPg: 1) that cnxPg inhibits the machinery involved in the turnover of cytosolic β-catenin, which then accumulates and inhibits maternal XTCF3, and 2) that cnxPg directly acts to inhibit XTCF3 activity. To distinguish between these models, we created a series of N-terminal deletion mutations of cnxPg and examined their ability to induce an ectopic axis in Xenopus, activate a TCF-responsive reporter (OT), stabilize β-catenin, and colocalize with components of the Wnt signaling pathway. cnxPg does not colocalize with the Wnt pathway component Dishevelled, but it does lead to the redistribution of APC and Axin, two proteins involved in the regulation of β-catenin turnover. Expression of cnxPg increases levels of cytosolic β-catenin; however, this effect does not completely explain its signaling activity. Although cnxPg and Wnt-1 stabilize β-catenin to similar extents, cnxPg activates OT to 10- to 20-fold higher levels than Wnt-1. Moreover, although LEF1 and TCF4 synergize with β-catenin and plakoglobin to activate OT, both suppress the signaling activity of cnxPg. In contrast, XTCF3 suppresses the signaling activity of both β-catenin and cnxPg. Both exogenous XLEF1 and XTCF3 are sequestered in the cytoplasm of Xenopus cells by cnxPg. Based on these data, we conclude that, in addition to its effects on β-catenin, cnxPg interacts with other components of the Wnt pathway, perhaps TCFs, and that these interactions contribute to its signaling activity.

Two modes of transvection: Enhancer action in trans and bypass of a chromatin insulator in cis

Ed Lewis introduced the term “transvection” in 1954 to describe mechanisms that can cause the expression of a gene to be sensitive to the proximity of its homologue. Transvection since has been reported at an increasing number of loci in Drosophila, where homologous chromosomes are paired in somatic tissues, as well as at loci in other organisms. At the Drosophila yellow gene, transvection can explain intragenic complementation involving the yellow2 allele (y2). Here, transvection was proposed to occur by enhancers of one allele acting in trans on the promoter of a paired homologue. In this report, we describe two yellow alleles that strengthen this model and reveal an unexpected, second mechanism for transvection. Data suggest that, in addition to enhancer action in trans, transvection can occur by enhancer bypass of a chromatin insulator in cis. We propose that bypass results from the topology of paired genes. Finally, transvection at yellow can occur in genotypes not involving y2, implying that it is a feature of yellow itself and not an attribute of one particular allele.

On the mechanism of action of ribonuclease A: relevance of enzymatic studies with a p-nitrophenylphosphate ester and a thiophosphate ester.

It has been reported that His-119 of ribonuclease A plays a major role as an imidazolium ion acid catalyst in the cyclization/cleavage of normal dinucleotides but that it is not needed for the cyclization/cleavage of 3'-uridyl p-nitrophenyl phosphate. We see that this is also true for simple buffer catalysis, where imidazole (as in His-12 of the enzyme), but not imidazolium ion, plays a significant catalytic role with the nitrophenyl substrate, but both are catalytic for normal dinucleotides such as uridyluridine. Rate studies show that the enzyme catalyzes the cyclization of the nitrophenylphosphate derivative 47,000,000 times less effectively (kcat/kuncat) than it does uridyladenosine, indicating that approximately 50% of the catalytic free energy change is lost with this substrate. This suggests that the nitrophenyl substrate is not correctly bound to take full advantage of the catalytic groups of the enzyme and is thus not a good guide to the mechanism used by normal nucleotides. The published data on kinetic effects with ribonuclease A of substituting thiophosphate groups for the phosphate groups of normal substrates has been discussed elsewhere, and it was argued that these effects are suggestive of the classical mechanism for ribonuclease action, not the novel mechanism we have recently proposed. The details of these rate effects, including stereochemical preferences in the thiophosphate series, can be invoked as support for our newer mechanism.