Overexpression of TGF-β1 in Human Fibroblasts Results in Complex
Formation with LTBP-1, but Not with LTBP-2 or Fibrillin-1
Endogenous LTBP-1 forms a covalent complex with
TGF-β1•LAP in fibroblasts (
Taipale et al., 1994 
). To
analyze if fibrillin-1 or LTBP-2 are also capable of covalent complex
formation with β1•LAP, we transfected postconfluent fibroblasts
with TGF-β1 cDNA. Fibroblasts were used as a model, because all LTBPs
and fibrillins are expressed in confluent fibroblast cultures (
Kanzaki
et al., 1990 
;
Moren et al., 1994 
;
Saharinen
et al., 1998 
;
Sakai et al., 1986 
;
Zhang et
al., 1994 
; Unsöld, Hyytiäinen, Bruckner-Tuderman, and
Keski-Oja, unpublished data; see Figure
A). In nontransfected cells, only
very small amounts of secreted endogenous TGF-β1•LAP, all in large
latent complex, was detected. This is consistent with previous results,
showing that most cultured cell types secrete more LTBP-1 than TGF-β1
(
Taipale et al., 1994 
). In longer exposures, also minor
amounts of complexed endogenous LTBP-1 was detected. Endogenous LTBP-2
and fibrillin-1 were always in the uncomplexed, free form.
Upon TGF-β1 overexpression, β1•LAP saturated the endogenous
TGF-β binding LTBPs, and most β1•LAP was in the small latent
complex, which is consistent with our previous results (
Saharinen
et al., 1996 
). Due to the low transfection efficiency of the
primary fibroblasts, most endogenously expressed LTBP-1 was in the free
form, however, the mobility of a fraction of LTBP-1 was retarded,
indicating complex formation with the overexpressed β1•LAP
(brackets in Figure A). Similar larger molecular weight complexes were
not detected with LTBP-2 or fibrillin-1, indicating that neither LTBP-2
nor fibrillin-1 were able to form the covalent complexes with
β1•LAP. In addition, the apparent molecular weight of the large
latent β1•LAP complex was smaller than that expected for a possible
fibrillin-1 - β1•LAP complex. The antibodies for LTBPs-1 and -2 are
polyclonal against a large protein fragment, excluding the possibility
that steric hindrance could prevent the detection of the β•LAP -
LTBP-2 complexes. However, the fibrillin-1 antibody mAb 201 recognizes
a specific epitope in the C-terminus. We therefore repeated the
experiment by using another fibrillin-1 antibody mAb 69 against an
epitope in the N-terminal region with same results, confirming that
fibrillin-1 is unable to associate covalently with β1•LAP.
Overexpressed LTBP-2 Does Not Associate with TGF-β1•LAP
We analyzed next whether overexpressed LTBP-2 could
associate covalently with overexpressed TGF-β1•LAP in a cell system
that does not express endogenous LTBPs. pLTBP-1 or pLTBP-2 as well as
pTGFβ1 constructs were transfected to 293T cells, and LTBP-1 as well
as LTBP-2 were immunoblotted from conditioned medium. When
both LTBP-1 and TGF-β1 were overexpressed, LTBP-1 was seen
predominantly in complex with β1•LAP (Figure B). On the contrary,
when both LTBP-2 and TGF-β1 were overexpressed, no change in the
migration of LTBP-2 was observed, indicating the inability of LTBP-2 to
form a covalent complex with TGF-β1•LAP.
The results were confirmed by immunoblotting for
β1•LAP. When TGF-β1 was overexpressed alone, it was exclusively
in the small latent complex. The concurrent expression of LTBP-1
resulted a portion of β1•LAP to be recruited to a complex with
LTBP-1. Due to lower expression levels of full-length LTBP-1 than
TGF-β1, the majority of the β1•LAP was in free form. On the
contrary, when expressed with LTBP-2, all β1•LAP remained in the
small latent complex. These results were verified by using another cell
line, COS-7.
In LTBP-1, the 3
rd 8-Cys repeat mediates the
covalent binding to β1•LAP, and cDNA constructs containing this
domain have earlier been found to associate very efficiently with
β1•LAP (
Saharinen et al., 1996 
;
Gleizes et
al., 1996 
). The inability of the 8-Cys repeats of LTBP-2 to
associate with β1•LAP was confirmed by multiple LTBP-2 constructs
containing 3
rd or 3
rd and
4
th 8-Cys repeats. None of the proteins encoded
by these constructs was able to form covalent complexes when
overexpressed with TGF-β1•LAP.
8-Cys Repeats Containing Fibrillin -1 or -2 Fragments Do Not
Complex with Overexpressed TGF-β1•LAP
The inability of overexpressed 8-Cys repeats of fibrillin-1 to
form a covalent complex with TGF-β1•LAP was confirmed by using two
constructs, pF1–4 and pF1–8, containing different regions of
fibrillin-1 in an overexpression system. These constructs included the
8th 8-Cys repeat of fibrillin-1, which is most
similar to the TGF-β binding 3rd 8-Cys repeat
of LTBP-1 (see Figure A). Fibrillin-1 constructs were transfected with
TGF-β1 cDNA to 293T cells and β1•LAP was
immunoblotted from the conditioned medium (Figure C).
Neither of the fibrillin-1 construct encoded proteins was able to
associate with β1•LAP, unlike the protein from the LTBP-1 control
construct pJS-4.
We also analyzed the complex forming ability of the
8th 8-Cys repeat of fibrillin-2 construct pF2–8,
which encodes the 8th 8-Cys repeat and one
EGF-like repeat on both sides. The protein expressed from pF2–8 was
accordingly unable to form covalent complexes with coexpressed
β1•LAP.
Neither Fibrillin-1 nor LTBP-2 Coimmunoprecipitates with
TGF-β1•LAP
In addition to covalent interaction between TGF-β1 and its
binding proteins, we analyzed the possibility of a noncovalent
interaction between β1•LAP and members of the LTBP-fibrillin
family. Postconfluent fibroblast conditioned medium was
immunoprecipitated by β1•LAP antibodies followed by
immunoblotting using either LTBP -1, -2 or fibrillin-1
antibodies. LTBP-1, but not fibrillin-1, coprecipitated with β1•LAP
(Figure ). No LTBP-2 was detected in the
immunoprecipitated material either (our unpublished results). These
results further verify the lack of high stringency interactions,
covalent or noncovalent, between β1•LAP and fibrillin-1 or LTBP-2.
The secretion of TGF-β1 in the conditioned medium as well as in the
immunoprecipitates was verified using a TGF-β1 immunoblot
(Figure , third panel).
All TGF-β•LAP Isoforms Associate with the 3rd
8-Cys Repeats of LTBPs -1 and -3, but Not with LTBP-2
Using constructs containing only the
3rd 8-Cys repeats of different LTBPs, β1•LAP
binding ability was confirmed to reside in the
3rd 8-Cys repeat of LTBPs -1, -3, and -4. Protein
from an analogous LTBP-2 construct was negative in β1•LAP binding
(our unpublished results). Together with results presented in Figure ,
only three of the studied 8-Cys repeats of fibrillins and LTBPs were
observed to posses the TGF-β1•LAP binding function.
LTBP - TGF-β•LAP interactions have previously been studied using
the TGF-β1 isoform. We analyzed whether the other mammalian TGF-β
isoforms, β2 and β3, have similar ability to associate covalently
with LTBPs. For this purpose, expression constructs of all LTBPs,
containing the 3
rd 8-Cys repeat, two following
EGF-like repeats and the 4
th 8-Cys repeat were
used (Figure ). Although the association between TGF-β binding LTBPs
and β1•LAP takes place via the 3
rd 8-Cys
repeat, we included also other protein domains of LTBPs in these
constructs to yield larger mobility differences between the complexed
and free β•LAPs. The LTBP constructs were transfected together with
cDNAs for TGF-βs to 293T cells. For the detection of TGF-β•LAPs
-1 and -3, antibodies against the LAP regions were used. Since a
portion of TGF-βs is not correctly cleaved by proteolysis
during secretion (
Gentry et al., 1988 
;
Dubois et
al., 1995 
), this allowed the detection of both complexed and free
β2•LAP using antibodies against the growth factor part of TGF-β2,
which was necessary because of the unavailability of β2•LAP
antibodies. All β•LAP isoforms were found to be very efficiently
complexed with the LTBP-1 and LTBP-3 derived proteins (Figure
A, B, and C). The β•LAP binding
ability of the LTBP-4 fragment was much less efficient than that of
LTBP-1 or LTBP-3 fragments. Only minor traces of covalent complexes
between the protein coded by the LTBP-4 construct and β1•LAP, but
not with the other β•LAP isoforms, were detected. Protein encoded
by LTBP-2 construct could not form covalent complexes with any of the
β•LAP isoforms.
Binding between the 8-Cys Repeat and TGF-β1•LAP Is Mediated by
a Direct Disulphide Bond between the Cys-33 of TGF-β1•LAP and the
8-Cys Repeat
The covalent interaction between the
3
rd 8-Cys repeat of LTBP-1 and TGF-β1•LAP is
dependent on the Cys-33 of β1•LAP (
Saharinen et al.,
1996 
) and can be disrupted by reducing agents. The other cysteines 223
and 225 of β1•LAP are required for the dimerization of the
β1•LAP (
Gentry et al., 1988 
). It is also known that the
cysteine residues in the 8-Cys repeat are all in oxidized form (
Gleizes
et al., 1996 
;
Reinhardt et al., 1996 
). However,
it is not known whether the cysteine residues required for 8-Cys -
β1•LAP complexes are involved in inter- or intramolecular
disulphide bridges. In the intermolecular disulphide bridge model, one
or both of the Cys-33s of the β1•LAP dimer are forming a disulphide
bridge with unknown cysteine(s) of the 8-Cys repeat. In the
intramolecular cysteine disulphide bridge model, all the cysteines of
the TGF-β binding 8-Cys repeat and β1•LAP are involved in
intramolecular disulphide bridges. However, the molecules would be
folded in such a way that they would be kept together like two closed
circles. The complex would thus resist the nonreducing sample
denaturation in SDS-PAGEs.
To analyze β1•LAP - 8-Cys repeat interaction, we prevented the
β1•LAP dimerization by mutating the cysteines 223 and 225 to serine
residues. This construct was transfected with LTBP-1 or LTBP-2
constructs pJS-4 and pJS-24, respectively, into COS-7 cells. The LTBP-2
construct was used as a control to exclude nonspecific disulphide
binding of the mutated TGF-β1 and 8-Cys repeats. The complex
formation was analyzed from the conditioned medium by
immunoblotting with β1•LAP antibodies (Figure
). The mutated β1•LAP expressed
alone or with the LTBP-2 construct was not detected in β1•LAP
immunoblots due to the inability of the antibodies to
recognize monomeric β1•LAP, possibly due to misfolding of monomeric
β1•LAP, as observed from an immunoblot using reduced
conditioned medium of cells transfected with wild-type TGF-β1 (our
unpublished results). The mutated β1•LAP protein was found to
retain the ability to form covalent LTBP-1 complexes. This interaction
recruited both copies of the monomeric β1•LAP, as indicated by both
the observed mobility of the complex and by its detection in the
immunoblot. These results suggest that the interaction
between β1•LAP and LTBP-1 is mediated by two direct cysteine
disulphide bridges between the molecules (see proposed structure in
Figure ).
Chimeric Constructs between LTBP-1 and LTBP-2 Suggests the Motif
Required for TGF-β•LAP Binding of the 8-Cys Repeats
In order to analyze the regions in 8-Cys repeats providing
the TGF-β•LAP binding ability, we made chimeric constructs between
the 3rd 8-Cys repeats of LTBP-1 and LTBP-2. In
each chimeric construct, the amino acid residues between two successive
cysteine residues of the 3rd 8-Cys repeat of
LTBP-1 were changed to those of the analogous region in LTBP-2 (Figure
A). These constructs were transfected
with TGF-β1 cDNA to 293T cells, and the secretion of covalent
β1•LAP - LTBP complexes to conditioned medium was detected by
immunoblotting. The protein coded by the chimeric
construct L1ΔL2–4, in which the region between the
6th and 7th Cys-residues
was replaced, was unable to covalently associate with β1•LAP. All
other proteins encoded by the chimeric constructs retained the ability
to associate with β1•LAP.
To verify that the observed loss of β1•LAP binding function
of construct L1ΔL2–4 is not due to misfolding of the 8-Cys repeat,
we made a chimeric construct L1ΔL4–4, analogous to L1ΔL2–4, in
which the sequence between the 6th and
7th cysteine residues was replaced with analogous
sequence from LTBP-4 (see Figure B). The ability of the protein coded
by this construct to associate covalently with β1•LAP was analyzed
as with the L1ΔL2 constructs. Unlike the construct L1ΔL2–4 encoded
protein, the protein coded by chimeric construct L1ΔL4–4 between
LTBP-1 and LTBP-4 yielded covalent complexes with β1•LAP (Figure
B) with almost the same efficiency as with the protein coded by
wild-type LTBP-1 construct, supporting the importance of the region
between the 6th and 7th
cysteine residues as the region distinguishing TGF-β binding and
nonbinding type 8-Cys repeats
Construction of a Gain of TGF-β•LAP Binding Form of LTBP-2
The function of the critical TGF-β binding region of 8-Cys
repeats was further analyzed by creating a gain-of-function type cDNA
construct, L2GAIN, in which the backbone was the non-TGF-β•LAP
binding LTBP-2 construct pJS-24. The two amino acids between the
6th and 7th Cys-residues
were replaced by the analogous four amino acid peptide from LTBP-1 (see
Figure ). This construct was then
transfected to 293T cells together with TGF-β1 cDNA, and the
conditioned medium was analyzed as above. Although the secretion level
of the chimeric L2GAIN construct encoded protein was somewhat lower
than that of protein from both LTBP-1 and LTBP-2 wild-type construct
(Figure ), the protein encoded by L2GAIN construct was capable of
complex formation with β1•LAP, providing the gain of TGF-β1•LAP
binding function.
Multiple Sequence Alignment Distinguishes between the TGF-β
Binding and Nonbinding Types of 8-Cys Repeats
In order to elucidate which 8-Cys repeats contain the TGF-β
binding motif and to study the relatedness of the 8-Cys repeats, a
multiple sequence alignment as well as a dendrogram of the 8-Cys
repeats were done. For simplicity, the hybrid domains were excluded
from the figures as well as all the other 8-Cys repeats of fibrillins,
except the 7th and 8th
8-Cys repeats, which are the most similar to the 8-Cys repeats in
LTBPs.
In a dendrogram of the 8-Cys repeats (Figure
A), the 3rd 8-Cys
repeats of LTBPs -1 and -3 are most similar to each other, with the
weaker TGF-β•LAP binding 3rd 8-Cys repeat of
LTBP-4 being their closest relative. The non-TGF-β binding type
3rd 8-Cys repeat of LTBP-2, as well as the
8th 8-Cys repeats of fibrillins are more distant.
It should also be noted that all other 8-Cys repeats of LTBPs are even
more distant to the 3rd 8-Cys repeats of LTBPs
than the 8th 8-Cys repeat of fibrillins. The
primary sequences of the 8-Cys repeats, and especially the 3rd 8-Cys
repeats of LTBPs and the 8th 8-Cys of fibrillins
are quite conserved (Figure B). However, the three TGF-β binding
type 8-Cys repeats, namely the 3rd 8-Cys repeats
of LTBPs -1, -3, and -4 differ clearly from all other 8-Cys repeats, in
the respect of the insertion of two additional amino acid residues
between the 6th and 7th
Cys-residues. This TGF-β binding motif is not present in any other
8-Cys repeats or hybrid domains of LTBPs or fibrillins, including the
ones excluded from Figure B.
Molecular Models of the 3rd 8-Cys Repeats of Human
LTBPs -1, -2, and -3 Give Insight into the Structural Features Required
for the Covalent Binding to TGF-β1•LAP
We used molecular modeling to analyze the structural
implications of the presence of the TGF-β binding motif in 8-Cys
repeats. We modeled the 3
rd 8-Cys repeats from
the human LTBPs -1 and -2, as well as the 8-Cys repeats having the
modifications as in constructs L1ΔL2 1–5 and L2GAIN using the NMR
structure of the 8
th 8-Cys repeat of fibrillin-1
as template (
Yuan et al., 1997 
).
The backbone of the previously published structure of the
8th 8-Cys repeat of fibrillin is aligned with the
models for the 3rd 8-Cys repeat of LTBPs -1 and
-2 in the stereo image (Figure A). The
largest difference in the backbone alignment was in the TGF-β binding
determinant region between the 6th and
7th cysteine residues of the model for the
3rd 8-Cys repeat of LTBP-1. Within this region,
the insertion of two amino acids caused a loss of a small β-strand
and introduced a bending in the structure (indicated by an arrow in
Figure A). This bend resulted in a loss of altogether three hydrogen
bonds that are present both in the structure for the
8th 8-Cys repeat of fibrillin and in the model
for the 3rd 8-Cys repeat of LTBP-2. These
hydrogen bonds are formed between the Asp/Glu and second Cys-residues
in the non-TGF-β binding motif [DE]-L located between cysteines 6
and 7 (see Figure B) and with the side chains of the amino acids
between cysteines 5 and 6. The disulphide bridges between cysteines 4
and 7 in both the structure for the 8th 8-Cys
repeat of fibrillin-1 and the model for the 3rd
8-Cys repeat of LTBP-1 were exposed to solvent (Figure B). In the
model for the 3rd 8-Cys repeat of LTBP-2, this
disulphide bridge was buried. In the model for the
3rd 8-Cys repeat of LTBP-1, the surface
hydrophobicity was increased considerably, as compared with the
non-TGF-β binding models. The whole side of the
3rd 8-Cys repeat of LTBP-1 was hydrophobic and
especially, the hydrophobic region caused by the exposed aromatic side
chain of the phenylalanine residue in the region between
6th and 7th cysteine
residues is easily noted (Figure B, indicated by an arrow).
We modeled also the 8-Cys repeats coded by the chimeric constructs
L1ΔL2 1–5 and L2GAIN (Figure C). The sulfhydryl groups of the
disulphide bridge between cysteine residues 4–7 were less exposed in
some of the chimeric models than in the wild-type
3rd 8-Cys repeat of LTBP-1 model. However, the
increased surface hydrophobicity caused by the introduction of an
aromatic amino acid between the 6th and
7th cysteine of the chimeric models correlated
with the TGF-β•LAP binding ability. The three hydrogen bonds
involving the residues between the 6th and
7th cysteines were present in the non-TGF-β
biding type 8-Cys repeats coded by construct L1ΔL2–4, while they
were lost in all the models of TGF-β binding chimeric 8-Cys repeats.
Taken together, the models for TGF-β binding and nonbinding type
8-Cys repeats suggest the interaction with the β•LAP takes place
via a hydrophobic interaction.