Major findings of this paper are as follows. First, LRP4 is specifically expressed in myotubes, but not myoblasts and is concentrated at the NMJ (). Second, it is both necessary and sufficient to bind to agrin and to activate MuSK signaling that leads to AChR clustering. Using three different assays (in solution, on solid phase, and in cells), we demonstrate that neuronal agrin was able to interact directly with the extracellular region of LRP4 (, , and ). The binding activity of LRP4 was specific because 1) LRP4 binding to muscle agrin was minimal; 2) the binding is concentration-dependent and of high affinity with a sub-nanomolar Kd; and 3) neuronal agrin did not bind to LRP5 or LRP6, two other members of the LRP family that are highly homologous to LRP4. Third, expression of LRP4 enabled binding activity for neuronal agrin and MuSK signaling in cells that otherwise did not respond to agrin (). Fourth, suppression of LRP4 expression attenuated agrin binding activity and agrin-induced MuSK phosphorylation and AChR clustering in muscle cells (). Fifth, LRP4 could interact with MuSK in a manner that is increased by agrin ( and ). Finally, LRP4 became tyrosine-phosphorylated in muscle cells in response to agrin stimulation (). These observations indicate that LRP4 can bind to agrin and transmit signals to MuSK, suggesting that it may serve as a functional receptor for agrin. Based on these observations, we propose a working hypothesis where LRP4 interacts with MuSK at basal levels in the absence of the ligand. Upon agrin stimulation, the interaction was increased to activate MuSK and subsequent downstream signal cascades for AChR clustering ().
Despite the essential role of MuSK in NMJ formation, mechanisms of how it is activated and how it acts to control NMJ formation remain elusive. Recent studies have shed light on intracellular pathways downstream of MuSK. They are thought to involve the adapter protein Dok-7 (
Okada et al., 2006), and several enzymes including Src-family kinase (
Ferns et al., 1996;
Mittaud et al., 2001;
Mohamed et al., 2001;
Qu and Huganir, 1994;
Wallace, 1991), Abl (
Finn et al., 2003), casein kinase 2 (
Cheusova et al., 2006), geranylgeranyl transferase I (GGT) (
Luo et al., 2003), GTPases of the Rho family (
Weston et al., 2003;
Weston et al., 2000), and Pak1, a serine/threonine kinase that is activated by Rho GTPases (
Luo et al., 2002). Although agrin is known to activate MuSK, the two proteins, however, do not interact directly. The MASC co-receptor was hypothesized that has to be myotubes specific and is able to transmit signal from agrin to MuSK (
Glass et al., 1996a). Remarkably, LRP4 is a protein specifically expressed in myotubes, not in myoblasts (), fulfilling a requirement of MASC. Second, LRP4 is able to reconstitute agrin binding and MuSK signaling in cells that otherwise do not respond to agrin (). Third, LRP4 is required for agrin binding and induced MuSK signaling and AChR clustering in muscle cells (). Fourth, genetic studies have demonstrated that phenotypes of LRP4 mutant mice are similar to those in MuSK mutant (
Weatherbee et al., 2006). LRP4 mutants die at birth with defects in both pre- and post-synaptic differentiation and in particular, the rapsyn-dependent scaffold fails to assemble in LRP4 mutants. These results provide strong evidence that LRP4 satisfies essential criteria of serving a functional co-receptor of agrin.
The identification of LRP4 as a co-receptor for agrin could provide insight into mechanisms of how agrin stimulation leads to AChR clustering. First, bridging agrin and MuSK, LRP4 could transmit signal to MuSK and thus activate intracellular cascades that have been identified, leading to AChR clustering. Second, LRP4 may regulate MuSK activity. MuSK and LRP4 co-precipitate in vitro and in muscle cells in the absence of agrin ( and ), and tyrosine phosphorylation of MuSK is increased in cells co-expressing LRP4 (). These observations may suggest that LRP4 promotes MuSK auto-activation, presumably by regulating MuSK dimerization. Exactly how LRP4 regulates MuSK function and the stoichiometry of the LRP4-MuSK interaction warrant further investigation. Third and alternatively, LRP4 itself may function as a signal transducer. The juxtamembrane cytoplasmic region of LRP4 contains a NPXY motif. This motif in LDLR, LRP1 and LRP2 has been shown to serve as a docking site for cytoplasmic adaptor proteins through a phosphotyrosine binding (PTB) domain (
Herz and Bock, 2002). Intriguingly, LRP4 becomes tyrosine phosphorylated upon agrin stimulation (). It would be interesting to investigate whether tyrosine phosphorylation of LRP4 is necessary for agrin signaling and AChR clustering and whether phosphorylated LRP4 binds to PTB domain-containing proteins. One such protein is Dok7, which is essential for NMJ formation (
Okada et al., 2006).
Wnt signaling is implicated in synapse formation (
Ciani and Salinas, 2005). Wnt-7a released from granule cells induces axon and growth cone remodeling in mossy fibers (
Hall et al., 2000). In C. elegans, Wnt signaling positions NMJs by inhibiting synaptogenesis (
Klassen and Shen, 2007). NMJ formation in Drosophila requires Wnt signaling (
Mathew et al., 2005;
Packard et al., 2002). However, it remains unclear whether Wnt signaling regulates mammalian NMJ formation. Wnt ligands act by binding to the receptor complex of Frizzled and LRP5/6 (
Cadigan and Liu, 2006;
He et al., 2004;
Malbon and Wang, 2006;
Schulte and Bryja, 2007). Subsequently, signal is believed to be transmitted to the adapter protein Dishevelled (Dvl), which interacts with Frizzled, to initiate intracellular canonical and non-canonical pathways. Intriguingly, MuSK, like Frizzled, interacts with both a LRP protein (i.e., LRP4) and Dvl (
Luo et al., 2002). In addition, MuSK contains an extracellular CRD domain that is highly homologous to that in Frizzled that interacts with Wnt (
Glass et al., 1996a;
Valenzuela et al., 1995). Moreover, a number of Wnt signaling molecules including APC and β-catenin have been implicated in MuSK cascades (
Li et al., 2008;
Wang et al., 2003;
Zhang et al., 2007). These observations raise a question whether the agrin-LRP4-MuSK signaling is regulated by a Wnt ligand that may interact with LRP4 and/or MuSK. We showed that LRP4 does not bind Wnt-1 (). This, however, does not exclude possible involvement of one of the 18 other Wnt proteins in mouse (
Clevers, 2006)(The Wnt Homepage:
www.stanford.edu/~rnusse/wntwindow). On the other hand, the “Wnt signaling” molecules (including Dvl, APC, and β-catenin) may simply function in a manner independent of Wnt signaling in mammalian NMJ formation.
It is of interest to note that the phenotypes of MuSK and LRP4 mutant mice are more severe than those of agrin mutant. In LRP4 or MuSK mutants, but not agrin mutants, AChR clusters are absent when clusters begin to assemble at E13.5 and the rapsyn-dependent scaffold fails to assemble (
Lin et al., 2001;
Weatherbee et al., 2006). These observations could suggest the existence of a signaling pathway that requires MuSK and/or LRP4, but not agrin. This pathway may regulate the formation of aneuronal AChR clusters prior to the arrival of motoneuron terminals or assembly of rapsyn-dependent scaffold. It may be regulated by a ligand that could interact with MuSK and/or LRP4. In light of the above discussion, such ligand may be a Wnt protein.
Agrin is expressed in the brain (
Cohen et al., 1997;
Mann and Kroger, 1996;
O'Connor et al., 1994). Suppression of its expression impairs dendritic development and synapse formation in cultured hippocampal neurons (
Bose et al., 2000;
Ferreira, 1999). Agrin-deficient neurons appear to be resistant to excitotoxic injury and agrin heterozygous mice are less sensitive to kainic acid-induced seizure and mortality (
Hilgenberg et al., 2002). Agrin is thought to bind to the a3 subunit of Na+/K+-ATPase in neurons and thus regulates their function (
Hilgenberg et al., 2006). LRP4 expression is enriched in the brain and could interact with postsynaptic scaffold proteins including PSD-95 and SAP97 (
Lu et al., 2007;
Tian et al., 2006;
Weatherbee et al., 2006). The identification of LRP4 as a co-receptor of neuronal agrin may shed light on molecular mechanisms of how agrin and LRP4 work in the brain.