help button home button Endocrine Society Endocrinology
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Purchase Article
Right arrow View Shopping Cart
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Request Copyright Permission
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tortoriello, D. V.
Right arrow Articles by Schneyer, A. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Tortoriello, D. V.
Right arrow Articles by Schneyer, A. L.
Right arrowPubmed/NCBI databases
*Gene*GEO Profiles
*HomoloGene*Nucleotide
*OMIM*Protein
*UniGene
*Compound via MeSH
*Substance via MeSH
Endocrinology Vol. 142, No. 8 3426-3434
Copyright © 2001 by The Endocrine Society


ARTICLES

Human Follistatin-Related Protein: A Structural Homologue of Follistatin with Nuclear Localization

Drew V. Tortoriello, Yisrael Sidis, Douglas A. Holtzman, William E. Holmes and Alan L. Schneyer

Reproductive Endocrine Unit and National Center for Infertility Research, Massachusetts General Hospital (D.V.T., Y.S., A.S.), Boston, Massachusetts 02144; Microbia, Inc. (D.A.H.), Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139; and Millennium Pharmaceuticals (W.E.H.), Cambridge, Massachusetts 02144

Address all correspondence and requests for reprints to: Dr. Drew V. Tortoriello, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, Division of Molecular Genetics, Ross Berrie Medical Sciences Pavilion, 1150 St. Nicholas Avenue, New York, New York 10032. E-mail: dvtortoriello{at}pol.net


    Abstract
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Follistatin-related protein is a recently discovered glycoprotein that is highly homologous in both primary sequence and exon/intron domain structure to the activin-binding protein, follistatin. We explored their potential for functional redundancy by investigating the relative affinities and kinetics of their interactions with activin, bone morphogenic protein-6, and bone morphogenic protein-7 and by exploring their expression and distribution in human tissues and cells. Follistatin and follistatin-related protein mRNA were ubiquitous by Northern analyses, although their sites of peak distribution differed, with follistatin-related protein and follistatin predominating in the placenta and ovary, respectively. Follistatin-related protein, like follistatin, preferentially bound activin with high affinity and in an essentially irreversible fashion. Although follistatin-related protein, like follistatin, possesses a signal sequence and no known nuclear localization signals, its secretion was undetectable in most cell lines by RIA. Intriguingly, follistatin-related protein was identified as a nuclear protein in human granulosa cells and all human cell lines tested. Furthermore, Western analyses of CHO cells transfected with human follistatin-related protein revealed this protein to reside within the insoluble nuclear protein fraction. We conclude that despite its remarkably high level of similarity to follistatin with regard to structure and activin binding kinetics, follistatin-related protein is a nuclear as well as a secretory protein that may perform distinct intracellular actions.


    Introduction
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
FOLLISTATIN (FS) IS a secreted monomeric glycoprotein first isolated from ovarian follicular fluid on the basis of its ability to suppress FSH secretion by pituitary cells in vitro (1, 2). The mechanism underlying this effect involves the prevention of activin signaling. Indeed, the critical effects activin exerts on the ontogeny and physiology of several organ systems (3, 4) are at least partially regulated in a paracrine/autocrine manner by the coordinate expression of FS (5). FS selectively, nearly irreversibly, and with high affinity binds dimeric activin (6, 7), rendering it biologically inactive (8) and prone to endocytotic degradation (9). In addition, FS can bind proteoglycans (10) through a heparin binding motif, thereby forming a cell surface barrier that prevents activin from accessing its receptor (11).

A domain structure for FS has been proposed based upon the discovery that its exons encode distinct amino acid sequences that demonstrate a high degree of evolutionary conservation (2). The most salient feature of this structure is a series of 3 consecutive FS domains. Although encoded by separate exons, each FS domain is distinguished by an identical alignment of 10 cysteine residues. The 315-amino acid splice variant of FS contains an acidic C-terminal domain that may impede adherence to cell surfaces by neutralizing the basic heparin binding motif present in the first FS domain (10). FS also has a hydrophobic signal domain that facilitates entry of the nascent protein into the endoplasmic reticulum and is proteolytically cleaved before secretion of the mature peptide. The functional importance of FS, however, probably resides in its N-terminal domain, which has recently been implicated as the site responsible for the majority of FS’s ability to bind activin, with 2 tryptophan residues at positions 4 and 36 being especially important in this capacity (12, 13).

A novel gene was recently cloned from a B cell leukemia line and was named FLRG (FS-related gene) based upon primary sequence homology to FS (14). Its five exons encode a signal domain, an N-terminal domain, two cysteine-rich FS domains, and a C-terminal domain, yielding an overall modular architecture remarkably similar to that of FS (Fig. 1Go).



View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 1. Comparison of exon structure and amino acid sequence for human FSRP and human FS. The six exons of FS code for a signal peptide, N-terminal domain, three FS domains, and a C-terminal domain. FSRP has an identical structure, except for the absence of one FS domain that contains the heparin-binding site. The cleavage site of FSRP’s signal peptide is presumed, based upon homology to FS. Thus, the overall structural and sequence homology suggest that these proteins may serve similar functions.

 
FLRG has been detected in the conditioned media of HeLa, JAR, and LOVO cells by Western blotting (14). In addition, a mouse FLRG-glutathione-S-transferase fusion protein has been shown to bind activin in pull-down assays and to diminish activin-mediated gene transcription, albeit at relatively high concentrations, in vitro (15). Together these findings suggest that FLRG, like its structural homologue FS (16, 17), may serve as a secreted regulator of activin-mediated cellular processes functioning primarily in an autocrine/paracrine mode. FS has been demonstrated to play a key role in Xenopus embryonic neuralization (18), and functional redundancy with FLRG could theoretically explain the seemingly contradictory lack of neurological deficits in the FS knockout mouse (19).

As several extracellular matrix proteins, such as agrin, SPARC (secreted protein acidic and rich in cysteines), and testican (20, 21, 22), that are not known to bind TGFß superfamily ligands, have previously been termed products of follistatin-related genes based solely upon their possession of one or more FS domains, we refer to FLRG as FS-related protein (FSRP), to emphasize its uniquely high level of homology with regard to sequence, structure, and perhaps function.

We explored the hypothesis that FSRP serves a functionally redundant role with FS by first directly comparing their affinities and binding kinetics with activin and the closely related TGFß superfamily members BMP-6 and BMP-7. As the extent and site of a protein’s production as well as its subcellular destination can also be predictive of function, we investigated FSRP mRNA and protein biosynthesis in human tissues and cell lines. Our results indicate that FSRP, although clearly an activin-binding structural homolog of FS, has maximal expression in different tissues from FS, is located in the nucleus of all cells examined, and is only infrequently secreted. These findings suggest that FSRP may serve biological roles distinct from those of FS.


    Materials and Methods
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Materials
The FSRP cDNA was tagged at the C-terminus with either FLAG or hFc and was then expressed in 293 cells. Tagged FSRP was purified by immunoaffinity chromatography using anti-FLAG M2 affinity gel or protein A resin, respectively. Eluted fractions were neutralized, pooled, and dialyzed against PBS, pH 7.4. By Coomassie-stained SDS-PAGE gels, the purities of the proteins were estimated to be greater than 90%. The FSRP antibody was raised in rabbits to purified FSRP-Fc protein. High titer bleeds were pooled and purified by protein A affinity chromatography. Luteinized granulosa cells (LGC) were obtained from in vitro fertilization patients at the time of oocyte aspiration under approval of the Massachusetts General Hospital institutional review board. Pure recombinant human activin A, BMP-6, and BMP-7 were obtained from R&D Systems (Minneapolis, MN).

Ligand binding studies
Binding studies were conducted in 96-well microtiter plates that were coated with 25 ng FSRP-Fc or FS288 in 100 µl 0.1 M carbonate buffer (pH 9.6) and incubated overnight at 25 C on an orbital shaker as previously described (4). Unbound protein was removed by washing three times for 5 min each time with 200 µl wash buffer (0.01% Tween in 10 mM PBS solution). Blocking solution (200 µl; 3% BSA and 0.01% Tween in 10 mM PBS) was then added to each well, and the trays were incubated at 25 C for 2 h on an orbital shaker. The wells were rinsed three times with wash buffer, and 150 µl assay buffer (0.01 M PBS, 0.1% gelatin, and 0.05% Tween) containing approximately 100,000 cpm radiolabeled ligand were added to each well. Ligands were iodinated to a specific activity of approximately 35 µCi/µg using lactoperoxidase as previously described (23). Nonspecific binding was determined by the addition of 100- to 500-fold excess unlabeled ligand to some wells. This radioactivity was subtracted from the radioligand only wells to give specific ligand binding. To determine the association rate, the binding reactions were removed at the indicated times, the wells were washed, and bound radioligand was determined in a {gamma}-counter. As steady state was reached by 2 h, the dissociation rate was determined by removing unbound radioligand at 3 h, washing the wells, and then adding a 300-fold excess of unlabeled ligand in 150 µl assay buffer. At the indicated times, the binding reaction was removed, and the wells were washed and then counted for bound radioactivity. The equilibrium association rate constant (Ka) was determined from these kinetic experiments using linearized binding data and least squares regression to determine association and dissociation rates as previously described (23), using the formula Ka = k1/k-1, where k1 is the association rate, and k-1 is the dissociation rate.

To estimate their relative direct binding of FS and FSRP, equal amounts (counts per min) of radiolabeled activin, BMP-7, or BMP-6 were added to FS- or FSRP-coated wells. Nonspecific binding was determined in the presence of a 100- to 500-fold excess of unlabeled ligand and was subtracted from the total to give specific binding, expressed as a percentage of the total counts added.

Northern analysis
For Northern analysis of FSRP expression in cell lines, approximately 20 µg total RNA/cell line were denatured at 70 C in a glyoxal/dimethylsulfoxide buffer (NorthernMax-Gly kit, Ambion, Inc., Austin, TX) and electrophoretically separated in a 1% agarose gel at a constant 120 V. RNA was transferred to a positively charged nylon membrane (BrightStar-Plus, Ambion, Inc., Austin, TX) using downward transfer for 2 h and microwave cross-linked. The membrane was hybridized overnight to a 472-bp radiolabeled double-stranded DNA human FSRP probe at approximately 5 x 106 cpm/ml in a roller bottle at 42 C. After washing twice at 42 C, the membrane was exposed to film for 12 h at -80 C, then stripped by boiling in diethylpyrocarbonate-water containing 0.1% SDS for 5 min and subsequently rehybridized to double stranded DNA probes specific for human FS (512 bp) or human ß-actin (213 bp).

The Northern probes were generated as follows. DNA template (100 ng) and 5 µg random hexamers were boiled for 3 min, iced, and then added to a reaction mix containing 2.5 µl 0.5 mM deoxy (d)-NTPs (without dCTP), 2.5 µl 10 x Klenow fragment buffer, 5 µl 3000 Ci/mmol [{alpha}-32P]dCTP, and 1 µl Klenow fragment (5 U). After incubating for 3 h at 25 C, the reaction was stopped by the addition of 1 µl 0.5 M EDTA, 3 µl 10 mg/ml tRNA, and 100 µl TRIS-EDTA buffer. The unbound radioactivity was removed by centrifuging the reaction mix through a Sephadex G-50 column. The DNA probes were then denatured by incubating with 1.5 ml 10 mM EDTA at 90 C for 10 min and mixed with 500 µl hybridization solution before adding them to the membrane for overnight hybridization.

The oligomer used as template for the FSRP probe was generated by PCR of the cloned human FSRP-coding sequence. The forward FSRP primer spanned the first intron, and its sequence was CGCCCGGTGGTGTTTG. The reverse primer was located within exon 4, and its sequence was GCGCTGCCCGTCTGGTCC. FSRP cDNA was then amplified with 35 cycles at 94, 58, and 72 C and was purified using a PCR purification kit (Promega Corp., Madison, WI). The oligomers used for the FS and ß-actin probes were generated by performing PCR on human granulosa cell cDNA using previously described primer sets (24).

To compare the expression of FSRP and FS in human tissues, the DNA FSRP and FS probes were hybridized sequentially to a Human Multiple Tissue Expression Array (CLONTECH Laboratories, Inc., Palo Alto, CA), which contains poly(A)+ RNA from various human tissues spotted at equal densities, as calibrated by five different housekeeping genes. Autoradiograms were scanned using Adobe PhotoShop software (Abacus Concepts, Inc., Berkeley, CA), and the band densities were quantified using NIH Image software.

FSRP RIA
Iodinated pure recombinant human FSRP-FLAG was used as a radioligand with our polyclonal FSRP antibody. In 300 µl, 25 ng antibody in 1:400 normal rabbit serum, 50,000 cpm radioligand, and FSRP-FLAG standard or unknown sample were added and incubated overnight at 22 C. Goat antirabbit antiserum (1:16 in PBS) and 2.5% (final concentration) polyethylene glycol were added for 2 h, after which the tubes were centrifuged, aspirated, and counted in a {gamma}-counter. The minimum detectable dose was approximately 5 ng/ml, and the intraassay coefficient of variation was 6.5%. All samples from a single experiment were analyzed in a single assay.

Immunocytochemistry
Cells grown on coverslips in six-well trays were treated sequentially with 4% paraformaldehyde, 0.1% Triton-X, and 0.2% gelatin solution, and then incubated in PBS with polyclonal anti-FSRP antibody (2.5 µg/ml) for 1 h at 22 C. Additional coverslips containing LGC were also incubated with a specific monoclonal anti-FS antibody (7FS30, 3 µg/ml) to compare the intracellular distributions of FS and FSRP in the same primary cell type. The coverslips were then placed into PBS containing 1:5000 FITC-conjugated donkey antirabbit or donkey antimouse IgG antibody (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Inc., Santa Cruz, CA) for 1 h at 22 C.

In a separate experiment CHO cells permanently transfected with FSRP-FLAG cDNA using Effectene (QIAGEN, Valencia, CA) were analyzed by immunocytochemistry with the anti-FSRP antibody or 10 µg/ml monoclonal anti-FLAG M2 primary antibody (Sigma, St. Louis, MO) and 1:5000 rhodamine-conjugated donkey antimouse IgG (Santa Cruz Biotechnology, Inc.). Coverslips were mounted over a droplet of Vectashield (Vector Laboratories, Inc., Burlingame, CA), and inspected and photographed using a Nikon epifluorescent microscope (Melville, NY).

Western blot of fractionated cell extracts
Fractions selectively enriched for cytoplasmic proteins, soluble nuclear proteins, or insoluble nuclear proteins were extracted from CHO FSRP-FLAG cells according to previously published methods (25). Five micrograms of each fraction from the CHO FSRP-FLAG cells and 20 µg wild-type CHO whole cell extract underwent reducing (lithium dodecyl sulfate) PAGE in a 12% bis-Tris gel (NuPAGE System, Novex, San Diego, CA) and were then transferred to a polyvinylidene difluoride membrane. The primary antibody was either the polyclonal anti-FSRP antibody (2 µg/ml) or the monoclonal anti-FLAG M2 antibody (7.5 µg/ml). The secondary antibody was either donkey antimouse or donkey antirabbit conjugated to horseradish peroxidase (each 1:20,000).


    Results
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
FSRP and FS domain structure
The previously described members of the FS domain-containing protein family are extracellular matrix proteins that are not known to bind TGFß superfamily ligands. Unlike these proteins, FSRP’s overall structure is remarkably similar to that of FS, including a signal peptide, an N-terminal domain with conserved cysteine and tryptophan residues, two FS domains, and an acidic C-terminal domain (Fig. 1Go). Alignment of the N-terminal domains of FSRP and FS reveals 32% sequence identity between FS and FSRP, including the six conserved cysteines. The tryptophans (W) at positions 4 and 36, which have been shown to be responsible for 95–99% of the activin-binding activity of FS (13), are also conserved in FSRP. Their high degree of structural similarity coupled with their shared abilities to bind activin suggest that FSRP and FS comprise their own separate follistatin subfamily.

Activin binding specificity and kinetics
As shown in Fig. 2AGo, specific [125I]activin binding to both FSRP and FS reached 90% of the maximum after 20 min and achieved a steady state by 2 h. The addition of a 100-fold excess of unlabeled activin after 3 h revealed similarly slow dissociation rates of approximately 5% after 2 h and 10–20% by 3 h. As it is possible that some FSRP-activin complexes lifted off the plate during the 3-h incubation, the actual dissociation rate may be even less than depicted. As Scatchard analysis is not applicable to incompletely reversible binding reactions, equilibrium constants of dissociation were estimated by dividing the on rate by the off rate using linearized data from Fig. 2AGo. The Kd for FS was 4.63 x 10-10, whereas for FSRP, a constant of 1.13 x 10-9 was observed. Thus, the affinity of FS for activin under these assay conditions was approximately 2.4-fold greater than that of FSRP.



View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 2. Activin binding kinetics of FS and FSRP. A, Association/dissociation kinetics for FS and FSRP. Radiolabeled activin bound to both FS and FSRP with a relatively fast association rate. After steady state was reached (3 h), excess unlabeled activin was added for an additional 3 h, but almost no dissociation was observed for either protein. The Kd for FS was 4.63 x 10-10, whereas for FSRP, a constant of 1.13 x 10-9 was observed, indicating that the affinity of FS for activin is about 2.4-fold greater than that for FSRP. B, Direct binding assay. Identical amounts of radiolabeled activin, BMP-6, and BMP-7 were added to wells coated with either FS288 or FSRP. A 100- to 500-fold excess of cold ligand was added to some wells to determine nonspecific binding. Both FS and FSRP bound 20-fold more activin than BMP-7 and 40-fold more activin than BMP-6, indicating that both FS and FSRP bind activin preferentially over even very closely related TGFß superfamily proteins.

 
Figure 2BGo depicts the relative direct binding of equal amounts (counts per min) of radiolabeled ligand to solid phase FS or FSRP. Activin binding to both FS and FSRP was more than 20-fold greater than BMP-7 and 40-fold greater than BMP-6. This suggests that both FS and FSRP specifically bind activin, as their relative affinities for even the structurally similar BMPs were quite low.

mRNA expression
FSRP and FS mRNA expression was quantified in a wide variety of human adult and fetal tissues using a commercial array containing normalized amounts of poly(A)+ RNA. As shown in Fig. 3Go, both genes were expressed in nearly all tissues, but the sites of maximal expression were largely distinct. Testicular expression of both genes was quite high, so densitometric analyses were normalized to this tissue. Other than in the testis, however, FSRP expression was maximal in placenta, heart, and pancreas, whereas FS expression was maximal in ovary, pituitary, kidney, and fetal heart and liver. This largely nonoverlapping pattern of maximal expression suggests that in at least some tissues these two proteins do not serve redundant functions.



View larger version (43K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 3. Expression of FSRP and FS in human tissues. mRNA expression was analyzed using a multiple tissue array with normalized poly(A)+ RNA spots for a wide variety of human adult and fetal tissues. Results are arranged from high to low FSRP expression, with placenta, testes, heart, and pancreas being maximal and lymphoma being minimal. In contrast, FS expression was maximal in ovary, pituitary, kidney, and testes, demonstrating partial overlap of expression, but largely unique sites of maximal expression for these two genes.

 
A separate Northern analysis revealed that mRNA levels varied over a wide range in the numerous cell lines tested, which included those of the breast (MCF-7, BT-20), endometrium (Ishikawa), kidney (HEK-293), and cervix (HeLa, End-1; Fig. 4Go). Both FSRP and FS mRNA were also detected in primary human LGCs.



View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 4. Northern analysis of FSRP and FS expression in cells. FSRP was highly expressed in a number of cell lines, many of which expressed relatively low levels of FS, and was detectable in all cell lines examined to date. Human LGCs also express FSRP.

 
RIA
We next examined FSRP secretion from these cells by RIA analysis of conditioned medium. Figure 5Go depicts the RIA dilution curve for medium conditioned by HeLa cells, which is parallel to the standard curve, suggesting antibody specificity. Neither FS288 nor FS315 (100 ng) cross-reacted in this assay. In addition, preincubation of FSRP with excess human activin did not affect FSRP measurements, demonstrating that the RIA is capable of detecting both free and bound FSRP (data not shown).



View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 5. Development of FSRP RIA. Pure human recombinant FSRP-FLAG and a polyclonal anti-FSRP antibody were used to develop an FSRP RIA. The dilution curve for HeLa medium is depicted and is parallel to the standard curve, indicating that HeLa-conditioned medium contains authentic FSRP protein. FS288 and FS315 were undetectable in this assay, which has a sensitivity limit of 5 ng/ml.

 
Of all the cell lines we tested, FSRP could be detected by RIA in medium conditioned for 3 d by confluent HeLa, JEG, and CHO cells transfected with FSRP-FLAG cDNA, with a maximal level of approximately 70 ng/ml. On the other hand, human FSRP was undetectable in medium conditioned by the human cell lines MCF-7, BT-20, HEK-293, Ishikawa, and HepG2. Our antihuman FSRP antibody did not detect FSRP in medium conditioned by the nonhuman cell lines CHO and TT. Human follicular fluid aspirated from in vitro fertilization patients was also negative for FSRP, as was medium conditioned by their LGCs in primary monolayer culture.

Immunocytochemistry
As FSRP mRNA was detected in all cells examined to date, but secreted protein was detected only in the minority, we next assessed FSRP protein production using immunocytochemistry with the same FSRP-specific antibody as that used in the RIA. FSRP immunoreactivity was detected in all cells examined. However, rather than showing a cytoplasmic or endoplasmic reticular/Golgi pattern commonly observed for secreted proteins such as FS, in all cases FSRP immunoreactivity was predominantly confined to the nucleus (Fig. 6Go, A–C). Preincubation of the anti-FSRP antibody with a 10-fold excess of recombinant FSRP-FLAG completely abrogated antibody staining (Fig. 6DGo), indicating that this antibody is specific for an epitope on FSRP. In primary LGCs, which produce both FS and FSRP mRNA, FS immunoreactivity was detected exclusively in the cytoplasm (Fig. 7AGo). In contrast, FSRP immunoreactivity was again localized to the nucleus (Fig. 7BGo).



View larger version (113K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 6. Intracellular distribution of FSRP in cell lines. FSRP immunoreactivity is nuclear in Ishikawa (A), HeLa (B), and 293 cells (C) and preincubation of the FSRP antibody with a 10-fold excess of recombinant human FSRP-FLAG completely abrogates immunoreactivity in 293 cells (D).

 


View larger version (74K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 7. FS and FSRP in LGC. FS immunoreactivity (A) is localized primarily to the cytoplasm, whereas FSRP (B) is localized almost entirely to the nucleus.

 
Western blotting
To determine whether the nuclear localization was due to an intrinsic property of the human FSRP-coding sequence as well as to further confirm the specificity of our human FSRP antibody, CHO cells were stably transfected with a human FSRP-FLAG cDNA construct under control of a cytomegalovirus promoter. Both the anti-FSRP antibody as well as the anti-FLAG monoclonal antibody (Fig. 8AGo) detected FSRP-FLAG within the nucleus, whereas in untransfected cells, no immunoreactivity was detected with either antibody (Fig. 8BGo).



View larger version (52K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Figure 8. The FSRP-coding sequence targets FSRP to the nucleus. A, Human FSRP-FLAG-transfected CHO cells stained with anti-FLAG show that exogenously introduced human FSRP cDNA encodes a protein that targets the nucleus. Identical immunoreactivity was seen with the anti-FSRP antibody (not shown). Untransfected CHO cells (B) contain no FLAG-immunoreactive proteins. These cells were also negative for antihuman FSRP immunoreactivity (not shown). C, Both polyclonal FSRP and monoclonal FLAG antibodies detect a protein at approximately 34 kDa, consistent with FLAG-tagged glycosylated human FSRP, in the insoluble nuclear protein fraction (lane 2) of CHO FSRP-FLAG cells. Equal amounts of soluble protein (5 µg/lane) from the cytoplasm and nucleus (lanes 1 and 3) of these cells are negative. Untransfected CHO whole cell extract (20 µg) shows no immunoreactivity to either antibody (lane 4).

 
To more precisely localize FSRP within the cell, compartmentalized proteins were differentially extracted from CHO FSRP-FLAG cells and Western blotted with both anti-FSRP and anti-FLAG antibodies. A prominent immunoreactive band of approximately 34 kDa was detected by both anti-FSRP and anti-FLAG antibodies in the lanes containing the insoluble nuclear protein fraction (Fig. 8CGo, lane 2). Untagged FSRP has previously been identified as a 32-kDa protein by Western analysis (1), which shifts to its expected Mr of 27.6 kDa after deglycosylation. Therefore, our 34-kDa immunoreactive band is appropriate for glycosylated FSRP possessing a 10-amino acid FLAG tag. Cytoplasmic and soluble nuclear protein from CHO FSRP-FLAG cells (Fig. 8CGo, lanes 1 and 3) and a 4-fold excess of whole cell protein extract from untransfected CHO cells (lane 4) showed little or no such immunoreactivity.


    Discussion
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
FSRP’s similarity to FS is more extensive than that of all other known FS domain-containing proteins. Thus, in addition to its two FS domains, FSRP also contains a signal sequence, an N-terminal domain, and a C-terminal domain, which, like FS, are each encoded by separate exons. Consistent with this structural similarity to FS, FSRP has also been shown to bind activin and, at least in very high concentrations, to diminish activin-mediated gene transcription (15).

As the relative affinities of FS and FSRP for activin as well FSRP’s activin binding kinetics were unknown, we investigated these parameters in our evaluation of their potential for functional redundancy. We found that activin binding to both FS and FSRP was rapid and nearly irreversible, but the affinity for activin was approximately 2.4-fold greater for FS than for FSRP, suggesting that FSRP might be slightly less potent than FS in binding and neutralizing activin. In addition, the preferential ligand for both FS and FSRP appears to be activin, which, in a direct binding assay, was able to bind both FS and FSRP with at least 20-fold greater magnitude than its closely related TGFß family counterparts, BMP-6 and BMP-7 (26).

Although both FSRP and FS mRNA are located in a wide and largely overlapping range of human adult and fetal tissues, their sites of peak expression are different, with FSRP expression being exceptionally high in the placenta, testis, and cardiovascular tissue, whereas FS was highest in the ovary and pituitary. Their relative gene expression was also different among fetal tissues and several human cell lines. These observations suggest that FSRP and FS are differentially regulated spatially and temporally.

Based upon identification of an N-terminal signal sequence and no known nuclear localization signals, FSRP was predicted to be a secretory glycoprotein, analogous to FS, by both PSORT II (27) and TargetP V1.0 (28). Indeed, FSRP has been detected by Western blotting in the conditioned medium of transfected COS-7 cells as well as certain tumoral cell lines (14). However, when we scrutinized several other cell lines that produced FSRP mRNA by Northern analysis, secreted FSRP was only detectable from confluent HeLa, JEG, and CHO cells permanently transfected with human FSRP-FLAG cDNA. In addition, follicular fluid aspirated from in vitro fertilization patients was negative for FSRP, a finding in stark contrast to FS, which is present at concentrations greater than 200 ng/ml in this fluid (29).

Several possible explanations exist for our failure to detect secreted FSRP in cells known to produce its mRNA. It is possible that certain cell lines secrete very low amounts of FSRP that are below our RIA’s 5 ng/ml limit of detection. In addition, FSRP may be proteolytically processed after secretion and thereby escape detection by our polyclonal FSRP antibody. Alternatively, human FSRP may only be secreted under conditions of exceptionally high expression. This explanation seems plausible given that FSRP was detected in medium conditioned by JEG and HeLa cells, which we noted to produce among the highest levels of FSRP mRNA by Northern analysis.

To determine whether FSRP protein was being synthesized in cells that were negative for secretion by our RIA, we performed immunocytochemistry. Our analyses clearly indicate that at least a portion of the synthesized FSRP is located within the nucleus or associated with the nuclear membrane. This is supported by our finding that FSRP-FLAG, as detected with both an anti-FSRP and an anti-FLAG antibody, is also localized to the nucleus. Western analyses of protein extracts from CHO FSRP-FLAG cells corroborate the immunocytochemical studies and further demonstrate that FSRP-FLAG is concentrated in the insoluble nuclear protein fraction, a fraction enriched for nuclear membrane-associated proteins. Importantly, the nuclear localization of FSRP-FLAG in transfected CHO cells demonstrates that the nuclear transport of human FSRP is a characteristic intrinsic to its amino acid sequence, which although very similar to FS in terms of overall domain structure, shares only approximately 40% identity with FS.

Unfortunately, our anti-FSRP antibody was unable to detect FSRP, nuclear or otherwise, on slides of fixed human tissues despite its ability to specifically recognize FSRP in immunocytochemistry, RIA, and Western blotting. We believe this is due to antigen masking, a not uncommon consequence of the fixing and processing of tissue for immunohistochemistry. It is worth emphasizing, however, that the nuclear localization of FSRP was seen prominently in monolayers of human granulosa cells, which are primary human cells in culture and not an immortalized cell line. The nuclear pattern of FSRP was also demonstrable in cultured nonluteinized granulosa cells (data not shown). As these cells were aspirated from early follicular phase antral follicles, they were never exposed to supraphysiological concentrations of gonadotropins in vivo and are therefore even further representative of normal human tissue.

Although it is possible that the nuclear localization of FSRP in cell lines is secondarily induced by in vitro culture conditions, we believe this to be improbable, as this was a universal finding in the cell lines screened, including both secretors and nonsecretors of FSRP. Moreover, we were able to detect nuclear FSRP in human granulosa cells that were in culture for only 48 h. Nonetheless, the finding that a protein so structurally similar to the secretory glycoprotein FS is targeted to the nucleus under any conditions is an intriguing discovery, suggesting a novel intracellular function and transport mechanism.

At this point, the precise pattern and regulation of FSRP’s intracellular trafficking pattern are unknown. Although other proteins have been observed to translocate from the endoplasmic reticulum to the cytoplasm, this process usually involves removal of incorrectly folded proteins (30), or results from alternate splicing and processing of the signal peptide (31). However, one possible explanation for our observations is that transport of FSRP out of the endoplasmic reticulum and into the nucleus requires binding of a chaperone whose concentration is limited. Thus, when FSRP is overexpressed, the chaperone becomes saturated, and excess FSRP gets secreted. Alternatively, as a functional nuclear localization signal has recently been identified in the activin ßA-subunit precursor (32), it is possible that FSRP may bind activin A en route to the nucleus. In fact, both ßA-subunit and an immunoreactive follistatin-like protein have been separately observed in the nuclei of rat spermatogenic cells using immunocytochemical approaches (32, 33).

In conclusion, despite their high degree of structural homology and mutual affinity for activin, additional evidence suggests that FSRP may not be functionally redundant to FS. Despite significant overlap, their sites of maximal mRNA expression are distinct in human tissues, and although FSRP clearly has a signal sequence and the capacity to be secreted, the majority of cell lines we tested secreted no detectable FSRP. FSRP was universally detectable, however, as a nuclear protein by immunocytochemistry and Western blotting. These intriguing findings suggest that FSRP may have unique intracellular functions distinct from those of FS.


    Footnotes
 
This work was supported in part by Grants DK-55838, HD-29164, and HD-39777 (to A.L.S.).

Abbreviations: BMP, Bone morphogenic protein; FLRG, FS-related gene; FSRP, follistatin-related protein; FS, follistatin; LGC, luteinized granulosa cells; SPARC, secreted protein acidic and rich in cysteines.

Received February 9, 2001.

Accepted for publication April 16, 2001.


    References
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and Methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 

  1. Robertson DM, Klein R, de Vos FL, et al. 1987 The isolation of polypeptides with FSH suppressing activity from bovine follicular fluid which are structurally different to inhibin. Biochem Biophys Res Commun 149:744–749[CrossRef][Medline]
  2. Shimasaki S, Koga M, Esch F, et al. 1988 Primary structure of the human follistatin precursor and its genomic organization. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 85:4218–4222[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Kim SK, Hebrok M, Li E, et al. 2000 Activin receptor patterning of foregut organogenesis. Genes Dev 14:1866–1871[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  4. Asashima M, Ariizumi T, Malacinski GM 2000 In vitro control of organogenesis and body patterning by activin during early amphibian development. Comp Biochem Physiol B Biochem Mol Biol 126:169–178[CrossRef][Medline]
  5. DePaolo LV, Bicsak TA, Erickson GF, Shimasaki S, Ling N 1991 Follistatin and activin: a potential intrinsic regulatory system within diverse tissues. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 198:500–512[Medline]
  6. Nakamura T, Takio K, Eto Y, Shibai H, Titani K, Sugino H 1990 Activin-binding protein from rat ovary is follistatin. Science 247:836–838[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Schneyer AL, Rzucidlo DA, Sluss PM, Crowley Jr WF 1994 Characterization of unique binding kinetics of follistatin and activin or inhibin in serum. Endocrinology 135:667–674[Abstract]
  8. de Winter JP, ten Dijke P, de Vries CJ, et al. 1996 Follistatins neutralize activin bioactivity by inhibition of activin binding to its type II receptors. Mol Cell Endocrinol 116:105–114[CrossRef][Medline]
  9. Hashimoto O, Nakamura T, Shoji H, Shimasaki S, Hayashi Y, Sugino H 1997 A novel role of follistatin, an activin-binding protein, in the inhibition of activin action in rat pituitary cells. Endocytotic degradation of activin and its acceleration by follistatin associated with cell-surface heparan sulfate. J Biol Chem 272:13835–13842[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Nakamura T, Sugino K, Titani K, Sugino H 1991 Follistatin, an activin-binding protein, associates with heparan sulfate chains of proteoglycans on follicular granulosa cells. J Biol Chem 266:19432–19437[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Delbaere A, Sidis Y, Schneyer AL 1999 Differential response to exogenous and endogenous activin in a human ovarian teratocarcinoma-derived cell line (PA-1): regulation by cell surface follistatin. Endocrinology 140:2463–2470[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  12. Wang Q, Keutmann HT, Schneyer AL, Sluss PM 2000 Analysis of human follistatin structure: identification of two discontinuous N-terminal sequences coding for activin A binding and structural consequences of activin binding to native proteins. Endocrinology 141:3183–3183[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Sidis Y, Schneyer AL, Sluss PM, Johnson LN, Kentmann HT 2001 Follistatin: essential role for the N-terminal domain in activin binding and neutralization. J Biol Chem 276:17718–17726[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Hayette S, Gadoux M, Martel S, et al. 1998 FLRG (follistatin-related gene), a new target of chromosomal rearrangement in malignant blood disorders. Oncogene 16:2949–2954[CrossRef][Medline]
  15. Tsuchida K, Arai KY, Kuramoto Y, Yamakawa N, Hasegawa Y, Sugino H 2000 Identification and characterization of a novel follistatin-like protein as a binding protein for the TGF-ß family. J Biol Chem 275:40788–40796[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  16. Kogawa K, Nakamura T, Sugino K, Takio K, Titani K, Sugino H 1991 Activin-binding protein is present in pituitary. Endocrinology 128:1434–1440[Abstract]
  17. Meriggiola MC, Dahl KD, Mather JP, Bremner WJ 1994 Follistatin decreases activin-stimulated FSH secretion with no effect on GnRH-stimulated FSH secretion in prepubertal male monkeys. Endocrinology 134:1967–1970[Abstract]
  18. Hemmati-Brivanlou A, Kelly OG, Melton DA 1994 Follistatin, an antagonist of activin, is expressed in the Spemann organizer and displays direct neuralizing activity. Cell 77:283–295[CrossRef][Medline]
  19. Matzuk MM, Lu N, Vogel H, Sellheyer K, Roop DR, Bradley A 1995 Multiple defects and perinatal death in mice deficient in follistatin. Nature 374:360–363[CrossRef][Medline]
  20. Patthy L, Nikolics K 1993 Functions of agrin and agrin-related proteins. Trends Neurosci 16:76–81[CrossRef][Medline]
  21. Lane TF, Sage EH 1994 The biology of SPARC, a protein that modulates cell-matrix interactions. FASEB J 8:163–173[Abstract]
  22. Alliel PM, Perin JP, Jolles P, Bonnet FJ 1993 Testican, a multidomain testicular proteoglycan resembling modulators of cell social behaviour. Eur J Biochem 214:347–350[Medline]
  23. Schneyer AL, Rzucidlo DA, Sluss PM, Crowley Jr WF 1994 Characterization of unique binding kinetics of follistatin and activin or inhibin in serum. Endocrinology 135:667–674
  24. Fujiwara T, Lambert-Messerlian G, Sidis Y, et al. 2000 Analysis of follicular fluid hormone concentrations and granulosa cell mRNA levels for the inhibin-activin-follistatin system: relation to oocyte and embryo characteristics. Fertil Steril 74:348–355[CrossRef][Medline]
  25. Ausubel FM, Brent R, Kingston RE, et al. 1995 Current protocols in molecular biology. New York: John Wiley & Sons
  26. Yamashita H, ten Dijke P, Huylebroeck D, et al. 1995 Osteogenic protein-1 binds to activin type II receptors and induces certain activin-like effects. J Cell Biol 130:217–226[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  27. Emanuelsson O, Nielsen H, Brunak S, von Heijne G 2000 Predicting subcellular localization of proteins based on their N-terminal amino acid sequence. J Mol Biol 300:1005–1016[CrossRef][Medline]
  28. Nakai K, Horton P 1999 PSORT: a program for detecting sorting signals in proteins and predicting their subcellular localization. Trends Biochem Sci 24:34–36[CrossRef][Medline]
  29. Lambert-Messerlian G, Taylor A, Leykin L, et al. 1997 Characterization of intrafollicular steroid hormones, inhibin, and follistatin in women with and without polycystic ovarian syndrome following gonadotropin hyperstimulation. Biol Reprod 57:1211–1216[Abstract]
  30. Johnson AE, Haigh NG 2000 The ER translocon and retrotranslocation: is the shift into reverse manual or automatic? Cell 102:709–712[CrossRef][Medline]
  31. Kurys G, Tagaya Y, Bamford R, Hanover JA, Waldmann TA 2000 The long signal peptide isoform and its alternative processing direct the intracellular trafficking of interleukin-15. J Biol Chem 275:30653–30659[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  32. Blauer M, Husgafvel S, Syvala H, Tuohimaa P, Ylikomi T 1999 Identification of a nuclear localization signal in activin/inhibin ßA subunit; intranuclear ßA in rat spermatogenic cells. Biol Reprod 60:588–593[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  33. Ogawa K, Hashimoto O, Kurohmaru M, Mizutani T, Sugino H, Hayashi Y 1997 Follistatin-like immunoreactivity in the cytoplasm and nucleus of spermatogenic cells in the rat. Eur J Endocrinol 137:523–525[Abstract]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
EndocrinologyHome page
E. Lara-Pezzi, L. E. Felkin, E. J. Birks, P. Sarathchandra, K. D. Panse, R. George, J. L. Hall, M. H. Yacoub, N. Rosenthal, and P. J. R. Barton
Expression of Follistatin-Related Genes Is Altered in Heart Failure
Endocrinology, November 1, 2008; 149(11): 5822 - 5827.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
EndocrinologyHome page
A. L. Schneyer, Y. Sidis, A. Gulati, J. L. Sun, H. Keutmann, and P. A. Krasney
Differential Antagonism of Activin, Myostatin and Growth and Differentiation Factor 11 by Wild-Type and Mutant Follistatin
Endocrinology, September 1, 2008; 149(9): 4589 - 4595.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USAHome page
A. Mukherjee, Y. Sidis, A. Mahan, M. J. Raher, Y. Xia, E. D. Rosen, K. D. Bloch, M. K. Thomas, and A. L. Schneyer
FSTL3 deletion reveals roles for TGF-beta family ligands in glucose and fat homeostasis in adults
PNAS, January 23, 2007; 104(4): 1348 - 1353.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
EndocrinologyHome page
Y. Sidis, A. Mukherjee, H. Keutmann, A. Delbaere, M. Sadatsuki, and A. Schneyer
Biological Activity of Follistatin Isoforms and Follistatin-Like-3 Is Dependent on Differential Cell Surface Binding and Specificity for Activin, Myostatin, and Bone Morphogenetic Proteins
Endocrinology, July 1, 2006; 147(7): 3586 - 3597.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Exp. Biol. Med.Home page
Y.-G. Chen, Q. Wang, S.-L. Lin, C. D. Chang, J. Chung, and S.-Y. Ying
Activin Signaling and Its Role in Regulation of Cell Proliferation, Apoptosis, and Carcinogenesis.
Experimental Biology and Medicine, May 1, 2006; 231(5): 534 - 544.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
EndocrinologyHome page
T. R. Kumar
Too Many Follistatins: Racing Inside and Getting Out of the Cell
Endocrinology, December 1, 2005; 146(12): 5048 - 5051.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
EndocrinologyHome page
S. Saito, Y. Sidis, A. Mukherjee, Y. Xia, and A. Schneyer
Differential Biosynthesis and Intracellular Transport of Follistatin Isoforms and Follistatin-Like-3
Endocrinology, December 1, 2005; 146(12): 5052 - 5062.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum Reprod UpdateHome page
J.L. Juengel and K.P. McNatty
The role of proteins of the transforming growth factor-{beta} superfamily in the intraovarian regulation of follicular development
Hum. Reprod. Update, March 1, 2005; 11(2): 144 - 161.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
EndocrinologyHome page
Y. Sidis, A. L. Schneyer, and H. T. Keutmann
Heparin and Activin-Binding Determinants in Follistatin and FSTL3
Endocrinology, January 1, 2005; 146(1): 130 - 136.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
A. L. Schneyer, Q. Wang, Y. Sidis, and P. M. Sluss
Differential Distribution of Follistatin Isoforms: Application of a New FS315-Specific Immunoassay
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., October 1, 2004; 89(10): 5067 - 5075.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Mol. Endocrinol.Home page
Y. Xia, Y. Sidis, and A. Schneyer
Overexpression of Follistatin-Like 3 in Gonads Causes Defects in Gonadal Development and Function in Transgenic Mice
Mol. Endocrinol., April 1, 2004; 18(4): 979 - 994.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Endocr. Rev.Home page
S. Shimasaki, R. K. Moore, F. Otsuka, and G. F. Erickson
The Bone Morphogenetic Protein System In Mammalian Reproduction
Endocr. Rev., February 1, 2004; 25(1): 72 - 101.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Mol. Endocrinol.Home page
H. T. Keutmann, A. L. Schneyer, and Y. Sidis
The Role of Follistatin Domains in Follistatin Biological Action
Mol. Endocrinol., January 1, 2004; 18(1): 228 - 240.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
H.-Q. Wang, K. Takebayashi, K. Tsuchida, M. Nishimura, and Y. Noda
Follistatin-Related Gene (FLRG) Expression in Human Endometrium: Sex Steroid Hormones Regulate the Expression of FLRG in Cultured Human Endometrial Stromal Cells
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., September 1, 2003; 88(9): 4432 - 4439.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Mol. Endocrinol.Home page
J. J. Hill, Y. Qiu, R. M. Hewick, and N. M. Wolfman
Regulation of Myostatin in Vivo by Growth and Differentiation Factor-Associated Serum Protein-1: A Novel Protein with Protease Inhibitor and Follistatin Domains
Mol. Endocrinol., June 1, 2003; 17(6): 1144 - 1154.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
EndocrinologyHome page
A. Schneyer, A. Schoen, A. Quigg, and Y. Sidis
Differential Binding and Neutralization of Activins A and B by Follistatin and Follistatin Like-3 (FSTL-3/FSRP/FLRG)
Endocrinology, May 1, 2003; 144(5): 1671 - 1674.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Biol. Reprod.Home page
K. Y. Arai, K. Tsuchida, K. Uehara, K. Taya, and H. Sugino
Characterization of Rat Follistatin-Related Gene: Effects of Estrous Cycle Stage and Pregnancy on Its Messenger RNA Expression in Rat Reproductive Tissues
Biol Reprod, January 1, 2003; 68(1): 199 - 206.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Mol Hum ReprodHome page
J. Liu, T. Vanttinen, C. Hyden-Granskog, and R. Voutilainen
Regulation of follistatin-related gene (FLRG) expression by protein kinase C and prostaglandin E2 in cultured granulosa-luteal cells
Mol. Hum. Reprod., November 1, 2002; 8(11): 992 - 997.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Exp. Biol. Med.Home page
C. Welt, Y. Sidis, H. Keutmann, and A. Schneyer
Activins, Inhibins, and Follistatins: From Endocrinology to Signaling. A Paradigm for the New Millennium
Experimental Biology and Medicine, October 1, 2002; 227(9): 724 - 752.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
EndocrinologyHome page
Y. Sidis, D. V. Tortoriello, W. E. Holmes, Y. Pan, H. T. Keutmann, and A. L. Schneyer
Follistatin-Related Protein and Follistatin Differentially Neutralize Endogenous vs. Exogenous Activin
Endocrinology, May 1, 2002; 143(5): 1613 - 1624.
[Abstract] [Full Text]