4.6 Article

Role of Erk1/2 Signaling in the Regulation of Neutrophil Versus Mon ocyte Development in Response to G-CSF and M-CSF

Journal

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
Volume 290, Issue 40, Pages 24561-24573

Publisher

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M115.668871

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health from the NHLBI [R15HL112183]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Lineage specification in the hematopoietic system depends on the expression of lineage specific transcription factors. However, the role of hematopoietic cytokines in this process has been controversial and little is known about the intracellular signaling mechanisms by which cytokines instruct lineage choice. G-CSF and M-CSF are two lineage-specific cytokines that play a dominant role in granulopoiesis and monopoiesis, respectively. We show here that a G-CSFR mutant in which tyrosine 729 had been mutated to phenylalanine (Y7291) promoted monocyte rather than neutrophil development in myeloid precursors, which was associated with prolonged activation of Erkl /2 and augmented activation of downstream targets c-Fos and Egr 1. Inhibition of Erk1/2 activation or knockdown of c-Fos or Egrl largely rescued neutrophil development in cells expressing G-CSFR Y729 F. We also show that M-CSF, but not G-CSF, stimulated strong and sustained activation of Erk1/2 in mouse lineage marker negative (Lin(-)) bone marrow cells. Significantly, inhibition of Erk1/2 signaling in these cells favored neutrophil over monocyte development in response to M-CSF. Thus, prolonged Erk1/2 activation resulted in monocyte development following G-CSF induction whereas inhibition of Erk1 /2 signaling promoted neutrophil development at the expense of monocyte formation in response to M-CSF. These results reveal an important mechanism by which G-CST and M-CSF instruct neutrophil versus monocyte lineage choice, i.e. differential activation of Erk1/2 pathway.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available