4.6 Article

Establishment and characterization of cultured epithelial cells lacking expression of ZO-1

期刊

JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 279, 期 43, 页码 44785-44794

出版社

AMER SOC BIOCHEMISTRY MOLECULAR BIOLOGY INC
DOI: 10.1074/jbc.M406563200

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In well polarized epithelial cells, closely related ZO-1 and ZO-2 are thought to function as scaffold proteins at tight junctions (TJs). In epithelial cells at the initial phase of polarization, these proteins are recruited to cadherin-based spotlike adherens junctions (AJs). As a first step to clarify the function of ZO-1, we successfully generated mouse epithelial cell clones lacking ZO-1 expression (ZO-1-/- cells) by homologous recombination. Unexpectedly, in confluent cultures, ZO-1-/- cells were highly polarized with well organized AJs/TJs, which were indistinguishable from those in ZO-1+/+ cells by electron microscopy. In good agreement, by immunofluorescence microscopy, most TJ proteins including claudins and occludin appeared to be normally concentrated at TJs of ZO-1-/- cells with the exception that a ZO-1 deficiency significantly up- or down-regulated the recruitment of ZO-2 and cingulin, another TJ scaffold protein, respectively, to TJs. When the polarization of ZO-1-/- cells was initiated by a Ca2+ switch, the initial AJ formation did not appear to be affected; however, the subsequent TJ formation ( recruitment of claudins/occludin to junctions and barrier establishment) was markedly retarded. This retardation as well as the disappearance of cingulin were rescued completely by exogenous ZO-1 but not by ZO-2 expression. Quantitative evaluation of ZO-1/ZO-2 expression levels led to the conclusion that ZO-1 and ZO-2 would function redundantly to some extent in junction formation/epithelial polarization but that they are not functionally identical. Finally, we discussed advantageous aspects of the gene knockout system with cultured epithelial cells in epithelial cell biology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据