4.7 Article

PDGF and FGF induce focal adhesion kinase (FAK) phosphorylation at Ser-910: Dissociation from Tyr-397 phosphorylation and requirement for ERK activation

期刊

JOURNAL OF CELLULAR PHYSIOLOGY
卷 200, 期 2, 页码 213-222

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jcp.20018

关键词

-

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [P50 CA90388] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIDDK NIH HHS [5T32 DK 007180, DK 55003, DK 56930, DK 17294] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A rapid increase in the tyrosine phosphorylation of focal adhesion kinase (FAK) has been extensively documented in cells stimulated by multiple signaling molecules, but very little is known about the regulation of FAK phosphorylation at serine residues. Stimulation of Swiss 3T3 cells with platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) promoted a striking increase in the phosphorylation of FAK at Ser-910, as revealed by site-specific antibodies that recognized the phosphorylated state of this residue. FAK phosphorylation at Ser-910 could be distinguished from that at Tyr-397 in terms of dose-response relationships and kinetics. Furthermore, the selective phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI 3-kinase) inhibitors wortmannin and LY 294002 abrogated FAK phosphorylation at Tyr-397 but did not interfere with PDGF-induced FAK phosphorylation at Ser-910. Conversely, treatment with U0126, a potent inhibitor of MEK-mediated ERK activation, prevented FAK phosphorylation at Ser-910 induced by PDGF but did not interfere with PDGF-induced FAK phosphorylation at Tyr-397. These results were extended using growth factors that either stimulate, fibroblast growth factor (FGF), or do not stimulate (insulin) the FRK pathway activation in Swiss 3T3 cells. FGF but not insulin promoted a striking FRK-dependent phosphorylation of FAK at Ser-910. Our results indicate that FAK phosphorylation at Tyr-397 and FAK phosphorylation at Ser-910 are induced in response to PDGF stimulation through different signaling pathways, namely PI 3-kinase and ERK, respectively. (C) 2004 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

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

4.7
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