4.7 Article

Chemokine stimulation of human peripheral blood T lymphocytes induces rapid dephosphorylation of ERM proteins, which facilitates loss of microvilli and polarization

期刊

BLOOD
卷 102, 期 12, 页码 3890-3899

出版社

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood-2002-12-3807

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Lymphocyte microvilli mediate initial rolling-adhesion along endothelium but are lost during transmigration from circulation to tissue. However, the mechanism for resorption of lymphocyte microvilli remains unexplored. We show that chemokine stimulation of human peripheral blood T (PBT) cells is sufficient to induce rapid resorption of microvilli. Microvilli in other cells are regulated by ezrin/radixin/ moesin (ERM) proteins, which link the plasma membrane to the cortical F-actin cytoskeleton; maintenance of these linkages requires ERM activation, reflected by phosphorylation at a specific carboxy-terminal threonine residue. Carboxyphosphorylated-ERM (cpERM) proteins in resting PBT cells show a punctate peripheral distribution consistent with localization to microvilli. cpERM dephosphorylation begins within seconds of stimulation by chemokines (stromal derived factor 1alpha [SDF-1alpha] or secondary lymphoid tissue cytokine), and ERM proteins lose their punctate distribution with kinetics paralleling the loss of microvilli. The cpERM proteins are preferentially associated with the cytoskeleton at rest and this association is lost with chemokine-induced dephosphorylation. Transfection studies show that a dominant-negative ERM construct destroys microvilli, whereas a construct mimicking cpERM facilitates formation of microvilli, retards chemokine-induced loss of microvilli, and markedly impairs chemokine-induced polarization. Thus, chemokine induces rapid dephosphorylation and inactivation of cpERM, which may in turn facilitate 2 aspects of cytoskeletal reorganization involved in lymphocyte recruitment: loss of microvilli and polarization. (C) 2003 by The American Society of Hematology.

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