R-Ras is regulated by activators and effectors distinct from those that control Ras function.

Like Ras, constitutively activated mutants of the Ras-related protein R-Ras cause tumorigenic transformation of NIH3T3 cells. However, since R-Ras causes a transformed phenotype distinct from that induced by Ras, it is likely that R-Ras controls signaling pathways and cellular processes distinct from those regulated by Ras. To address this possibility, we determined if R-Ras is regulated by activators and effectors distinct from those that regulate Ras function. We observed that Ras guanine nucleotide exchange factors failed to activate R-Ras in vivo, indicating that R-Ras is activated by distinct GEFs. Consistent with this, mutants of R-Ras with mutations analogous to the Ras(15A)/(17N) dominant negative proteins did not antagonize Ras GEF function and lacked the growth inhibitory activity seen with these mutant Ras proteins. Thus, R-Ras, but not Ras, is dispensable for the viability of NIH3T3 cells. Finally, whereas constitutively activated Ras can overcome the growth inhibitory action of the Ras(17N) dominant negative protein via Raf-dependent and -independent activities, transforming mutants of R-Ras failed to do so. This inability was consistent with our observation that Ras-, but not R-Ras-transformed, NIH3T3 cells possessed constitutively upregulated Raf kinase activities. Thus, R-Ras and Ras are regulators of distinct signaling pathways and cellular processes.

TC21 causes transformation by Raf-independent signaling pathways.

Although the Ras-related protein TC21/R-Ras2 has only 55% amino acid identity with Ras proteins, mutated forms of TC21 exhibit the same potent transforming activity as constitutively activated forms of Ras. Therefore, like Ras, TC21 may activate signaling pathways that control normal cell growth and differentiation. To address this possibility, we determined if regulators and effectors of Ras are also important for controlling TC21 activity. First, we determined that Ras guanine nucleotide exchange factors (SOS1 and RasGRF/CDC25) synergistically enhanced wild-type TC21 activity in vivo and that Ras GTPase-activating proteins (GAPs; p120-GAP and NF1-GAP) stimulated wild-type TC21 GTP hydrolysis in vitro. Thus, extracellular signals that activate Ras via SOS1 activation may cause coordinate activation of Ras and TC21. Second, we determined if Raf kinases were effectors for TC21 transformation. Unexpectedly, yeast two-hybrid binding analyses showed that although both Ras and TC21 could interact with the isolated Ras-binding domain of Raf-1, only Ras interacted with full-length Raf-1, A-Raf, or B-Raf. Consistent with this observation, we found that Ras- but not TC21-transformed NIH 3T3 cells possessed constitutively elevated Raf-1 and B-Raf kinase activity. Thus, Raf kinases are effectors for Ras, but not TC21, signaling and transformation. We conclude that common upstream signals cause activation of Ras and TC21, but activated TC21 controls cell growth via distinct Raf-independent downstream signaling pathways.

Guanine nucleotide exchange factors: activators of Ras superfamily proteins.

Members of the Ras superfamily of proteins function as regulated GDP/GTP switches that cycle between active GTP-complexed and inactive GDP-complexed states. Guanine nucleotide exchange factors (GEFs) stimulate formation of the GTP-bound state, whereas GTPase activating proteins (GAPs) catalyze the formation of the GDP-bound state. We describe three studies that evaluate the mechanism of action of GEFs for Ras (SOS1 and RasGRF/CDC25) or Ras-related Rho (Dbl and Vav) proteins. Growth factor-mediated activation of Ras is believed to be mediated by activation of Ras GEFs (CDC25/GRF and SOS1/2). Although the mechanisms of Ras GEF regulation are unclear, recent studies suggest that translocation of SOS1 to the plasma membrane, where Ras is located, might be responsible for Ras activation. Our observation that the addition of the Ras plasma membrane-targeting sequence to the catalytic domains of CDC25 and SOS1 greatly enhanced their transforming and transactivation activities (10-50 fold and 5-10 fold, respectively) suggests that membrane translocation alone is sufficient to potentiate GEF activation of Ras. We have determined that two Ras-related proteins, designated R-Ras and R-Ras2/TC21, can trigger the malignant transformation of NIH 3T3 cells via activation of the Ras signal transduction pathway. Furthermore, like Ras and R-Ras, we observed that TC21 GTPase activity was stimulated by Ras GAPs. However, we observed that both SOS1 and CDC25 were activators of normal TC21, but not R-Ras, transforming activities. Therefore, TC21, but not R-Ras, may be activated by the same extracellular signaling events that activate Ras proteins. Dbl family proteins are believed to function as GEFs and activators of the Ras-related Rho family of proteins. However, one Dbl family oncogene, designated Vav, has been reported to be a GEF for Ras proteins. Therefore we were interested in determining whether Dbl family oncogenes cause transformation by triggering the constitutive activation of Rho or Ras proteins. Our results suggest that Dbl oncogenes cause transformation via a Ras-independent activation of MAP kinases and Rho family proteins.

Guanine nucleotide exchange factors: activators of the Ras superfamily of proteins.

Ras proteins function as critical relay switches that regulate diverse signaling pathways between cell surface receptors and the nucleus. Over the past 2-3 years researchers have identified many components of these pathways that mediate Ras activation and effector function. Among these proteins are several guanine nucleotide exchange factors (GEFs), which are responsible for directly interacting with and activating Ras in response to extracellular stimuli. Analogous GEFs regulate Ras-related proteins that serve other diverse cellular functions. In particular, a growing family of proteins (Dbl homology proteins) has recently been identified, which may function as GEFs for the Rho family of Ras-related proteins. This review summarizes our current knowledge of the structure, biochemistry and biology of Ras and Rho family GEFs. Additionally, we describe mechanisms of GEF activation of Ras in signal transduction and address the potential that deregulated GEFs might contribute to malignant transformation through chronic Ras protein activation.

Ras-15A protein shares highly similar dominant-negative biological properties with Ras-17N and forms a stable, guanine-nucleotide resistant complex with CDC25 exchange factor.

We show that expression of Ras-15A, previously shown to be a dominant-negative mutant in yeast, is a potent inhibitor of endogenous Ras protein function in mammalian cells. Expression of Ras-15A did not inhibit the growth of cells containing an oncogenic ras gene nor did it interfere with the ability of transiently expressed oncogenic ras or raf genes to activate transcription from a Ras-responsive ets1/AP-1 promoter. In contrast, expression of Ras-15A completely blocked growth of normal cells and activation of the ets1/AP-1 promoter by transiently overexpressed SOS1 and normal Ras proteins. These results suggest that Ras-15A, like Ras-17N, blocks endogenous Ras function by interfering with upstream activation of Ras proteins rather than downstream effects. To test whether Ras-15A and Ras-17N interfere with Ras function by blocking GDP-GTP exchange proteins, we examined their physical interaction with the CDC25 exchange protein. All three proteins formed stable complexes with CDC25 in the absence of guanine-nucleotides, but only Ras-15A was not released from CDC25 by physiological concentrations of GDP or GTP. These results establish that Ras-15A blocks the activation of normal Ras proteins by sequestering GDP-GTP exchange factors into non-productive complexes. In contrast, it would appear that the similar biological properties of Ras-17N are mediated by a reversible, competitive sequestration of exchange factors.

Membrane-targeting potentiates guanine nucleotide exchange factor CDC25 and SOS1 activation of Ras transforming activity.

Growth factor-triggered activation of Ras proteins is believed to be mediated by guanine nucleotide exchange factors (CDC25/GRF and SOS1/2) that promote formation of the active Ras GTP-bound state. Although the mechanism(s) of guanine nucleotide exchange factor regulation is unclear, recent studies suggest that translocation of SOS1 to the plasma membrane, where Ras is located, might be responsible for Ras activation. To evaluate this model, we generated constructs that encode the catalytic domains of human CDC25 or mouse SOS1, either alone (designated cCDC25 and cSOS1, respectively) or terminating in the carboxyl-terminal CAAX membrane-targeting sequence from K-Ras4B (designated cCDC25-CAAX and cSOS1-CAAX, respectively; in CAAX, C is Cys, A is an aliphatic amino acid, and X is Ser or Met). We then compared the transforming potential of cCDC25 and cSOS1 with their membrane-targeted counterparts. We observed that addition of the Ras plasma membrane-targeting sequence to the catalytic domains of CDC25 and SOS1 greatly enhanced their focus-forming activity (10- to 50-fold) in NIH 3T3 transfection assays. Similarly, we observed that the membrane-targeted versions showed a 5- to 10-fold enhanced ability to induce transcriptional activation from the Ets/AP-1 Ras-responsive element. Furthermore, whereas cells that stably expressed cCDC25 or cSOS1 exhibited the same morphologies as untransformed NIH 3T3 cells, cells expressing cCDC25-CAAX or cSOS1-CAAX displayed transformed morphologies that were indistinguishable from the elongated and refractile morphology of oncogenic Ras-transformed cells. Thus, these results suggest that membrane translocation alone is sufficient to potentiate guanine nucleotide exchange factor activation of Ras.

Identification of residues critical for Ras(17N) growth-inhibitory phenotype and for Ras interaction with guanine nucleotide exchange factors.

The Ras(17N) dominant negative antagonizes endogenous Ras function by forming stable, inactive complexes with Ras guanine nucleotide exchange factors (GEFs; e.g., SOS1). We have used the growth-inhibitory phenotype of Ras(17N) to characterize two aspects of Ras interaction with GEFs. First, we used a nonprenylated version of Ras(17N), designated Ras(17N/186S), which no longer associates with the plasma membrane and lacks the growth-inhibitory phenotype, to address the importance of Ras subcellular location and posttranslational modification for its interaction with GEFs. We observed that addition of an N-terminal myristylation signal to Ras(17N/186S) restored the growth-inhibitory activity of nonprenylated Ras(17N). Thus, membrane association, rather than prenylation, is critical for Ras interaction with Ras GEFs. Second, we used a biological selection approach to identify Ras residues which are critical for Ras(17N) growth inhibition and hence for interaction with Ras GEFs. We identified mutations at residues 75, 76, and 78 that abolished the growth-inhibitory activity of Ras(17N). Since GEF interaction is dispensable for oncogenic but not normal Ras function, our demonstration that single-amino-acid substitutions at these three positions impaired the transforming activity of normal but not oncogenic Ras provides further support for the role of these residues in Ras-GEF interactions. Finally, Ras(WT) proteins with mutations at these residues were no longer activated by mammalian SOS1. Altogether, these results suggest that the Ras intracellular location and Ras residues 75 to 78 are critical for Ras-GEF interaction.

Molecular analysis of the nerve growth factor inducible ornithine decarboxylase gene in PC12 cells.

In an effort to understand molecular mechanisms by which nerve growth factor (NGF) regulates gene expression, we have isolated a full-length rat cDNA clone encoding ornithine decarboxylase (ODC) and utilized this probe to identify and examine the transcriptionally active, NGF inducible ODC gene in rat PC12 cells. This same gene is also responsive to epidermal growth factor, basic fibroblasts growth factor, and dibutyryl cAMP. Primer extension analysis demonstrates that both basal and NGF induced transcription of the ODC gene utilize the same major transcriptional start site, demonstrating that NGF acts to increase transcriptional activity at the basal start site as opposed to unmasking an alternative, stronger start site. Functional promoter analysis reveals the presence of a constitutive core promoter residing between positions -201 and +390, relative to the start site of transcription. Additional analyses reveal that sequences in the region -7800 to +2257 are insufficient to mediate NGF induced transcriptional activation, demonstrating that at least some of the regulatory sequences necessary for NGF mediated transcriptional induction of the ODC gene must reside at relatively enormous distances from the transcriptional start site. Such a long distance transcriptional regulatory mechanism is unique when compared with other NGF responsive genes that have been similarly analyzed.