Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Members of the transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-beta) superfamily signal via different heteromeric complexes of two sequentially acting serine/threonine kinase receptors, i.e. type I and type II receptors. We generated two different chimeric TGF-beta superfamily receptors, i.e. TbetaR-I/BMPR-IB, containing the extracellular domain of TGF-beta type I receptor (TbetaR-I) and the intracellular domain of bone morphogenetic protein type IB receptor (BMPR-IB), and TbetaR-II/ActR-IIB, containing the extracellular domain of TGF-beta type II receptor (TbetaR-II) and the intracellular domain of activin type IIB receptor (ActR-IIB). In the presence of TGF-beta1, TbetaR-I/BMPR-IB and TbetaR-II/ActR-IIB formed heteromeric complexes with wild-type TbetaR-II and TbetaR-I, respectively, upon stable transfection in mink lung epithelial cell lines. We show that TbetaR-II/ActR-IIB restored the responsiveness upon transfection in mutant cell lines lacking functional TbetaR-II with respect to TGF-beta-mediated activation of a transcriptional signal, extracellular matrix formation, growth inhibition, and Smad phosphorylation. Moreover, TbetaR-I/BMPR-IB and TbetaR-II/ActR-IIB formed a functional complex in response to TGF-beta and induced phosphorylation of Smad1. However, complex formation is not enough for signal propagation, which is shown by the inability of TbetaR-I/BMPR-IB to restore responsiveness to TGF-beta in cell lines deficient in functional TbetaR-I. The fact that the TGF-beta1-induced complex between TbetaR-II/ActR-IIB and TbetaR-I stimulated endogenous Smad2 phosphorylation, a TGF-beta-like response, is in agreement with the current model for receptor activation in which the type I receptor determines signal specificity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Persson et al. (1997) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: