Home | Help | Feedback | Subscriptions | Archive | Search | Table of Contents

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF, 126K) PPT slides of all figures Alert me when this article is cited Citation Map Services Email this article Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new content in the JEM Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Craig Morton, H. Articles by Brandtzaeg, P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Craig Morton, H. Articles by Brandtzaeg, P. Social Bookmarking                            What's this?

Articles

Immunoglobulin-binding Sites of Human FcRI (CD89) and Bovine Fc2R Are Located in their Membrane-distal Extracellular Domains

H. Craig Morton^*, Ger van Zandbergen, Cees van Kooten, Chris J. Howard, Jan G. J. van de Winkel^||, and Per Brandtzaeg^*

From the ^* Laboratory of Immunohistochemistry and Immunopathology (LIIPAT), The National Hospital, University of Oslo, Rikshospitalet, N-0027 Oslo, Norway; the Department of Nephrology, Leiden University Medical Center, 2300 RC Leiden, The Netherlands; the Division of Immunology and Pathology, The Institute for Animal Health, Compton, Newbury, Berkshire RG20 7NN, United Kingdom; and the ^|| Department of Immunology and Medarex Europe, University Hospital Utrecht, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands

	Abstract

Top Abstract Materials and Methods Results Discussion References

 
To localize the immunoglobulin (Ig)-binding regions of the human Fc receptor (FcRI, CD89) and the bovine Fc2 receptor (bFc2R), chimeric receptors were generated by exchanging comparable regions between these two proteins. FcRI and bFc2R are highly homologous and are more closely related to each other than to other human and bovine FcRs. Nevertheless, they are functionally distinct in that FcRI binds human IgA (hIgA) but not bovine IgG2 (bIgG2), whereas bFc2R binds bIgG2 but not hIgA. FcRI and bFc2R possess extracellular regions consisting of two Ig-like domains, a membrane-distal extracellular domain (EC1), a membrane-proximal EC domain (EC2), a transmembrane region, and a short cytoplasmic tail. Chimeras constructed by exchanging complete domains between these two receptors were transfected to COS-1 cells and assayed for their ability to bind hIgA- or bIgG2-coated beads. The results showed that the Ig-binding site of both FcRI and bFc2R is located within EC1. Supporting this observation, monoclonal antibodies that blocked IgA binding to FcRI were found to recognize epitopes located in this domain. In terms of FcR–Ig interactions characterized thus far, this location is unique and surprising because it has been shown previously that leukocyte FcRs and FcRI bind Ig via sites principally located in their EC2 domains.

Key Words: Fc receptor • CD89 • bovine Fc2 receptor • immunoglobulin A • myeloid

Abbreviations used: b, bovine; EC, extracellular; GAM, goat anti–mouse; GFP, green fluorescent protein; KIR, natural killer cell inhibitory receptor; TM/C, transmembrane/cytoplasmic.

Immunoglobulin (Ig) Fc receptors (FcRs) expressed on phagocytic cells provide a crucial link between the humoral and cellular branches of the immune system. Ligation of FcRs by antigen-bound Ig leads to cellular activation and triggering of powerful effector mechanisms (1, 2). In humans and other mammals, IgA predominates in mucosae and, furthermore, comprises a substantial proportion of the circulating Ig pool. At mucosal surfaces IgA provides a first-line protective function, termed immune exclusion, whereby it inhibits microbial colonization on epithelial cells and penetration of harmful antigens. In addition, the protective function of IgA both in mucosa and in the circulation may be reinforced by interaction of IgA-complexed antigens with the myeloid FcRI (CD89)(3, 4). FcRI is expressed on monocytes, macrophages, polymorphonuclear granulocytes, and eosinophils, and its cross-linking triggers a variety of immunological effector functions, including phagocytosis, antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity, and release of inflammatory mediators and cytokines (3–6).

Among FcRs characterized until now, FcRI is most closely related to the bovine Fc receptor for IgG2 (bFc2R)¹ expressed on monocytes and granulocytes. In fact, these two FcRs are more closely related to each other than to any known human or bovine FcRs (7). More recently, it has been shown that FcRI and bFc2R are members of a new gene family that apparently evolved from a common ancestral gene. Other human genes belonging to this family include the natural killer cell inhibitory receptors (KIRs), the Ig-like transcripts (ILTs), the leukocyte and monocyte/ macrophage Ig-like receptors (LIRs, MIRs), LAIR-1, and HM18 (8–13). These genes are located close to the FcRI gene within the so-called leukocyte receptor complex on chromosome 19q13.4 (13–15). Several murine members of the same gene family, gp49B1 (a structural homologue of human KIRs), and the paired Ig-like receptors A and B (PIR-A and PIR-B), have also been described (16–18).

FcRI and bFc2R are both transmembrane glycoproteins composed of two extracellular (EC) Ig-like domains (EC1 and EC2), a transmembrane region containing a charged arginine residue, and a short cytoplasmic tail devoid of signaling motifs (7, 19). Signal transduction via FcRI is mediated via the FcR chain, which associates with FcRI through the charged arginine residue within its transmembrane domain but does not affect its affinity for IgA (20–23). Despite the high level of amino acid identity (41%) within the EC and transmembrane regions of FcRI and bFc2R, these two receptors are functionally quite distinct in that FcRI binds IgA but not bIgG2, whereas bFc2R binds bIgG2 but not IgA. Therefore, to map the ligand-binding domains of these two FcRs we utilized their high degree of identity and exchanged homologous regions between them. Based on knowledge of interactions between other two-domain FcRs (FcRII, FcRIII, and FcRI) with their respective ligands (IgG or IgE), we expected the Ig-binding sites to be located within the membrane-proximal EC2 domain (24– 30). Surprisingly, however, our results demonstrated that the ligand-binding region of both FcRI and bFc2R is located in their membrane-distal EC1 domain. In part, this finding probably reflects the evolutionary development of FcRI and bFc2R from an ancestral gene distinct from the putative FcR/FcR precursor.

	Materials and Methods

Top Abstract Materials and Methods Results Discussion References

 
Cell Culture.
COS-1 cells were maintained in DMEM (BioWhittaker) supplemented with 10% FCS, 1 mM L-glutamine, and 50 µg/ml gentamycin (Life Technologies, UK). The murine IIA1.6 B cell line that coexpresses FcRI and the FcR chain has been described previously (21).

cDNAs and Construction of Chimeric FcRs.
cDNAs encoding the complete FcRI coding region and a mutant cDNA encoding a soluble form of FcRI were gifts from Dr. C. Maliszewski (Immunex Corp., Seattle, WA) (19, 31). cDNA for bFc2R has been described previously (7). Chimeric cDNAs were constructed by overlap extension PCR (21). Although the genomic structure of bFc2R is unknown, the high homology to FcRI allowed us to infer intron–exon boundaries because amino acid residues that link the FcRI exons are identical to those at comparable positions in bFc2R (Fig. 1). Primers were thus designed to allow the fusion of exons at these residues. To construct the bEC1^(1–50)-FcRI mutant, primers were designed to allow the fusion of the first 50 amino acids of bFc2R to FcRI at isoleucine 50; both FcRI and bFc2R have isoleucine residues at this position, which lies almost exactly in the middle of the EC1 domains. The integrity of all chimeric cDNAs was confirmed by sequence analysis. Chimeric FcR cDNAs were cloned into the pCDNA3 mammalian expression vector (Invitrogen, The Netherlands) before transfection. The pCMV-GFP plasmid, which directed the expression of green fluorescent protein (GFP), was constructed by inserting the CMV promoter region from pCDNA3 into the multiple cloning site of the pEGFP-1 vector (Clontech).

View larger version (40K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PPT slide]   Figure 1 Alignment of amino acid sequences of FcRI (X54150) and bFc2R (Z37506). S1 exons are shown from the methionine initiation codons. Because the gene structure of bFc2R is unknown, intron–exon boundaries are shown only for FcRI. Amino acids that link two FcRI exons are underlined, and the exon designation is shown above the sequence. Note that exon-linking amino acids are conserved between FcRI and bFc2R. The first 19 amino acids of both sequences are considered to represent NH2-terminal signal peptides, which are removed before cell surface expression. Thus, glutamine (Q) 22 is proposed to be the first amino acid of both mature proteins and therefore is designated +1. Isoleucine (I) 50 is also underlined. Residues of bFc2R identical to those of FcRI are designated (*), and gaps that have been inserted to line up the sequences are designated (–) (also see reference 7).

 
Transfections.
COS-1 cells were transiently transfected with 2 µg chimeric FcR cDNA constructs by means of Fugene 6 transfection reagent (Boehringer Mannheim, Germany) according to the manufacturer's instructions. In some experiments, 1 µg pCMV-GFP was cotransfected together with the FcR constructs. Cells were incubated at 37°C in a humidified CO₂ atmosphere for 48 h before harvesting.

Ig-binding Assays.
Uncoated magnetic M-450 Dynabeads (Dynal, Norway) were coated, according to the manufacturer's instructions, with either human serum IgA (hIgA) or bovine IgG2 (bIgG2), which were purified as previously described (7, 32). Due to low transfection efficiency of some DNA constructs (see Results), transfected COS-1 cells were first enriched for those becoming positive for gene expression by cotransfection of the FcR and pCMV-GFP constructs. Experiments showed that most fluorescent (GFP⁺) cells had also taken up both plasmids, thus expressing the chimeric FcR together with GFP (see Results). Therefore, binding assays were performed as follows: 5 x 10⁴ GFP⁺ COS-1 cells (which had also been cotransfected with an FcR construct) were purified in a FACSVantage^® cell sorter (Becton Dickinson) and mixed with Ig-coated Dynabeads in a final volume of 50 µl per well in V-bottomed microtiter plates. After a 15-min incubation at room temperature, the plate was spun at 50 g for 1 min and incubated for an additional 45 min at room temperature. Cells and beads were resuspended and examined for the presence of rosettes, using a combination of light and fluorescent microscopy, in a Nikon Eclipse E800 microscope. Rosettes were defined as GFP⁺ cells binding four or more Ig-coated beads and at least 200 GFP⁺ COS-1 cells were counted for each determination. For blocking studies, cells were incubated with either mAb My43 (50 µl culture supernatant) or CC-G24 (50 µl ascites fluid diluted 1:4) for 30 min at room temperature before the addition of Ig-coated beads.

Production and Purification of Recombinant Soluble FcRI.
A cDNA that encodes a soluble form of FcRI was expressed in Chinese hamster ovary cells by means of the pEE14 expression system (Lonza, UK), and the protein was isolated from the culture supernatant by affinity chromatography with Sepharose-bound human IgA (van Zandbergen, G., and C. van Kooten, unpublished data).

Monoclonal Antibodies.
The previously described FcRI mAbs My43 (murine IgM), A3, A59, A62, and A77 (all murine IgG1) were used in this study (33, 34). My43 and A62 were gifts from Dr. Li Shen (Dartmouth Medical School, Lebanon, NH) and Dr. Max Cooper (University of Alabama, Birmingham, AL), respectively. A77 was supplied by Medarex Europe (The Netherlands), and A3 and A59 were purchased from Immunotech (France) and Research Diagnostics Inc. respectively. The bFc2R mAb CC-G24 (murine IgM) was generated by immunizing mice with bFc2R protein purified from cattle leukocytes, and the specificity was confirmed by staining COS-7 cells transfected with cDNA encoding the bFc2R or bovine FcRII (Howard, C.J., unpublished data). To obtain new FcRI mAbs, female BALB/C mice were immunized with purified soluble FcRI. Splenocytes isolated from immunized animals were fused with myeloma cells (SP20) in the presence of 50% polyethylene glycol. The cell suspension was diluted in IMDM supplemented with 10% FCS, hypoxanthine (100 µmol), aminopterin (0.4 µM), thymidine (16 µM), 500 pg/ml IL-6, 100 U/liter penicillin, and 100 µg/ml streptomycin. Cells producing antibodies to FcRI were subcloned by limiting dilution. Five clones producing mAb to FcRI were expanded and the specificity was determined by FACS^® analysis (see below). To define the capacity of these new mAbs to inhibit binding of IgA to FcRI, blocking studies were performed as follows: FcRI mAbs or control mAbs of the same isotype were diluted in FACS buffer and incubated together with FcRI-transfected IIA1.6 cells for 15 min at 4°C. Purified human serum IgA, which had previously been heat-aggregated for 1 h at 63°C (aIgA), was then added for 1 h at 4°C. Cells were washed and bound aIgA was detected by incubation with a goat anti– human IgA F(ab)₂-PE polyclonal antibody conjugate (Southern Biotechnology Associates, Inc.) in FACS^® analysis. Isotype control antibodies for murine IgG1 were purchased from Becton Dickinson, and those for murine IgM were provided by Dr. Robert Burns (Scottish Agricultural Science Agency, Edinburgh, UK).

FACS^® Analysis.
Cells (5 x 10⁵) were washed twice with FACS buffer (PBS/0.5% BSA/0.02% azide) and incubated with either FcRI mAb (murine IgM or IgG1) culture supernatant or the appropriate isotype control supernatant for 1 h at 4°C. Cells were then washed twice with FACS buffer and incubated for 1 h at 4°C with either goat anti–mouse (GAM) IgM-FITC conjugate (1:150 final dilution), or a GAM IgG1-PE conjugate (1:150 final dilution) (both from Southern Biotechnology Associates, Inc.). In experiments where GFP⁺ cells were analyzed for chimeric FcR expression, a GAM IgG1 Tricolor secondary reagent (1:200 final dilution) (Caltag Labs.) was used. After washing twice with FACS buffer, cells were fixed in PBS-buffered 1% (wt/vol) paraformaldehyde at 4°C and analyzed on a FACScan^®. Data acquisition was conducted with Lysis II software (Becton Dickinson), and data analysis was performed using WinMDI software (available from The Scripps Research Institute, La Jolla, CA).

	Results

Top Abstract Materials and Methods Results Discussion References

 
The EC1 Domains of FcRI and bFc2R Mediate Ligand Binding.
To map the ligand-binding domains of FcRI and bFc2R, we generated five chimeric receptors as follows: hEC-bFc2R, consisting of the two EC domains of FcRI fused to the transmembrane/cytoplasmic (TM/C) domain of bFc2R; bEC-FcRI, the two bovine EC domains fused to the TM/C domain of FcRI; hEC1-bFc2R, the EC1 domain of FcRI fused to the EC2 TM/C region of bFc2R; bEC1-FcRI, the EC1 domain of bFc2R joined to the EC2 TM/C region of FcRI; and bEC1^(1–50)-FcRI, the first 50 amino acids of bFc2R fused at isoleucine 50 to FcRI (Fig. 1). Together with wild-type FcRI and bFc2R cDNAs, individual chimeric FcR constructs were transfected to COS-1 cells, and their cell surface expression was assessed by FACS^® analysis and by a specific binding assay using Ig-coated beads (see Materials and Methods). Initial experiments revealed the transfection efficiency of individual constructs to be quite variable. The most efficient construct directed expression of FcRI on the surface of 30% of COS-1 cells, whereas the least efficient (bEC1-FcRI) was expressed by only 3% of the transfectants (Fig. 2 A). Therefore, we developed a method to selectively enrich for transiently transfected cells by cotransfecting a plasmid that directed expression of GFP (visualized by green fluorescence) together with the chimeric FcR constructs. Most GFP⁺ COS-1 cells cotransfected with FcRI were recognized by mAb A62 (Fig. 2 B), and formed rosettes with hIgA-coated beads (Fig. 2 C). By this procedure we obtained an approximately twofold enrichment of chimeric FcR-expressing cells, which in the case of FcRI resulted in >60% of cells being reactive with FcRI mAb and further able to form rosettes with hIgA coated beads (Fig. 2, B and C). It should be noted that GFP^– COS-1 almost never formed rosettes, most likely because transfectants expressing FcRI alone accounted for only 1% of the total cells (Fig. 2 B). We, furthermore, demonstrated the specificity of our binding assay by using blocking mAbs specific for FcRI or bFc2R to inhibit rosette formation (Fig. 3). The finding that the inhibition obtained with My43 was only partial (50%) was most likely explained by the use of culture supernatant other than a higher concentration of purified antibody which was not available.

View larger version (56K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PPT slide]   Figure 2 Expression of chimeric FcR by COS-1 cells. (A) Cos-1 cells were transfected with the indicated constructs 2 d before harvesting and FACS® analysis. Cells were stained with either FcRI EC2-specific mAb A62 (mouse IgG1) (bottom panels) or an appropriate isotype control (top panels), followed by a GAM IgG1 Tricolor reagent. Numbers in the top right corners of the plots refer to the percentage of positive cells. (B) Enrichment of FcRI expression in COS-1 cells cotransfected with GFP. Cells transfected with both FcRI and GFP were stained with FcRI EC2-specific mAb A62 followed by GAM IgG1 Tricolor reagent and analyzed by FACS®. More than 60% of the GFP+ cells also express FcRI. (C) Rosette formation by COS-1 cells cotransfected with both FcRI and GFP and exposed to hIgA-coated beads. Rosettes were quantified as specified in Materials and Methods. Black bar, total number of cells counted; white bar, total number of GFP+ cells assessed by fluorescent microscopy; gray bar, number of GFP+ cells forming rosettes. Results shown are representative of three separate experiments.

 

View larger version (27K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PPT slide]   Figure 3 Specificity of the bead rosetting assays. COS-1 cells were cotransfected with the indicated FcR construct together with pCMV-GFP. GFP+ cells were purified as described in Materials and Methods and incubated with the relevant murine IgM-blocking mAb or an irrelevant murine IgM control mAb for 30 min before addition of Ig-coated beads. Results are shown as percentage of inhibition of rosette formation when compared with transfectants that were not incubated with mAb before rosetting analysis. Results shown are representative of two experiments.

 
FcRI does not bind bIgG2, and bFc2R does not bind hIgA (reference 7 and this paper); accordingly, we neither observed rosettes when hIgA-coated beads were mixed with bFc2R transfectants, nor when bIgG2-coated beads were mixed with FcRI transfectants (Fig. 4). Binding studies with COS-1 cells enriched for FcR expression as described above, showed not unexpectedly that wild-type FcRI and bFcR2 transfectants produced the highest levels of rosette formation with hIgA- and bIgG2-coated beads, respectively (Fig. 4). Transfectants expressing chimeras coding for the entire EC portions of the receptors (hEC-bFc2R and bEC-FcRI) bound their respective Ig-coated beads efficiently, although at a slightly lower level than their wild-type counterparts (Fig. 4). The fact that the hEC1-bFc2R chimera retained IgA-binding capacity demonstrated that the binding site of FcRI lies within the membrane-distal EC1 domain. Furthermore, because this chimera did not form rosettes with bIgG2-coated beads, our finding further suggested that the binding site for bIgG2 in bFc2R was not located within the EC2 domain of this receptor. Conversely, the bEC1-FcRI chimera did form rosettes with bIgG2-coated beads, but not with beads coated with hIgA.

View larger version (22K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PPT slide]   Figure 4 Rosette formation by FcR/GFP cotransfected COS-1 cells. Schematic representation of wild-type and chimeric FcRs. Unshaded regions are derived from FcRI, shaded regions from bFc2R. S, signal peptide; EC1, extracellular domain 1; EC2, extracellular domain 2; TM/C, transmembrane/cytoplasmic tail. GFP+ transfectants were purified from COS-1 cells cotransfected with GFP and FcR constructs as described. Ig-binding to FcRs coexpressed with GFP was assessed by rosetting with either hIgA- or bIgG2-coated beads. More than 200 cells were counted for each determination, and the number of cells binding four or more Ig-coated beads is expressed as percentage rosette formation. Results are representative of three separate experiments.

 
Altogether these results showed that, in common with FcRI, the ligand-binding site of bFc2R appeared to lie within the EC1 domain. It should be noted, however, that the level of binding obtained with the two EC1 chimeras (hEC1-bFc2R and bEC1-FcRI) was reduced when compared with the wild-type receptors, and the EC chimeras (hEC-bFc2R and bEC-FcRI) (Fig. 4). Futhermore, to better localize the Ig-binding sites of these two receptors, a further chimera was constructed in which the first 50 amino acids of the EC1 domain were from bFc2R, while the remaining EC1 (49 amino acids) and the rest of the receptor were from FcRI [bEC1^(1–50)-FcRI]. Although this chimera was expressed at the cell surface and could be recognized by the majority of FcRI mAb, it bound neither hIgA- nor bIgG2-coated beads.

EC1-specific Antibodies Block FcRI Binding of IgA.
To confirm that the IgA-binding site of FcRI lies within the EC1 domain, we mapped the specific epitopes for a number of blocking and nonblocking mAbs. Of the previously described FcRI mAbs, only My43 (murine IgM) was able to block the binding of hIgA to FcRI (33). Four others (A3, A59, A62, and A77, all murine IgG1) did not inhibit binding (34). We also included a number of new FcRI mAbs (2E6, 2D11, 7G4, 2H8, and 7D7, all murine IgG1), raised against a soluble form of FcRI. These mAbs were shown to be specific for FcRI by reaction with IIA1.6 cells expressing this receptor (Fig. 5 A). They were next assayed for ability to block binding of heat-aggregated hIgA to FcRI: mAbs 2E6, 2D11, 7G4, and 2H8 produced such inhibition while 7D7 did not (Fig. 5 B). Accordingly, we presumed that the blocking mAbs would prove to be EC1-specific, whereas the nonblocking ones would be EC2 specific.

View larger version (37K): [in this window] [in a new window] [Download PPT slide]   Figure 5 (A) FACS® analysis of newly produced mAbs to FcRI compared with mAb A77 of similar specificity. FcRI-expressing murine B cells (IIA1.6) were incubated with mAbs as indicated (white peaks) or with concentration and isotype-matched control mAbs (hatched peaks), followed by a GAM IgG1–PE conjugate. (B) FcRI-expressing IIA1.6 cells were incubated without (left panel) or with mAbs as indicated, followed by heat-aggregated hIgA (aIgA). After 1 h at 4°C, cells were washed and bound hIgA was detected by incubation with goat anti–human IgA F(ab)2-PE conjugate (white peaks). Cells incubated with only the secondary reagent served as negative controls (hatched peaks). (C) Reactivity of chimeras (left) with a panel of FcR and bFc2R mAb (top) as measured by FACS® analysis. Binding was graded as follows: +, strong binding; +/–, weak binding; –, no binding.

 
To test this hypothesis, we screened the reactivity of all mAbs against the panel of chimeric FcR expressed in COS-1 cells by FACS^® analysis. Indeed, all mAbs capable of blocking the binding of heat-aggregated hIgA to FcRI (Fig. 5 B), mapped to the EC1 domain (Fig. 5 C). Also, all nonblocking mAbs were directed against the EC2 domain, except for mAb A3 that apparently recognized an epitope depending on parts of both domains. Unfortunately, because only one mAb against bFc2R was available, a similar detailed study could not be performed for this receptor. We showed that mAb CC-G24 only recognized wild-type bFc2R and the bEC-FcRI chimera (Fig. 5 C). Thus, like mAb A3, it is most likely directed against a conformational epitope depending on both EC1 and EC2.

	Discussion

Top Abstract Materials and Methods Results Discussion References

 
By means of a panel of chimeric FcRs, we identified conclusively for the first time the ligand-binding sites of FcRI and bFc2R. Surprisingly, these sites were found to be located in the EC1 domains. FcRI and bFc2R are highly homologous both at the protein and nucleotide level (41 and 56% identity, respectively), but show much less homology with other human and bovine FcRs (7). This suggests that FcRI and bFc2R evolved from a common ancestral gene (also shared by KIR, ILT, MIR, LIR, LAIR-1, HM18, PIR, and gp49B1 genes) and not shared by other human or bovine FcRs (7). Mapping of the bFc2R gene to bovine chromosome 18, which corresponds to human chromosome 19, further supports this notion (35).

Our finding that the Ig-binding sites of both FcRI and bFc2R are located within their EC1 domains, was based on the fact that rosetting with Ig-coated beads was only seen for the corresponding FcRI or bFc2R EC1 chimera. In both cases, however, a reduction in binding activity was seen compared with that obtained for the wild-type receptors and for the comparable EC chimeras (Fig. 4). Although these differences in part may be attributed to the expression levels of individual constructs (especially for the bEC1-FcRI chimera, see above), it is also possible that the EC2 domains and membrane-proximal regions of the receptors contribute either directly (by forming "secondary" contact sites) or indirectly (by preserving three- dimensional structure) to the affinity and stability of the ligand interactions. This would be analogous to the activity of other two-domain FcRs, namely FcRII, FcRIII, and FcRI in which the ligand-binding sites are located in the membrane-proximal EC2 domains, whereas structures within the EC1 domains contribute to the binding process (29, 30).

It should also be noted that the region of hIgA interacting with FcRI has recently been mapped to the C2/ C3 boundary (36). This is in contrast to the region of human IgG responsible for interaction with FcRs, which is proposed to lie much closer to the hinge (30). Therefore, in terms of the evolution of Ig/FcR interactions, it should be interesting to map the region of bIgG2 that binds to bFc2R. Because recombinant bIgG2 is available, experiments can readily be designed to determine whether this region lies close to the hinge region as in human IgG or in a position analogous to that of hIgA (37).

To substantiate our observation that hIgA binds to the EC1 domain of FcRI, we mapped the epitopes for a panel of blocking and nonblocking FcRI mAbs that bound equally to the EC parts of wild-type FcRI and the hEC-Fc2R chimera. The nonblocking mAbs (A59, A62, A77, and 7D7) were shown to react with the membrane-proximal EC2 domain because they bound only to wild-type FcRI and the hEC-bFc2R, bEC1-FcRI, and bEC1^(1–50)-FcRI chimeras. The only exception was the nonblocking mAb A3 that bound only to wild-type FcRI and the hEC-bFc2R and bEC1^(1–50)-FcRI chimeras, suggesting that its epitope is conformational and depends on regions of both EC1 and EC2 (similar to the bFc2R mAb CC-G24; see Results section). In contrast, all blocking mAbs (My43, 2E6, 2D11, 7G4, and 2H8) were shown to react with the EC1 domain of FcRI because their binding activity was retained with the hEC1-bFc2R chimera. The epitopes recognized by My43 and 2D11 were further localized to the region of EC1 directly adjacent to EC2, because they were shown to bind the bEC1^(1–50)-FcRI chimera. 2E6 and 2H8 on the other hand, bound only weakly to this chimera, whereas 7G4 did not bind at all. Similar mapping studies with blocking mAbs have previously been used to localize the IgG-binding sites of FcRII and FcRIII to their EC2 domains (25, 27).

A number of FcRI mRNAs have been isolated and shown to encode splice variants of the receptor (38–41). One such report described cell surface expression of an FcRI variant that lacked the complete EC2 domain, and suggested the EC1 domain to be involved in hIgA binding (40). However, in contrast to our results, mAb My43 was proposed to react with EC2, and mAb A59 with EC1. We believe that observation to be spurious either due to incorrect cell surface expression of the splice variant and/or aberrant receptor structure caused by lack of the complete EC2 domain. This possibility was supported by our attempts to express various FcRI splice variants in COS cells with no success (38). Additionally, chimeras constructed between FcRI and FcRII were not expressed efficiently (Morton, H.C., and J.G.J. van de Winkel, unpublished observations), possibly reflecting a degree of structural incompatibility between these two FcRs. In fact, our unsuccessful experience with those approaches led us to construct chimeras between FcRI and bFc2R as reported here, because their levels of homology (and hence presumably their overall structure) are more similar than for other FcRs. Thus swapping of highly homologous regions should have minimal affect on the overall structural integrity of the resultant chimeras. Therefore, we feel that the present approach is more physiological than previous attempts to this end.

The surprising difference seen between the ligand-binding sites of FcRI and bFc2R versus those of other leukocyte FcRs and FcRI may have interesting implications in terms of Ig interactions. As mentioned above, this disparity could simply reflect the proposed evolution of FcRI and bFc2R from an ancestral gene distinct from that giving rise to other FcRs and FcRI. This notion is supported by the observation that residues within the membrane-distal domain of two KIR proteins determine their ability to bind to their respective ligands, the two groups of HLA-C allotypes (42). Moreover, due to their high levels of homology, the three-dimensional structure of FcRI and bFc2R might more closely resemble that of the KIR proteins than that of more distantly related FcRs (43). Indeed, more detailed mutational analysis, directed by modeling studies using the recently published three dimensional structure of the p58 KIR as a template for the protein backbones of FcRI and bFc2R, are currently underway in our laboratory to further localize the Ig-binding sites within these two receptors.

An alternative evolutionary explanation possibly applicable at least for FcRI might be that its ligand-binding site developed to ensure interaction with all molecular forms of IgA: monomeric IgA, dimeric IgA (including J chain), and secretory IgA (including J chain and secretory component). FcRI is reported to bind all these ligand variants (44, 45). Therefore, because the site of interaction with FcRI at the C2/C3 boundary appears to be accessible to the receptor in all these forms of IgA, FcRI could have evolved to accomplish this interaction via its EC1 domain to avoid potential problems of steric hindrance of a more membrane-proximal binding site in relation to large IgA polymers.

In conclusion, we have shown that the closely related FcRI and bFc2R bind their ligands via sites located in their membrane-proximal EC1 domains. The difference in the Ig-binding sites of these two receptors versus other leukocyte FcRs and FcRI, may reflect the proposed divergent evolutionary pathway from a distinct genetic precursor, or (at least in the case of FcRI) a specific adaptation for efficient interaction with large molecular forms of IgA.

	Acknowledgments

 
We would like to thank Drs. Li Shen for My43, Max Cooper for A62, and Charles Maliszewski and Immunex for FcRI cDNAs. We also gratefully acknowledge the technical staff of LIIPAT, specifically Bjørg Simonsen, Marie Johannesen, and Inger Johanne Ryen, for expert laboratory assistance. We further thank Gøril Olsen for help with cell sorting, and Dr. Finn-Eirik Johansen (LIIPAT) for helpful discussions and provision of the pCMV-GFP plasmid.

Submitted: 24 December 1998
Revised: 29 March 1999

Note added in proof. A recent report by Wines et al. (J. Immunol. 1999. 162:2146–2153) likewise identified the EC1 domain of FcRI to be responsible for ligand binding.

	References

Top Abstract Materials and Methods Results Discussion References

 

1 Ravetch JV & Kinet JP. Fc receptors, Annu Rev Immunol, 1991, 9, 457–492.[Medline]

2 Daeron M. Fc receptor biology, Annu Rev Immunol, 1997, 15, 203–234.[Medline]

3 Morton HC, van Egmond M & van de Winkel JG. Structure and function of human IgA Fc receptors (FcR), Crit Rev Immunol, 1996, 16, 423–440.[Medline]

4 Shen L. Receptors for IgA on phagocytic cells, Immunol Res, 1992, 11, 273–282.[Medline]

5 Monteiro RC, Kubagawa H & Cooper MD. Cellular distribution, regulation, and biochemical nature of an Fc receptor in humans, J Exp Med, 1990, 171, 597–613.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

6 Monteiro RC, Hostoffer RW, Cooper MD, Bonner JR, Gartland GL & Kubagawa H. Definition of immunoglobulin A receptors on eosinophils and their enhanced expression in allergic individuals, J Clin Invest, 1993, 92, 1681–1685.[Medline]

7 Zhang G, Young JR, Tregaskes CA, Sopp P & Howard CJ. Identification of a novel class of mammalian Fc receptor, J Immunol, 1995, 155, 1534–1541.[Abstract]

8 Dupont B, Selvakumar A & Steffens U. The killer cell inhibitory receptor genomic region on human chromosome 19q13.4, Tissue Antigens, 1997, 49, 557–563.[Medline]

9 Samaridis J & Colonna M. Cloning of novel immunoglobulin superfamily receptors expressed on human myeloid and lymphoid cells: structural evidence for new stimulatory and inhibitory pathways, Eur J Immunol, 1997, 27, 660–665.[Medline]

10 Cosman D, Fanger N, Borges L, Kubin M, Chin W, Peterson L & Hsu ML. A novel immunoglobulin superfamily receptor for cellular and viral MHC class I molecules, Immunity, 1997, 7, 273–282.[Medline]

11 Borges L, Hsu ML, Fanger N, Kubin M & Cosman D. A family of human lymphoid and myeloid Ig-like receptors, some of which bind to MHC class I molecules, J Immunol, 1997, 159, 5192–5196.[Abstract]

12 Arm JP, Nwankwo C & Austen KF. Molecular identification of a novel family of human Ig superfamily members that possess immunoreceptor tyrosine-based inhibition motifs and homology to the mouse gp49B1 inhibitory receptor, J Immunol, 1997, 159, 2342–2349.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

13 Wagtmann N, Rojo S, Eichler E, Mohrenweiser H & Long EO. A new human gene complex encoding the killer cell inhibitory receptors and related monocyte/macrophage receptors, Curr Biol, 1997, 7, 615–618.[Medline]

14 Kremer EJ, Kalatzis V, Baker E, Callen DF, Sutherland GR & Maliszewski CR. The gene for the human IgA Fc receptor maps to 19q13.4, Hum Genet, 1992, 89, 107–108.[Medline]

15 Wilson M, Torkar M & Trowsdale J. The leukocyte receptor complex on human chromosome 19q13.4, Immunology, 1997, 92, 75, . (Abstr.), .[Medline]

16 Arm JP, Gurish MF, Reynolds DS, Scott HC, Gartner CS, Austen KF & Katz HR. Molecular cloning of gp49, a cell-surface antigen that is preferentially expressed by mouse mast cell progenitors and is a new member of the immunoglobulin superfamily, J Biol Chem, 1991, 266, 15966–15973.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

17 Wang LL, Mehta IK, LeBlanc PA & Yokoyama WM. Mouse natural killer cells express gp49B1, a structural homologue of human killer inhibitory receptors, J Immunol, 1997, 158, 13–17.[Abstract]

18 Kubagawa H, Burrows PD & Cooper MD. A novel pair of immunoglobulin-like receptors expressed by B cells and myeloid cells, Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 1997, 94, 5261–5266.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

19 Maliszewski CR, March CJ, Schoenborn MA, Gimpel S & Shen L. Expression cloning of a human Fc receptor for IgA, J Exp Med, 1990, 172, 1665–1672.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

20 Pfefferkorn LC & Yeaman GR. Association of IgA-Fc receptors (FcR) with FcRI 2 subunits in U937 cells. Aggregation induces the tyrosine phosphorylation of 2, J Immunol, 1994, 153, 3228–3236.[Abstract]

21 Morton HC, van den Herik-Oudijk IE, Vossebeld P, Snijders A, Verhoeven AJ, Capel PJ & van de Winkel JG. Functional association between the human myeloid immunoglobulin A Fc receptor (CD89) and FcR chain. Molecular basis for CD89/FcR chain association, J Biol Chem, 1995, 270, 29781–29787.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

22 Saito K, Suzuki K, Matsuda H, Okumura K & Ra C. Physical association of Fc receptor chain homodimer with IgA receptor, J Allergy Clin Immunol, 1995, 96, 1152–1160.[Medline]

23 Reterink TJ, van Zandbergen G, van Egmond M, Klar-Mohamad N, Morton HC, van de Winkel JG & Daha MR. Size-dependent effect of IgA on the IgA Fc receptor (CD89), Eur J Immunol, 1997, 27, 2219–2224.[Medline]

24 Hulett MD, McKenzie IF & Hogarth PM. Chimeric Fc receptors identify immunoglobulin-binding regions in human FcRII and FcRI, Eur J Immunol, 1993, 23, 640–645.[Medline]

25 Ierino FL, Hulett MD, McKenzie IF & Hogarth PM. Mapping epitopes of human FcRII (CDw32) with monoclonal antibodies and recombinant receptors, J Immunol, 1993, 150, 1794–1803.[Abstract]

26 Hulett MD, Witort E, Brinkworth RI, McKenzie IF & Hogarth PM. Multiple regions of human FcRII (CD32) contribute to the binding of IgG, J Biol Chem, 1995, 270, 21188–21194.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

27 Tamm A & Schmidt RE. The binding epitopes of human CD16 (FcRIII) monoclonal antibodies. Implications for ligand binding, J Immunol, 1996, 157, 1576–1581.[Abstract]

28 Tamm A, Kister A, Nolte KU, Gessner JE & Schmidt RE. The IgG binding site of human FcRIIIB receptor involves CC' and FG loops of the membrane-proximal domain, J Biol Chem, 1996, 271, 3659–3666.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

29 Hulett MD & Hogarth PM. Molecular basis of Fc receptor function, Adv Immunol, 1994, 57, 1–127.[Medline]

30 Raghavan M & Bjorkman PJ. Fc receptors and their interactions with immunoglobulins, Annu Rev Cell Dev Biol, 1996, 12, 181–220.[Medline]

31 Maliszewski CR, VandenBos T, Shen L, Schoenborn MA, Kubagawa H, Beckmann MP & Monteiro RC. Recombinant soluble IgA Fc receptor: generation, biochemical characterization, and functional analysis of the recombinant protein, J Leukocyte Biol, 1993, 53, 223–232.[Abstract]

32 Brandtzaeg P, Fjellanger I & Gjeruldsen ST. Human secretory immunoglobulins. I. Salivary secretions from individuals with normal or low levels of serum immunoglobulins, Scand J Haematol Suppl, 1970, 12, 3–83.[Medline]

33 Shen L, Lasser R & Fanger MW. My 43, a monoclonal antibody that reacts with human myeloid cells inhibits monocyte IgA binding and triggers function, J Immunol, 1989, 143, 4117–4122.[Abstract]

34 Monteiro RC, Cooper MD & Kubagawa H. Molecular heterogeneity of Fc receptors detected by receptor-specific monoclonal antibodies, J Immunol, 1992, 148, 1764–1770.[Abstract]

35 Klungland H, Vage DI & Lien S. Linkage mapping of the Fc2 receptor gene to bovine chromosome 18, Mamm Genome, 1997, 8, 300–301.[Medline]

36 Carayannopoulos L, Hexham JM & Capra JD. Localization of the binding site for the monocyte immunoglobulin (Ig) A Fc receptor (CD89) to the domain boundary between C2 and C3 in human IgA1, J Exp Med, 1996, 183, 1579–1586.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

37 Knight KL, Suter M & Becker RS. Genetic engineering of bovine Ig. Construction and characterization of hapten-binding bovine/murine chimeric IgE, IgA, IgG1, IgG2, and IgG3 molecules, J Immunol, 1988, 140, 3654–3659.[Abstract]

38 Morton HC, Schiel AE, Janssen SW & van de Winkel JG. Alternatively spliced forms of the human myeloid Fc receptor (CD89) in neutrophils, Immunogenetics, 1996, 43, 246–247.[Medline]

39 Patry C, Sibille Y, Lehuen A & Monteiro RC. Identification of Fc receptor (CD89) isoforms generated by alternative splicing that are differentially expressed between blood monocytes and alveolar macrophages, J Immunol, 1996, 156, 4442–4448.[Abstract]

40 Pleass RJ, Andrews PD, Kerr MA & Woof JM. Alternative splicing of the human IgA Fc receptor CD89 in neutrophils and eosinophils, Biochem J, 1996, 318, 771–777.[Medline]

41 Toyabe S, Kuwano Y, Takeda K, Uchiyama M & Abo T. IgA nephropathy-specific expression of the IgA Fc receptors (CD89) on blood phagocytic cells, Clin Exp Immunol, 1997, 110, 226–232.[Medline]

42 Winter CC & Long EO. A single amino acid in the p58 killer cell inhibitory receptor controls the ability of natural killer cells to discriminate between the two groups of HLA-C allotypes, J Immunol, 1997, 158, 4026–4028.[Abstract]

43 Fan QR, Mosyak L, Winter CC, Wagtmann N, Long EO & Wiley DC. Structure of the inhibitory receptor for human natural killer cells resembles haematopoietic receptors, Nature, 1997, 389, 96–100.[Medline]

44 Kerr MA. The structure and function of human IgA, Biochem J, 1990, 271, 285–296.[Medline]

45 van Zandbergen G, van Kooten C, Mohamad NK, Reterink TJ, de Fijter JW, van de Winkel JG & Daha MR. Reduced binding of immunoglobulin A (IgA) from patients with primary IgA nephropathy to the myeloid IgA Fc-receptor, CD89, Nephrol Dial Transplant, 1998, 13, 3058–3064.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

CiteULike

Complore

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Facebook

Reddit

Technorati

Twitter

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF, 126K) PPT slides of all figures Alert me when this article is cited Citation Map Services Email this article Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new content in the JEM Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Craig Morton, H. Articles by Brandtzaeg, P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Craig Morton, H. Articles by Brandtzaeg, P. Social Bookmarking                            What's this?