Article19 February 2004free access Integration of TGF-β/Smad and Jagged1/Notch signalling in epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition Jiri Zavadil Jiri Zavadil Department of Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USACurrent address: New York University Cancer Institute, 400 East 34th Street, New York, NY 10016, USA Search for more papers by this author Lukas Cermak Lukas Cermak Department of Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA Institute of Molecular Genetics, Czech Academy of Sciences, Videnska, Prague, Czech Republic Search for more papers by this author Noemi Soto-Nieves Noemi Soto-Nieves Department of Molecular Genetics, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA Search for more papers by this author Erwin P Böttinger Corresponding Author Erwin P Böttinger Department of Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA Department of Molecular Genetics, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA Search for more papers by this author Jiri Zavadil Jiri Zavadil Department of Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USACurrent address: New York University Cancer Institute, 400 East 34th Street, New York, NY 10016, USA Search for more papers by this author Lukas Cermak Lukas Cermak Department of Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA Institute of Molecular Genetics, Czech Academy of Sciences, Videnska, Prague, Czech Republic Search for more papers by this author Noemi Soto-Nieves Noemi Soto-Nieves Department of Molecular Genetics, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA Search for more papers by this author Erwin P Böttinger Corresponding Author Erwin P Böttinger Department of Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA Department of Molecular Genetics, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA Search for more papers by this author Author Information Jiri Zavadil1,‡, Lukas Cermak1,2,‡, Noemi Soto-Nieves3 and Erwin P Böttinger 1,3 1Department of Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA 2Institute of Molecular Genetics, Czech Academy of Sciences, Videnska, Prague, Czech Republic 3Department of Molecular Genetics, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA ‡These authors contributed equally to this work *Corresponding author. Department of Medicine, Mount Sinai Medical Center, One Gustave L. Levy Place, Box 1118, New York, NY 10029, USA. Tel.: +1 212 659 8242; Fax: +1 212 876 5844; E-mail: [email protected] The EMBO Journal (2004)23:1155-1165https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.emboj.7600069 Current address: New York University Cancer Institute, 400 East 34th Street, New York, NY 10016, USA PDFDownload PDF of article text and main figures. ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinked InMendeleyWechatReddit Figures & Info Epithelial-to-mesenchymal transitions (EMTs) underlie cell plasticity required in embryonic development and frequently observed in advanced carcinogenesis. Transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β) induces EMT phenotypes in epithelial cells in vitro and has been associated with EMT in vivo. Here we report that expression of the hairy/enhancer-of-split-related transcriptional repressor Hey1, and the Notch-ligand Jagged1 (Jag1), was induced by TGF-β at the onset of EMT in epithelial cells from mammary gland, kidney tubules, and epidermis. The HEY1 expression profile was biphasic, consisting of immediate-early Smad3-dependent, Jagged1/Notch-independent activation, followed by delayed, indirect Jagged1/Notch-dependent activation. TGF-β-induced EMT was blocked by RNA silencing of HEY1 or JAG1, and by chemical inactivation of Notch. The EMT phenotype, biphasic activation of Hey1, and delayed expression of Jag1 were induced by TGF-β in wild-type, but not in Smad3-deficient, primary mouse kidney tubular epithelial cells. Our findings identify a new mechanism for functional integration of Jagged1/Notch signalling and coordinated activation of the Hey1 transcriptional repressor controlled by TGF-β/Smad3, and demonstrate functional roles for Smad3, Hey1, and Jagged1/Notch in mediating TGF-β-induced EMT. Introduction During embryogenesis, epithelial cell layers undergo epithelial-to-mesenchymal transitions (EMTs) characterized by disassembly of cell–cell contacts, reorganization of actin cytoskeleton, and cell–cell separation resulting in fibroblast-like cells with mesenchymal marker expression and migratory properties (Hay, 1995). Extracellular cues, including cell adhesion molecules and growth factors, have been shown to induce various phenotypic aspects of EMT in vitro and in vivo (reviewed in Thiery, 2002). In addition, members of the transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β) superfamily have been identified as important inducers of EMT in cardiac, palatal and hair follicle development, and in cutaneous wound repair (Sanford et al, 1997; Sun et al, 1998; Romano and Runyan, 2000; Camenisch et al, 2002). Importantly, the metastatic potential of certain carcinomas is associated with cooperative signalling by activated Ras and autocrine TGF-β inducing an irreversible EMT phenotype (Janda et al, 2002). Members of the TGF-β superfamily are multifunctional cytokines that control cell fates, including cell cycle arrest, differentiation, and apoptosis (Roberts and Sporn, 1990). TGF-β signals through complexes of heteromeric transmembrane type I (TbRI) and type II (TbRII) receptors (Massague, 2000), activating Smad2 and/or Smad3, two signalling mediators of the SMAD protein family (Heldin et al, 1997; Hoodless and Wrana, 1998), which associate with the shared partner Smad4 and translocate to the nucleus. Nuclear SMAD protein complexes bind specific DNA sequence motifs and participate in transcriptional regulation of target genes (Derynck et al, 1998; Yang et al, 2003). TGF-β controls a context-dependent spectrum of epithelial cell plasticity, ranging from cell scattering phenotypes to partial and reversible EMT, or complete and persistent EMT, in nontransformed epithelial cells, indicating an important role for TGF-β-dependent signals in inducing EMT phenotypes. Extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK), p38 mitogen-activated protein kinases (MAPKs), phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K), RhoA and Rac1 small GTPases, and Smads have all been implicated as mediators of some or all phenotypic aspects of TGF-β-induced EMT (Miettinen et al, 1994; Piek et al, 1999; Bakin et al, 2000; Bhowmick et al, 2001; Zavadil et al, 2001). Zinc-finger transcriptional repressors Snail and Slug, and the two-handed E-box-binding zinc-finger protein SIP1 are targets of TGF-β signalling (Romano and Runyan, 2000; Comijn et al, 2001; Zavadil et al, 2001) with putative roles in EMT (Nieto, 2002). These findings together emphasize our currently incomplete understanding of the complexity of TGF-β signalling in orchestrating EMT phenotypes. We have previously reported that TGF-β induction of an EMT phenotype in cultured human keratinocytes was associated with early upregulation of components and target genes of Notch receptor signalling, including transcriptional repressors related to Drosophila hairy and enhancer-of-split (H/E(spl)) proteins (Zavadil et al, 2001). Binding of transmembrane Notch receptors with membrane-bound ligands of the Delta, Serrate/Jagged, or Caenorhabditis elegans Lag-2 (DSL) family initiates proteolytic processing of Notch receptors mediated by accessory protein complexes and γ-secretase activity, followed by nuclear translocation of the intracellular domain of Notch (NICD) (Mumm and Kopan, 2000). Activation (derepression) of Notch target genes involves NICD binding with constitutive repressor complexes anchored at CBF-1-binding elements, converting them into transcriptional activator complexes. The basic helix–loop–helix (bHLH) DNA-binding transcriptional repressors of the H/E(Spl) protein family are direct targets of Notch. To date, H/E(Spl) proteins have not been implicated in EMT and/or TGF-β signalling. Although both TGF-β/Smad and Notch pathways are widely involved in cell fate decisions in development and pathobiology, functional and molecular interactions of these pathways have not been reported to date. Here we report a new signalling mechanism involved in EMT activated by TGF-β. We show that TGF-β stimulates two kinetically coordinated waves of expression of Hey1. Immediate-early activation of Hey1 by TGF-β is mediated directly by Smad3/4 binding at distinct Smad-binding element core repeats (SCRs) in their distal promoter regions and does not require Notch signalling. The immediate-early activation cycle is followed by a second cycle of gene activation that requires classical Notch-dependent signalling, which is activated by TGF-β through Smad3- and ERK MAPK-dependent synthesis of Jagged1. When either Hey1, Jagged1, Notch, or Smad3 is inactivated, TGF-β fails to induce key EMT phenotypes, including disassembly of E-cadherin adherens junctions, disassembly of cortical actin, and cell–cell separation. Our results suggest that functional integration of TGF-β and Notch pathways is mediated by Smad3/ERK MAPK-dependent synthesis of Jagged1 and has important roles in regulation of epithelial cell plasticity by TGF-β. Results The Notch-regulated transcriptional repressor Hey1 is a new direct target gene of TGF-β/Smad signalling in epithelial cells Our previous work indicated a potential role for Notch and Notch target genes of the H/E(spl) family of bHLH transcriptional repressors in TGF-β-induced EMT (Zavadil et al, 2001). Here we found that TGF-β induced expression of the H/E(spl) gene Hey1 in established cell culture models of TGF-β-induced EMT (Figure 1A), including normal murine mammary gland epithelial cells (NMuMGs), kidney proximal tubular epithelial (HK-2), and distal tubular epithelial cell lines Madin–Darby Canine Kidney (MDCK). Induction was RNA synthesis dependent and protein synthesis independent (data not shown), indicating that Hey1 is a new immediate-early target gene of TGF-β. Consistent with mRNA expression, Hey1 protein synthesis was induced upon stimulation by TGF-β (Figure 1B). Figure 1.HEY1 is a direct target gene of TGF-β/Smad signalling. (A) Bar graphs show averages of relative HEY1 mRNA abundance determined by quantitative RT-PCR analysis in keratinocytes (HaCaT), mouse mammary gland epithelial cells (NMuMG), human kidney proximal tubular epithelial cells (HK-2), and canine kidney distal tubular epithelial cell line (MDCK). (B) Immunoblots show HEY1 and C-terminally phosphorylated Smad2 p-Smad2 proteins in keratinocytes stimulated with TGF-β. PARP, loading control. (C) Bars show average (N=3) fold induction by TGF-β of relative luciferase units (RLUs) in keratinocytes transfected with reporter constructs of human HEY1 promoter deletions (full-length FL, M7 to M1). (▿) positions of SCRs; (*) positions of NICD-responsive CBEs. (D) Bars indicate average (N=3) fold induction by TGF-β of luciferase activity (RLU) in keratinocytes cotransfected with luciferase reporter constructs (FL-HEY1, M7 HEY1, or 3TPLux) and plasmids expressing dominant-negative mutants of type II TGF-β receptor (dnTbRII), Smad2, 3 and 4 (dn Smad2, 3 and 4), or NICD. p3TPlux, positive control for TGF-β/Smad; NICD, positive control for activation of CBE sites. Download figure Download PowerPoint To investigate molecular mechanisms of HEY1 activation by TGF-β, we isolated a 3.9 kb fragment of the 5′ flanking region of human HEY1 and tested its response to TGF-β in transiently transfected keratinocytes using a luciferase reporter construct. We observed a significant ∼3-fold increase in luciferase activity upon TGF-β treatment (Figure 1C). Sequence analysis of the HEY1 promoter identified five putative consensus binding elements for Smad3/Smad4 (Dennler et al, 1998). Four of the Smad-binding elements (SBE) were arranged in two GTCTnGTCT repeats at positions −2681 (proximal) and −3005 (distal) relative to the translation initiation codon (Figure 1C). Such SCRs have been shown to mediate high-affinity binding of Smad3/Smad4 protein complexes (von Gersdorff et al, 2000), and are characteristic elements of TGF-β-responsive immediate-early genes (Yang et al, 2003). We used a series of HEY1 promoter deletion constructs to confirm that promoter fragments containing both proximal and distal SCRs were required for the activation by TGF-β signals, while constructs lacking the SCRs (M1–M5) were unresponsive (Figure 1C). Dominant-negative mutant interference with TGF-β signals by cotransfection with expression plasmids for either TβRII-DN-K277R, Smad3Δexon8, or Smad4ΔM4 reduced the TGF-β-inducible activity of HEY1 full-length (FL) or M7 reporter constructs to baseline levels, while Smad2 3S → A had a partial effect (Figure 1D). These results indicate that key components of the TGF-β/Smad pathway were required for induction of the HEY1 promoter. Two Notch-responsive CBEs are located in the proximal part of the promoter in constructs FL, M2–M7 while construct M1 contains only a proximal CBE (Figure 1C). When the reporter constructs were cotransfected with a construct expressing active Notch intracellular domain (NICD), all promoter fragments except for M1 were sufficient to mediate induction of luciferase activity by NICD (data not shown). TGF-β/Smad and Notch signals thus use physically distinct promoter regions to activate HEY1. TGF-β induces rapid and transient binding of endogenous Smad3/Smad4 complexes at SCRs in the HEY1 promoter In vivo binding of endogenous Smad3- and Smad4-containing complexes with both HEY1 promoter SCRs at positions −2681 and −3005, respectively, was analyzed by chromatin immunoprecipitation with anti-Smad3 and anti-Smad4 antibodies, followed by quantitative PCR analysis of the SCR loci (ChIP–QPCR). TGF-β induced rapid and transient increases of SCR binding with Smad3/Smad4-containing complexes (Figure 2A). In contrast, we could not detect TGF-β-inducible SCR binding of endogenous Smad2 (data not shown). To confirm our in vivo results, conventional electrophoretic mobility shift assays (EMSAs) and antibody interference studies also demonstrated TGF-β-induced binding of Smad3-containing protein complexes to synthetic oligonucleotide probes containing either the distal or the proximal HEY1 SCR (Figure 2B). Together, these experiments define two separate TGF-β-inducible, Smad3/4 response elements at positions −3005 and −2681 bp relative to the translation initiation site of the human HEY1 gene. Figure 2.TGF-β induces rapid in vivo binding of endogenous Smad3/Smad4 protein complexes with SCR elements in the HEY1 promoter. (A) Bar graphs show the relative amount of distal HEY1 SCR (−3005 bp), or proximal SCR (−2681 bp), respectively, determined by quantitative, sequence-specific PCR that is bound with immunoprecipitated Smad3 (black bars) or Smad4 (gray bars) in untreated keratinocytes (time 0 h; baseline unit set at 1) and TGF-β-treated keratinocytes. (B) EMSAs demonstrate binding of oligonucleotide probes containing the distal (−3005) SCR or proximal (−2681) SCR, respectively, and nuclear protein extracts from keratinocytes left untreated (−) or treated with TGF-β (+) for 0.5 and 1 h. Specific DNA-binding protein complexes are depicted by block arrowheads, and are supershifted by preincubation with anti-Smad3 antibody (open arrowhead). Download figure Download PowerPoint Notch receptor activation and function is not required for Smad3/4-dependent, immediate-early induction of HEY1 by TGF-β To investigate whether TGF-β/Smad3 and Notch pathways may cooperate in the immediate-early induction of HEY1, we examined classical features of Notch receptor signalling. Chemical inhibition (GSI) of γ-secretase activity, typically required for proteolytic activation of Notch (Mumm and Kopan, 2000), did not block induction of HEY1 by TGF-β (Figure 3A). We did not detect nuclear accumulation of transcriptionally active NICD within 60 min of TGF-β treatment (Figures 3B and 5B). TGF-β had no effect on the constitutive CBF-1 protein complex binding with oligonucleotide probes containing proximal (Figure 3C) or distal CBE sites of the HEY1 promoter, respectively. Furthermore, the level of 300 kDa transmembrane form of Notch1, as assessed by immunoblotting, was unchanged within the first hour of TGF-β treatment (see Figure 5B). Together, our results indicate that Notch receptor function was not required for the immediate-early activation of HEY1 mediated by Smad3/4 in TGF-β-treated HaCaT cells. Figure 3.Activation of the Notch receptor is not involved in TGF-β induction of HEY1. (A) Histograms show the relative abundance of HEY1 mRNA expression as determined by quantitative RT-PCR in keratinocytes treated with TGF-β in the absence or presence of γ-secretase inhibitor GSI. (B) Immunoblot showing NICD in nuclear and cytoplasmic protein fractions of keratinocytes treated with TGF-β. PARP (poly-α-ADP-ribosyltransferase) and TUBB (tubulin β) demonstrate purity of cytoplasmic and nuclear protein lysate fractions, respectively. (C) EMSA demonstrates binding of CBF-1 protein complex with oligonucleotide probe containing the distal CBE of the HEY1 promoter (lanes 1–5). Lanes 6 and 7: EMSA using mutated CBE oligonucleotide probe (CBEmut) with single bp exchange (cgtggGaaa → cgtggCaaa). Lanes 8 and 9: EMSA using probe containing the distal (−3005 bp) HEY1 SCR sequence (HEY1 distal SCR) demonstrates TGF-β-inducible Smad protein complexes. Download figure Download PowerPoint Disassembly of E-cadherin adherens junctions, cell–cell separation, and cell motility induced by TGF-β in keratinocytes require HEY1 function We used antisense oligonucleotides to inactivate HEY1 function. HEY1 induction by TGF-β at 1 h was significantly reduced in antisense oligotransfected, but not in sense oligotransfected, cells (Figure 4A). In confluent keratinocyte cultures transfected with control sense oligonucleotide, TGF-β treatment for 24 h induced typical features of EMT, including disassembly and disappearance of E-cadherin adherens junctions, cell–cell separation, and conversion to fibroblastoid cell morphology (Figure 4B). In contrast, transfection of HEY1 antisense oligonucleotide blocked these manifestations of TGF-β-induced EMT as monitored after 24 h (Figure 4B). In addition, transfection of HEY1 antisense, but not sense oligonucleotide, significantly reduced TGF-β-induced cell motility associated with EMT at 24 and 48 h (Figure 4C), as measured by in vitro scratch-wound assays. These results demonstrate that activation of HEY1 by TGF-β/Smad3 is required for TGF-β-induced EMT phenotype manifestations and cell motility in human keratinocytes. Figure 4.HEY1 is required for EMT and cell motility induced by TGF-β in keratinocytes. (A) Histograms show the relative abundance of HEY1 mRNA after treatment with TGF-β in keratinocytes transfected with the control S (sense) and AS (antisense) oligonucleotides, respectively. (B) In vitro scratch-wound assay of the cells transfected with S and AS oligonucleotide and stimulated by TGF-β for 24 h and immunostained for E-cadherin (white staining). The empty space right of the white line indicates the wound area. The arrow depicts E-cadherin-positive cell adherens junctions in untreated cells, and the arrowhead indicates loss of E-cadherin-positive adherens junctions in TGF-β-treated cells. (C) Histograms indicate the average coverage of scratch wound widths in % relative to baseline wound width (0 h) at 24 and 48 h after TGF-β treatment in keratinocyte cultures transfected with S (gray bars) or AS (open bars) oligonucleotides. Significance of the motility change was determined by Student's t-test. Wound width coverage at 24 and 48 h in untreated control cells was not significantly different from baseline (not shown). Download figure Download PowerPoint Figure 5.Jagged1-induced Notch receptor activation initiates a second, delayed activation of HEY1. (A) Histograms show the mean of relative mRNA abundance determined by quantitative RT-PCR of Notch ligand JAGGED1 in response to TGF-β in epithelial cells (N=3). (B) Immunoblotting depicts JAGGED1 protein, intact 300 kDa transmembrane form (Notch1tm) of Notch in the absence or presence of γ-secretase inhibitor GSI, and nuclear accumulation of NICD (NICDnuc) in the absence or presence of GSI in TGF-β-treated keratinocytes. (C) Bar graphs indicate the relative abundance of HEY1 mRNA as determined by quantitative RT-PCR analysis in keratinocytes treated with TGF-β in the absence or presence of GSI. (D) Histogram shows RLUs in keratinocytes transfected with reporter constructs containing proximal human and mouse HEY1 promoter fragments, as indicated, after TGF-β stimulation (N=3). (E) Left histogram: Bars indicate a representative experiment showing the relative abundance of JAGGED1 mRNA determined by quantitative RT-PCR in keratinocytes, either control transfected (mock) or transfected with anti-JAGGED1 siRNA (anti-JAG1 siRNA). Right histogram: Bars show the mean relative abundance of HEY1 mRNA at 4 and 6 h after TGF-β treatment in untransfected keratinocytes (no TF), control-transfected keratinocytes (mock), control-transfected keratinocytes pretreated with GSI (GSI), or in anti-JAGGED1 siRNA-transfected keratinocytes (anti-JAG1 siRNA). Download figure Download PowerPoint TGF-β induces delayed Jagged1 synthesis to activate kinetically coordinated Notch signalling required for a second, delayed phase of HEY1 induction We reported previously that stimulation of HaCaT keratinocytes with TGF-β indirectly activates ERK MAPK between 1 and 2 h, and that ERK function was required for delayed induction of the Notch ligand JAG1 after 2 h of TGF-β treatment (Zavadil et al, 2001). Here we show that TGF-β increased the expression of Jagged1 mRNA between 2 and 6 h in all four epithelial cell lines examined (Figure 5A). Moreover, TGF-β treatment strongly induced Jagged1 protein levels beginning at 2 h in keratinocytes. Jagged1 expression was associated with a dramatic decrease of the levels of intact 300 kDa transmembrane Notch protein (Notchtm) and accumulation of NICD in the nucleus (NICDnuc) by 4 h (Figure 5B). The reduction of transmembrane Notch protein and the accumulation of NICD in the nucleus were prevented by chemical inhibitor of γ-secretase activity, suggesting that classical Notch receptor activation was associated with increased Jagged1 synthesis induced by TGF-β. As Notch is known to activate transcription of several H/E(spl) genes directly, including Hey1 (Nakagawa et al, 2000), we examined the expression of HEY1 mRNA over an extended time period (0–8 h) of TGF-β stimulation. The immediate-early, TGF-β/Smad-dependent wave of activation (1–3 h) was followed by a second, delayed induction wave of HEY1 (5–8 h) (Figure 4C). Inhibition of γ-secretase had no effect on the immediate-early activation, but completely blocked the delayed induction of HEY1 mRNA (Figure 4C), indicating that it was mediated by Notch receptor activation. Interestingly, we observed that TGF-β induced biphasic activation profiles of additional H/E(spl) genes HEY2, HES1, and HES5, similar to HEY1 (Supplementary Data Figure S1). Immediate-early regulation of all four TGF-β-induced H/E(spl) genes was Notch independent and associated with inducible Smad3/Smad4 protein complex binding at SCR Smad complex response elements conserved in their promoters (Supplementary Data Figure S2). Similar to HEY1, a delayed activation phase of HEY2, HES1, and HES5 with peak activation between 5 and 8 h was either completely blocked (HEY2, HES5) or diminished (HES1) by GSI γ-secretase inhibitor (Supplementary Data Figure S1). In addition, the delayed Jagged1-mediated activation of Notch was associated with activation of Notch/NICD-responsive and TGF-β/Smad-unresponsive HEY1 promoter regions, as assayed by luciferase reporter assays in cells transfected with luciferase reporter constructs M3 HEY1 (human) and mLucHey (mouse) (Maier and Gessler, 2000) (Figure 5D). Together, these results indicate that delayed activation of Notch by TGF-β leads to classical NICD signalling and transcriptional activation of a broader complement of classical Notch target genes. To examine directly whether Jagged1 was required for the delayed, Notch-dependent induction wave of HEY1, we used RNA interference to silence TGF-β-inducible Jagged1 expression. We confirmed that anti-Jagged1 short-interfering RNA (siRNA) blocked induction of Jagged1 mRNA synthesis by TGF-β (Figure 5E). The delayed increase of HEY1 mRNA observed at 6 h after TGF-β treatment in untransfected and control oligo (Mock)-transfected cells was completely blocked in cells transfected with anti-Jagged1 siRNA (Figure 5E), similar to cells pretreated with γ-secretase inhibitor (Figure 5E). Taken together, our results demonstrate that TGF-β stimulates two kinetically coordinated waves of activation of HEY1. Immediate-early activation of HEY1 by TGF-β is mediated directly by Smad3/4 binding at two distinct SCR sequences in the distal HEY1 promoter region and does not require Notch signalling. The Smad-dependent, Notch-independent immediate-early activation is followed by a second wave of HEY1 activation mediated by classical Notch-dependent signalling induced through indirect and delayed induction of Jagged1 synthesis by TGF-β. Functional inactivation of Jagged1 or Notch inhibits disassembly of E-cadherin adherens junctions and cell–cell separation induced by TGF-β Next, we examined the effects of Jagged1 silencing on EMT phenotypes. In cells transfected with control siRNA, disassembly of E-cadherin adherens junctions and cortical actin bundles, cell–cell separations, and stress fiber formation were induced by TGF-β within 24 h (Figure 6A). In contrast, cells transfected with anti-Jagged1 siRNA retained epithelial morphology and cells failed to separate, although E-cadherin adherens junctions appeared widened, and limited stress fiber formation was detectable (bottom row panels) when compared with untreated, control-transfected cells (upper row panels) (Figure 6A). To further delineate the timeframe for functional requirement of Jagged1-induced Notch signalling in EMT, we used timed pharmacological inhibition of γ-secretase activity (Figure 5). When γ-secretase inhibitor GSI was applied before or, up to 7 h, after treatment with TGF-β, the cells retained epithelial morphology during TGF-β exposure while some stress fiber formation was observed (Figure 6B), similar to cells transfected with anti-Jagged1 siRNA (Figure 6A). In contrast, addition of the inhibitor at 8 h or later time points failed to prevent TGF-β-induced EMT (not shown). Thus, the timeframe for functional requirement of Notch signalling in TGF-β-induced EMT phenotypes coincided with the delayed phase of Jagged1- and γ-secretase-dependent synthesis of HEY1. These results demonstrate that the TGF-β-induced Jagged1-dependent activation of Notch signalling is required for disassembly of E-cadherin adherens junctions and cortical actin bundles, and for cell–cell separation induced by TGF-β in keratinocytes. Figure 6.Jagged1 and Notch activation is required for TGF-β-induced EMT. (A) Immunofluorescence labelling for E-cadherin (red), F-actin (green), or both merged with nuclear DAPI staining, as indicated, of control-transfected, untreated (no TGF-β, control siRNA), or TGF-β-treated (+TGF-β, control siRNA) keratinocytes, and keratinocytes transfected with anti-JAGGED1 siRNA and treated with TGF-β (+TGF-β, anti-JAG1 siRNA). Immunostaining assays were performed 24 h after TGF-β induction. Open arrowheads show E-cadherin-positive adherens junctions and cortical actin bundles, respectively. White arrowheads depict widened E-cadherin-positive adherens junctions. Arrows denote actin stress fibers. (B) Experiments shown as in (A) in untransfected keratinocytes treated with TGF-β in the absence or presence of γ-secretase inhibitor (GSI) added either within 0–7 h of TGF-β treatment (+GSI before 7 h) or after 7 h (+GSI after 7 h). Download figure Download PowerPoint Smad3 is required for induction of Snail family repressors, Hey1, and Jagged1 expression by TGF-β, and is essential for TGF-β-induced EMT phenotypes in primary mouse kidney tubular epithelial cells To examine the role of Smad proteins in TGF-β signalling in EMT, we established primary tubular epithelial cell cultures (mTEC) from mice with homozygous deletion of Smad3 (Smad3Δex8/Δex8) and wild-type control littermates (Yang et al, 1999). Quantitative real-time PCR (RT-PCR) analysis confirmed that Smad3 mRNA was present in wild-type (mTEC WT) control cells, but not detectable in Smad3 knockout (mTEC S3KO) (Figure 7A). Please note that mTEC S3KO appeared on average larger than mTEC WT. TGF-β strongly induced a biphasic pattern of Hey1 mRNA expression in mTEC WT, including an immediate-early induction (1–3 h) and a delayed induction (5–7 h) (Figure 7B). In contrast, both phases of Hey1 induction were dramatically reduced in mTEC S3KO (Figure 7B). Compared with a progressive and sustained increase of Jagged1 mRNA in mTEC WT after 2 h of TGF-β stimulation, induction of Jagged1 mRNA levels was significantly lower and not sustained in mTEC S3KO (Figure 7C). Next, we analyzed patterns of E-cadherin and actin cytoskeleton in mTEC WT and mTEC S3KO in response to TGF-β. E-cadherin and cortical actin patterns were characteristic of epithelial cell phenotype in untreated mTEC WT and mTEC S3KO cultures (Figure 7D). TGF-β treatment induced disassembly of E-cadherin adherens junctions and cortical a