A prominent pathway of transforming growth factor (TGF)-β signaling involves receptor-dependent phosphorylation of Smad2 and Smad3, which then translocate to the nucleus to activate transcription of target genes. To investigate the relative importance of these two Smad proteins in TGF-β1 signal transduction, we have utilized a loss of function approach, based on analysis of the effects of TGF-β1 on fibroblasts derived from mouse embryos deficient in Smad2 (S2KO) or Smad3 (S3KO). TGF-β1 caused 50% inhibition of cellular proliferation in wild-type fibroblasts as assessed by [3H]thymidine incorporation, whereas the growth of S2KO or S3KO cells was only weakly inhibited by TGF-β1. Lack of Smad2 or Smad3 expression did not affect TGF-β1-induced fibronectin synthesis but resulted in markedly suppressed induction of plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 by TGF-β1. Moreover, TGF-β1-mediated induction of matrix metalloproteinase-2 was selectively dependent on Smad2, whereas induction of c-fos, Smad7, and TGF-β1 autoinduction relied on expression of Smad3. Investigation of transcriptional activation of TGF-β-sensitive reporter genes in the different fibroblasts showed that activation of the (Smad binding element)4-Lux reporter by TGF-β1 was dependent on expression of Smad3, but not Smad2, whereas activation of the activin response element-Lux reporter was strongly suppressed in S2KO fibroblasts but, on the contrary, enhanced in S3KO cells. Our findings indicate specific roles for Smad2 and Smad3 in TGF-β1 signaling. A prominent pathway of transforming growth factor (TGF)-β signaling involves receptor-dependent phosphorylation of Smad2 and Smad3, which then translocate to the nucleus to activate transcription of target genes. To investigate the relative importance of these two Smad proteins in TGF-β1 signal transduction, we have utilized a loss of function approach, based on analysis of the effects of TGF-β1 on fibroblasts derived from mouse embryos deficient in Smad2 (S2KO) or Smad3 (S3KO). TGF-β1 caused 50% inhibition of cellular proliferation in wild-type fibroblasts as assessed by [3H]thymidine incorporation, whereas the growth of S2KO or S3KO cells was only weakly inhibited by TGF-β1. Lack of Smad2 or Smad3 expression did not affect TGF-β1-induced fibronectin synthesis but resulted in markedly suppressed induction of plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 by TGF-β1. Moreover, TGF-β1-mediated induction of matrix metalloproteinase-2 was selectively dependent on Smad2, whereas induction of c-fos, Smad7, and TGF-β1 autoinduction relied on expression of Smad3. Investigation of transcriptional activation of TGF-β-sensitive reporter genes in the different fibroblasts showed that activation of the (Smad binding element)4-Lux reporter by TGF-β1 was dependent on expression of Smad3, but not Smad2, whereas activation of the activin response element-Lux reporter was strongly suppressed in S2KO fibroblasts but, on the contrary, enhanced in S3KO cells. Our findings indicate specific roles for Smad2 and Smad3 in TGF-β1 signaling. transforming growth factor activator protein 1 activin response element dermal fibroblast embryonic stem forkhead activin signal transducer knockout mouse embryo fibroblast Mad homology matrix metalloproteinase plasminogen activator inhibitor 1 Smad binding element TGF-β receptor type wild-type receptor-activated Smad multiplicity of infection Transforming growth factor (TGF)1-β is the prototypic member of the TGF-β superfamily and mediates a multiplicity of biological effects on different cell types. TGF-β regulates cellular proliferation, induces synthesis of extracellular matrix proteins such as fibronectin and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1), modulates the immune response, and plays an important role in embryonic development and cellular differentiation (1Roberts A.B. Sporn M.B. Sporn M.B. Roberts A.B. Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology, Peptide Growth Factors and Their Receptors. Springer-Verlag, Berlin1990: 419-472Google Scholar).TGF-β evokes its biological effects by signaling through two different receptor serine/threonine kinases, TGF-β receptor type (TβR)-I and TβR-II, that form a tetrameric complex after binding of TGF-β to TβR-II. TβR-II activates TβR-I by phosphorylation of serine residues in the GS box. The anchor protein SARA (Smad anchor for receptor activation) recruits the cytoplasmic signal transducers Smad2 and Smad3, classified as so-called receptor-activated Smads (R-Smads), to the Tβ R-I kinase domain, resulting in their phosphorylation on serine residues in the C-terminal SSXS motif. Activated R-Smads heteroligomerize with the common partner (CO)-Smad4, and these complexes are transported into the nucleus, where they regulate gene expression. R-Smads and CO- Smads contain two highly conserved domains, the Mad homology (MH) 1 domain and the MH2 domain, which are connected by a linker region. Whereas their MH1 domains can interact with the DNA, the MH2 domains are endowed with transcriptional activation properties.Down-regulation of TGF-β signaling is effected, in part, by a feedback mechanism involving induction of expression of the inhibitory Smads, Smad6 and Smad7, which then prevent R-Smad activation (2Heldin C.H. Miyazono K. ten Dijke P. Nature. 1997; 390: 465-471Crossref PubMed Scopus (3316) Google Scholar,3Piek E. Heldin C.H. ten Dijke P. FASEB J. 1999; 13: 2105-2124Crossref PubMed Scopus (737) Google Scholar).Absence of Smad2 or Smad3 expression resulting from targeted deletion of the respective Smad genes in mice has revealed different developmental roles for Smad2 and Smad3. Homozygous loss of function mutations of the Smad2 gene by targeted deletion of the MH1 or MH2 domain resulted in embryonic lethality due to failure to establish an anterior-posterior axis, gastrulation, and mesoderm formation (4Nomura M. Li E. Nature. 1998; 393: 786-790Crossref PubMed Scopus (504) Google Scholar, 5Weinstein M. Yang X. Li C. Xu X. Gotay J. Deng C.X. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1998; 95: 9378-9383Crossref PubMed Scopus (257) Google Scholar). These events are controlled by Smad2-dependent signals from the visceral endoderm (6Waldrip W.R. Bikoff E.K. Hoodless P.A. Wrana J.L. Robertson E.J. Cell. 1998; 92: 797-808Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (393) Google Scholar, 7Heyer J. Escalante-Alcalde D. Lia M. Boettinger E. Edelmann W. Stewart C.L. Kucherlapati R. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1999; 96: 12595-12600Crossref PubMed Scopus (138) Google Scholar). Postgastrulation-rescued Smad2 mutant embryos survived up to embryonic day 10.5 but showed several malformations such as cyclopia, cranial abnormalities, and impaired left-right patterning as observed by abnormal heart looping and embryo turning (7Heyer J. Escalante-Alcalde D. Lia M. Boettinger E. Edelmann W. Stewart C.L. Kucherlapati R. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1999; 96: 12595-12600Crossref PubMed Scopus (138) Google Scholar).In contrast, mice harboring homozygous deletions of theSmad3 gene are viable and survive for several months, indicating that Smad3 is dispensable for embryonic development. However, Smad3 knockout mice are smaller than wild-type littermates and show forelimb malformations (8Datto M.B. Frederick J.P. Pan L. Borton A.J. Zhuang Y. Wang X.F. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1999; 19: 2495-2504Crossref PubMed Google Scholar, 9Yang X. Letterio J.J. Lechleider R.J. Chen L. Hayman R. Gu H. Roberts A.B. Deng C. EMBO J. 1999; 18: 1280-1291Crossref PubMed Google Scholar). Mice lacking expression of Smad3 die from chronic inflammation of several organs as a consequence of impaired immune function including defects in mucosal immunity, as revealed by abscesses in tissues adjacent to mucosal membranes, and expansion of activated T-cell populations. This can be attributed in part to the lack of responsiveness of Smad3-deficient T cells to the growth-inhibitory effects of TGF-β as well as to a defective chemotactic response of Smad3-deficient neutrophils to TGF-β (8Datto M.B. Frederick J.P. Pan L. Borton A.J. Zhuang Y. Wang X.F. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1999; 19: 2495-2504Crossref PubMed Google Scholar, 9Yang X. Letterio J.J. Lechleider R.J. Chen L. Hayman R. Gu H. Roberts A.B. Deng C. EMBO J. 1999; 18: 1280-1291Crossref PubMed Google Scholar). Smad3-deficient mice show accelerated wound healing compared with wild-type littermates, which is a consequence of enhanced re-epithelialization by proliferating keratinocytes and reduced wound infiltration as well as TGF-β production by monocytes (10Ashcroft G.S. Yang X. Glick A.B. Weinstein M. Letterio J.L. Mizel D.E. Anzano M. Greenwell-Wild T. Wahl S.M. Deng C. Roberts A.B. Nat. Cell Biol. 1999; 1: 260-266Crossref PubMed Scopus (762) Google Scholar). Homozygous Smad3 knockout mice generated by Zhu et al. (11Zhu Y. Richardson J.A. Parada L.F. Graff J.M. Cell. 1998; 94: 703-714Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (512) Google Scholar) die from colon carcinomas between 4 and 6 months of age, a phenotype that was not observed in Smad3 null mice derived by Datto et al. (8Datto M.B. Frederick J.P. Pan L. Borton A.J. Zhuang Y. Wang X.F. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1999; 19: 2495-2504Crossref PubMed Google Scholar) or Yang et al. (9Yang X. Letterio J.J. Lechleider R.J. Chen L. Hayman R. Gu H. Roberts A.B. Deng C. EMBO J. 1999; 18: 1280-1291Crossref PubMed Google Scholar).To investigate the relative importance of Smad2 and Smad3 in TGF-β1 signaling, we have established mouse embryo-derived fibroblasts lacking expression of the Smad2 or Smad3 gene (7Heyer J. Escalante-Alcalde D. Lia M. Boettinger E. Edelmann W. Stewart C.L. Kucherlapati R. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1999; 96: 12595-12600Crossref PubMed Scopus (138) Google Scholar, 9Yang X. Letterio J.J. Lechleider R.J. Chen L. Hayman R. Gu H. Roberts A.B. Deng C. EMBO J. 1999; 18: 1280-1291Crossref PubMed Google Scholar). In contrast to analysis of the function of Smad2 and Smad3 by overexpression studies, these loss of function cell systems provide a more appropriate model to investigate the physiological roles and relative importance of these R-Smads in TGF-β signaling and provide insight into the consequence of impaired TGF-β R-Smad function in relation to pathophysiology. Our data show that expression of Smad2 or Smad3 in fibroblasts is important for TGF-β1-mediated growth inhibition as well as for synthesis of PAI-1, whereas Smad2 and Smad3 contribute uniquely to TGF-β1-induced activation of several luciferase reporter constructs. We further show that certain genes are selectively dependent on only one of these two TGF-β receptor-activated Smads, such as, for example, the matrix metalloproteinase MMP-2, which is critically dependent on Smad2 but not Smad3 expression. Collectively, our results indicate nonredundant roles for Smad2 and Smad3 in TGF-β1-mediated signaling and provide insight into the targets of these specific signaling pathways in vivo.DISCUSSIONWe have investigated TGF-β signaling in established mouse embryo-derived fibroblasts deficient in expression of Smad2or Smad3 to assess the effect of loss of each of these key signaling intermediates on induction of target gene expression by TGF-β1. We have identified target genes with Smad2- or Smad3-independent patterns of induction, those that are affected by the loss of either R-Smad, and genes that are selectively dependent on one or the other of these two R-Smad proteins. As examples, we have shown that TGF-β1-induced fibronectin synthesis occurs in the absence of Smad2 or Smad3 expression, whereas both Smads have roles in the induction of PAI-1 protein and in the more complex end point of TGF-β1-induced growth inhibition with associated regulation of cyclin/cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitorsp15 INK4B and p21 CIP1/WAF1. We also show for the first time that TGF-β1-mediated induction of c-fos expression requires Smad3 and that induction of MMP-2 is selectively dependent on Smad2. Moreover, similar to that shown for Smad3 null macrophages and keratinocytes (10Ashcroft G.S. Yang X. Glick A.B. Weinstein M. Letterio J.L. Mizel D.E. Anzano M. Greenwell-Wild T. Wahl S.M. Deng C. Roberts A.B. Nat. Cell Biol. 1999; 1: 260-266Crossref PubMed Scopus (762) Google Scholar), we show that autoinduction of TGF-β1 in fibroblasts is strongly suppressed in the absence of Smad3. To test that results shown previously in overexpression systems are truly dependent on Smad2 and Smad3, we have also assessed the activation of several TGF-β-sensitive reporter genes in these Smad-deficient fibroblasts. Together, these experiments demonstrate that Smad2 and Smad3 have both overlapping and distinct roles in TGF-β1 signaling, depending on the target gene and cellular context.Because of the early embryonic lethal phenotype of the Smad2 knockout mice (4Nomura M. Li E. Nature. 1998; 393: 786-790Crossref PubMed Scopus (504) Google Scholar, 5Weinstein M. Yang X. Li C. Xu X. Gotay J. Deng C.X. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1998; 95: 9378-9383Crossref PubMed Scopus (257) Google Scholar) and the technical difficulties involved in derivation of S2KO embryonic fibroblasts, we were forced to do most of our comparisons between the role of Smad2 and Smad3 in TGF-β1 signaling using spontaneously immortalized fibroblasts that were cultured over multiple passages. To underscore the validity of our studies, we show that expression of Smad3 is also important for TGF-β1-mediated induction of Smad7, TGF-β1, and PAI-1 in primary MEFs and primary DFs. We also show that induction of expression of these genes by TGF-β1 can be restored after stable reintroduction of Smad3 in these primary Smad3-deficient fibroblasts. In contrast, whereas adenoviral- or retroviral-mediated restoration of Smad2 or Smad3 expression in fibroblasts could restore TGF-β1-responsive reporter gene induction dependent directly on Smads, this strategy was not sufficient to restore induction by TGF-β1 of endogenous gene responses shown to be dependent on Smad2 or Smad3 (data not shown). Similar observations of the inability to rescue responses by stable introduction of Smads or other signaling molecules into established cell systems have been reported (35Shen X. Li J. Hu P.P-c. Waddell D. Zhang J. Wang X.-F. J. Biol. Chem. 2001; 276: 15362-15368Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (91) Google Scholar, 36Blain S.W. Massague J. J. Biol. Chem. 2000; 275: 32066-32070Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (21) Google Scholar). Our data suggest that restoration of Smad expression is not sufficient to fully revert the established Smad knockout fibroblasts to their WT counterparts, possibly because loss of Smad expression in combination with multiple genetic alterations, inherently associated with immortalization, irreversibly alters expression of additional genes important in mediating signaling to more complex endogenous targets of TGF-β.In contrast to previous reports that address the role of different Smads by overexpression in in vitro systems, we show that fibroblasts derived from mouse embryos lacking expression of Smad2 or Smad3 provide a suitable loss of function model system to investigate the different effects of these two R-Smads in TGF-β signaling, as is important for the understanding of their distinct roles in vivo. For example, the different roles of Smad2 and Smad3 are evident in studies of embryogenesis, where targeted deletion of Smad2 or Smad3 results in either early embryonic lethality or viable offspring, respectively (4Nomura M. Li E. Nature. 1998; 393: 786-790Crossref PubMed Scopus (504) Google Scholar, 5Weinstein M. Yang X. Li C. Xu X. Gotay J. Deng C.X. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1998; 95: 9378-9383Crossref PubMed Scopus (257) Google Scholar, 6Waldrip W.R. Bikoff E.K. Hoodless P.A. Wrana J.L. Robertson E.J. Cell. 1998; 92: 797-808Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (393) Google Scholar, 7Heyer J. Escalante-Alcalde D. Lia M. Boettinger E. Edelmann W. Stewart C.L. Kucherlapati R. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1999; 96: 12595-12600Crossref PubMed Scopus (138) Google Scholar, 8Datto M.B. Frederick J.P. Pan L. Borton A.J. Zhuang Y. Wang X.F. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1999; 19: 2495-2504Crossref PubMed Google Scholar, 9Yang X. Letterio J.J. Lechleider R.J. Chen L. Hayman R. Gu H. Roberts A.B. Deng C. EMBO J. 1999; 18: 1280-1291Crossref PubMed Google Scholar, 11Zhu Y. Richardson J.A. Parada L.F. Graff J.M. Cell. 1998; 94: 703-714Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (512) Google Scholar). In wound healing, decreased levels of Smad2 or Smad3 have dramatically different effects (10Ashcroft G.S. Yang X. Glick A.B. Weinstein M. Letterio J.L. Mizel D.E. Anzano M. Greenwell-Wild T. Wahl S.M. Deng C. Roberts A.B. Nat. Cell Biol. 1999; 1: 260-266Crossref PubMed Scopus (762) Google Scholar). Differences are also apparent in carcinogenesis, where Smad2 has been classified as a tumor suppressor based on its mutation frequency in several types of cancer (37Hata A. Shi Y. Massague J. Mol. Med. Today. 1998; 4: 257-262Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (142) Google Scholar, 38Massague J. Annu. Rev. Biochem. 1998; 67: 753-791Crossref PubMed Scopus (3964) Google Scholar), but where evidence for a similar role of Smad3 is lacking (39Arai T. Akiyama Y. Okabe S. Ando M. Endo M. Yuasa Y. Cancer Lett. 1998; 122: 157-163Crossref PubMed Scopus (62) Google Scholar, 40Riggins G.J. Kinzler K.W. Vogelstein B. Thiagalingam S. Cancer Res. 1997; 57: 2578-2580PubMed Google Scholar). Moreover, because autoinduction of TGF-β1, previously shown to involve Ras/mitogen-activated protein kinase/AP-1 signaling (26Kim S.J. Angel P. Lafyatis R. Hattori K. Kim K.Y. Sporn M.B. Karin M. Roberts A.B. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1990; 10: 1492-1497Crossref PubMed Google Scholar, 27Yue J. Mulder K.M. J. Biol. Chem. 2000; 275: 30765-30773Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (131) Google Scholar), is also dependent on Smad3 (Fig. 4, Dand E) (10Ashcroft G.S. Yang X. Glick A.B. Weinstein M. Letterio J.L. Mizel D.E. Anzano M. Greenwell-Wild T. Wahl S.M. Deng C. Roberts A.B. Nat. Cell Biol. 1999; 1: 260-266Crossref PubMed Scopus (762) Google Scholar), retention of Smad3 might be selected for in tumor cells because TGF-β1 secreted by tumor cells can promote tumorigenesis by inducing metastasis, invasion, and angiogenesis (reviewed in Ref. 41Piek, E., and Roberts, A. B. (2001) Adv. Cancer Res., in press.Google Scholar). It should be noted, however, that R-Smad activity can be blocked by certain oncogenes including Evi-1, which, in certain cells, could have effects similar to its loss by genetic defects (42de Caestecker M.P. Piek E. Roberts A.B. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 2000; 92: 1388-1402Crossref PubMed Google Scholar).A number of physical differences between Smad2 and Smad3 have been described that might underlie or contribute to their observed functional differences or, in other cases, to their interchangeability. Whereas the MH1 domain of Smad3 can interact directly with SBE sequences (CAGAGTCT) in the DNA, Smad2 contains an extra exon that encodes 30 amino acids absent in the MH1 domain of Smad3 and prevents its binding to DNA (31Dennler S. Huet S. Gauthier J.M. Oncogene. 1999; 18: 1643-1648Crossref PubMed Scopus (152) Google Scholar, 32Yagi K. Goto D. Hamamoto T. Takenoshita S. Kato M. Miyazono K. J. Biol. Chem. 1999; 274: 703-709Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (205) Google Scholar). Consistent with this, we observed that TGF-β1-induced activation of the (SBE)4-luciferase reporter, which consists of four concatemerized SBEs derived from the mouse JunB promoter (34Jonk L.J. Itoh S. Heldin C.H. ten Dijke P. Kruijer W. J. Biol. Chem. 1998; 273: 21145-21152Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (510) Google Scholar), occurred as efficiently in S2KO as in WT fibroblasts, whereas in S3KO cells, TGF-β1-induced (SBE)4-luciferase reporter activation was impaired. This is in agreement with previous observations that Smad2, in contrast to Smad3, could not be detected in Smad-complexes bound to aJunB probe and that overexpression of Smad2 contributed only weakly to TGF-β1-induced activation of the (SBE)4-luciferase reporter, whereas overexpression of Smad3 potently enhanced reporter induction, even in the absence of TGF-β (34Jonk L.J. Itoh S. Heldin C.H. ten Dijke P. Kruijer W. J. Biol. Chem. 1998; 273: 21145-21152Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (510) Google Scholar). In a similar manner, Smad3 is involved in activation of theSmad7 gene promoter, whereas Smad2 does not have a functional role in its induction by TGF-β (19von Gersdorff G. Susztak K. Rezvani F. Bitzer M. Liang D. Bottinger E.P. J. Biol. Chem. 2000; 275: 11320-11326Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (155) Google Scholar, 43Nagarajan R.P. Zhang J. Li W. Chen Y. J. Biol. Chem. 1999; 274: 33412-33418Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (207) Google Scholar). Interestingly, mechanisms exist to alter the DNA binding patterns of Smad2 and Smad3. An alternative splice variant of Smad2 that lacks exon 3 does bind to DNA (32Yagi K. Goto D. Hamamoto T. Takenoshita S. Kato M. Miyazono K. J. Biol. Chem. 1999; 274: 703-709Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (205) Google Scholar, 44Takenoshita S. Mogi A. Nagashima M. Yang K. Yagi K. Hanyu A. Nagamachi Y. Miyazono K. Hagiwara K. Genomics. 1998; 48: 1-11Crossref PubMed Scopus (45) Google Scholar) and might possibly compensate for loss of Smad3 in mediating activation of certain TGF-β-induced responses.Differential in vivo activities of Smad2 and Smad3 on the same target element are also supported by our studies, suggesting that Smad2 and Smad3 might have distinct affinities for different transcription factors and thereby contribute differently to TGF-β signaling. Thus, overexpression of Smad3 inhibits activation of the goosecoid or Mix2 (ARE) TGF-β target gene promoters that are dependent on FAST, Smad2, and Smad4 (20Chen X. Rubock M.J. Whitman M. Nature. 1996; 383: 691-696Crossref PubMed Scopus (625) Google Scholar, 21Chen X. Weisberg E. Fridmacher V. Watanabe M. Naco G. Whitman M. Nature. 1997; 389: 85-89Crossref PubMed Scopus (490) Google Scholar). This inhibition has been proposed to result from either competition between Smad3 and Smad4 for binding to FAST (23Nagarajan R.P. Liu J. Chen Y. J. Biol. Chem. 1999; 274: 31229-31235Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (37) Google Scholar) or competitive affinities of Smad3 and Smad4 for SBE elements in the gene promoters (22Labbe E. Silvestri C. Hoodless P.A. Wrana J.L. Attisano L. Mol. Cell. 1998; 2: 109-120Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (460) Google Scholar). Our loss of function studies further support the dependence of this promoter on Smad2 as well as its negative regulation by endogenous Smad3. Thus, we show compromised activation of the ARE-luciferase reporter in Smad2-deficient fibroblasts, in contrast with enhanced activation of this reporter in Smad3-deficient cells as well as in NMuMG cells in which a truncated dominant-negative form of Smad3 is overexpressed, likely interfering with the function of the endogenous protein (9Yang X. Letterio J.J. Lechleider R.J. Chen L. Hayman R. Gu H. Roberts A.B. Deng C. EMBO J. 1999; 18: 1280-1291Crossref PubMed Google Scholar).In contrast to direct activation of immediate early genes and TGF-β-sensitive luciferase reporter genes that are likely controlled by low signaling thresholds, regulation of cell growth requires continuous signaling to modulate the tightly balanced cell cycle apparatus that integrates multiple signals at several complex end points. It is therefore more difficult to identify the genes that are directly involved in abrogation of TGF-β-induced inhibition of cellular proliferation. Similar to our findings in Smad2- or Smad3-deficient fibroblasts, it has been reported that the growth-inhibitory effects of TGF-β are lost in Smad3-deficient MEFs and astrocytes (8Datto M.B. Frederick J.P. Pan L. Borton A.J. Zhuang Y. Wang X.F. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1999; 19: 2495-2504Crossref PubMed Google Scholar, 45Rich J.N. Zhang M. Datto M.B. Bigner D.D. Wang X.F. J. Biol. Chem. 1999; 274: 35053-35058Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (101) Google Scholar). Whereas Datto et al. (8Datto M.B. Frederick J.P. Pan L. Borton A.J. Zhuang Y. Wang X.F. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1999; 19: 2495-2504Crossref PubMed Google Scholar) did not observe changes in the induction of p15 INK4B orp21 CIP1/WAF1 in Smad3-deficient MEFs, basal expression levels of p15 and p21 were dramatically decreased and increased, respectively, in our S2KO and S3KO fibroblasts compared with WT controls. In agreement with this, suppressed p15 levels and reduced activation of p15 by TGF-β have been observed in Smad3-deficient astrocytes (45Rich J.N. Zhang M. Datto M.B. Bigner D.D. Wang X.F. J. Biol. Chem. 1999; 274: 35053-35058Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (101) Google Scholar). However, the correlation between dysregulated p15 and p21 levels and the observed growth behavior of our KO fibroblasts is unclear at present.The results presented here demonstrating that activation of genes by TGF-β1 is often dependent on one of the two TGF-β R-Smads, Smad2 or Smad3, suggest that the observed differences in KO phenotypes of Smad2-versus Smad3-deficient mice are not merely a consequence of differential spatially and temporally controlled patterns of gene expression of these two R-Smads during development but rather reflect unique, nonoverlapping roles for Smad2 and Smad3 in control of target gene expression, which allows for more versatility in cross-talk with other signal transduction pathways. Detailed analysis of TGF-β target gene expression in Smad2 versus Smad3 KO cell systems now has the potential to provide insights into their respective roles in regulation of genes that are of critical importance for both normal physiology and development as well as in disease pathogenesis, including carcinogenesis. Transforming growth factor (TGF)1-β is the prototypic member of the TGF-β superfamily and mediates a multiplicity of biological effects on different cell types. TGF-β regulates cellular proliferation, induces synthesis of extracellular matrix proteins such as fibronectin and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1), modulates the immune response, and plays an important role in embryonic development and cellular differentiation (1Roberts A.B. Sporn M.B. Sporn M.B. Roberts A.B. Handbook of Experimental Pharmacology, Peptide Growth Factors and Their Receptors. Springer-Verlag, Berlin1990: 419-472Google Scholar). TGF-β evokes its biological effects by signaling through two different receptor serine/threonine kinases, TGF-β receptor type (TβR)-I and TβR-II, that form a tetrameric complex after binding of TGF-β to TβR-II. TβR-II activates TβR-I by phosphorylation of serine residues in the GS box. The anchor protein SARA (Smad anchor for receptor activation) recruits the cytoplasmic signal transducers Smad2 and Smad3, classified as so-called receptor-activated Smads (R-Smads), to the Tβ R-I kinase domain, resulting in their phosphorylation on serine residues in the C-terminal SSXS motif. Activated R-Smads heteroligomerize with the common partner (CO)-Smad4, and these complexes are transported into the nucleus, where they regulate gene expression. R-Smads and CO- Smads contain two highly conserved domains, the Mad homology (MH) 1 domain and the MH2 domain, which are connected by a linker region. Whereas their MH1 domains can interact with the DNA, the MH2 domains are endowed with transcriptional activation properties. Down-regulation of TGF-β signaling is effected, in part, by a feedback mechanism involving induction of expression of the inhibitory Smads, Smad6 and Smad7, which then prevent R-Smad activation (2Heldin C.H. Miyazono K. ten Dijke P. Nature. 1997; 390: 465-471Crossref PubMed Scopus (3316) Google Scholar,3Piek E. Heldin C.H. ten Dijke P. FASEB J. 1999; 13: 2105-2124Crossref PubMed Scopus (737) Google Scholar). Absence of Smad2 or Smad3 expression resulting from targeted deletion of the respective Smad genes in mice has revealed different developmental roles for Smad2 and Smad3. Homozygous loss of function mutations of the Smad2 gene by targeted deletion of the MH1 or MH2 domain resulted in embryonic lethality due to failure to establish an anterior-posterior axis, gastrulation, and mesoderm formation (4Nomura M. Li E. Nature. 1998; 393: 786-790Crossref PubMed Scopus (504) Google Scholar, 5Weinstein M. Yang X. Li C. Xu X. Gotay J. Deng C.X. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1998; 95: 9378-9383Crossref PubMed Scopus (257) Google Scholar). These events are controlled by Smad2-dependent signals from the visceral endoderm (6Waldrip W.R. Bikoff E.K. Hoodless P.A. Wrana J.L. Robertson E.J. Cell. 1998; 92: 797-808Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (393) Google Scholar, 7Heyer J. Escalante-Alcalde D. Lia M. Boettinger E. Edelmann W. Stewart C.L. Kucherlapati R. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1999; 96: 12595-12600Crossref PubMed Scopus (138) Google Scholar). Postgastrulation-rescued Smad2 mutant embryos survived up to embryonic day 10.5 but showed several malformations such as cyclopia, cranial abnormalities, and impaired left-right patterning as observed by abnormal heart looping and embryo turning (7Heyer J. Escalante-Alcalde D. Lia M. Boettinger E. Edelmann W. Stewart C.L. Kucherlapati R. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 1999; 96: 12595-12600Crossref PubMed Scopus (138) Google Scholar). In contrast, mice harboring homozygous deletions of theSmad3 gene are viable and survive for several months, indicating that Smad3 is dispensable for embryonic development. However, Smad3 knockout mice are smaller than wild-type littermates and show forelimb malformations (8Datto M.B. Frederick J.P. Pan L. Borton A.J. Zhuang Y. Wang X.F. Mol. Cell. Biol. 1999; 19: 2495-2504Crossref PubMed Google Scholar,