|
|
||||||||
BRIEF REVIEWS |


* Department of Molecular Cell Biology and Immunology, VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; and
Sir William Dunn School of Pathology, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom
| Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
, activating SIRP
, nonsignaling SIRP
, and soluble SIRP
members. For each species, there appears to be a single inhibitory SIRP
member that, upon interaction with the "self" ligand CD47, controls "homeostatic" innate immune effector functions, such as host cell phagocytosis. The activating SIRP
proteins show considerable variability in structure and number across species and do not bind CD47. Thus the SIRP family is a rapidly evolving gene family with important roles in immune regulation. | Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
500 million years ago, of rearranging AgRs and thus adaptive immunity was possibly a SIRP-like molecule. Insight into the functional properties of SIRPs may provide clues about the innate origins of the adaptive immune system. As with many members of the other "paired receptors" mentioned above, SIRPs possess the potential to signal through cytoplasmic tails that contain either ITIMs (8) or transmembrane regions that have positively charged residues that allow an association with adaptor proteins, such as DAP12/KARAP, containing ITAMs (9). | The biochemically characterized SIRP members |
|---|
|
|
|---|
(also known as SHPS-1, BIT, MFR, CD172a, or p84), was originally identified in rat cells by its association with cytoplasmic tyrosine phosphatase Src homology region 2 domain-containing phosphatase (SHP)-2 (8) and was later shown to exist in other mammals, including humans, mice, and cattle (10, 11, 12). Two other SIRP family genes, SIRP
1 (CD172b) and SIRP
(CD172g), have been described in humans (11, 13, 14, 15). SIRP
was originally described as SIRP
2 (14), but as outlined in the accompanying letter, we believe the name SIRP
is more suitable. In the mouse, two SIRP
members (SIRP
1 and SIRP
2), which can both associate and signal via DAP12, have been characterized (16, 17). The SIRP
1 was previously termed mouse SIRP
. However, protein sequences with similarity to the reported SIRPs are present in the genomes, and the availability of the complete genome sequences of various species and extensive expressed sequence tag (EST) data now permit characterization of the complete SIRP family in humans and other species. The hypothesis is that proteins related to the known SIRPs will have evolved by gene duplication and have related functions as already shown for SIRP
, which has the same ligand (i.e., CD47) as SIRP
(13, 15). Clearly, understanding the full range of genes in the SIRP family is essential for understanding its significance in the immune system.
|
20% identity as residues key for the domain fold are conserved (5). Therefore, a cutoff of 30% amino acid identity was used to search and identify related genes (see below). | The SIRP genes in humans and other primates |
|---|
|
|
|---|
, SIRP
1, and SIRP
, are clustered on chromosome 20p13 (Fig. 1B). Adjacent to the known human SIRP genes on chromosome 20, we have identified two additional SIRP genes and a pseudogene. Based on their structural properties, we termed these novel SIRP molecules, SIRP
2, SIRP
3p (for the pseudogene), and SIRP
(Fig. 1A) (for nomenclature of the SIRP family, see the accompanying Brief Review). These novel SIRP family members are clearly more divergent than the three previously known SIRP molecules. In fact, SIRP
, SIRP
1, and SIRP
appear to form a subgroup that evolved relatively recently before the bifurcation of chimpanzee and man (see below). SIRP
2 appears to encode a cell surface receptor composed of two extracellular IgSF V-type domains and, in analogy to SIRP
1, a transmembrane region with a positively charged residue, suggesting a putative association with the adaptor protein DAP12. Consistent with this, SIRP
2 is expressed by cells of the monocyte-macrophage lineage (as determined by PCR and analysis of EST data), and there is alternative splicing of the extracellular IgSF domains (E. M. Van Beek et al., unpublished observations). SIRP
3p has an unusual extracellular region, with three NH2-terminal C1-type IgSF domains and two membrane proximal V-type IgSF domains. The human SIRP
3p appears to be a pseudogene, but its orthologs in rodents (i.e., rat (r)SIRP
3 and murine (m)SIRP
3) appear functional (see below). Although gene prediction programs identify an open reading frame, there is no evidence (from, for example, EST) for expression. SIRP
encodes a putatively secreted molecule with a single V-type IgSF domain. EST evidence suggests that SIRP
may be expressed by sperm cells and in respiratory tissue (T. K. van den Berg, unpublished observations).
The human SIRP gene cluster is flanked by the dynorphin precursor (pDyn) gene, and this orientation is conserved in all species investigated where a SIRP cluster is found in a syntenic position in the genome. Outside the 20p13 SIRP cluster, we have not detected any other active human SIRP genes, apart from an intronless SIRP
gene (92% overall nucleotide identity) on chromosome 22, which probably represents a retrotransposon (Fig. 1A). Although this SIRP
-like gene has an open reading frame, the lack of evidence for transcription strongly suggests it to be a pseudogene (termed SIRP
2p). In the chimpanzee, the productive SIRP
gene is localized in a syntenic position on chromosome 23 while, the SIRP
like gene within the chimpanzee SIRP-gene cluster is most probably a pseudogene. This illustrates the difficulty in assigning specific species homologues and reflects how, as with many other "paired receptors," these genes have been subject to extensive duplication, divergence, and loss. Furthermore, it seems possible that the chimpanzee SIRP
1 does not contain a V-type Ig-like domain, but the latter could also be a sequencing error or a mistake of the gene prediction algorithm. Because expression data are lacking, as yet only genomic information has been used for the chimpanzee, and thus SIRP genes and their products are exclusively predicted here by gene prediction programs. One of the more important implications from the above is that there is only a single human SIRP
family member, suggesting indirectly that most of the additional human SIRP
sequences reported (11) probably represent polymorphic variants. In fact, our own findings (A. Van Elsas and T. K. van den Berg, unpublished observations) suggest that the most frequent SIRP
allotypes in the human population are represented by the two deposited SIRP
1 and SIRP
2/BIT sequences (SIRP
1 (National Center for Biotechnology Information Entrez protein accession no. CAA71403) and SIRP
2/BIT (protein accession no. NP_542970)).
| The SIRP genes in rodents |
|---|
|
|
|---|
ortholog and rat and mouse SIRP
3 (i.e., the orthologs of the human SIRP
3p pseudogene) are in the first cluster (cluster I). Interestingly, these rSIRP
3 and mSIRP
3 represent functional genes and not a pseudogene as in humans. Both have a C1-C1-C1-TM-Cyt structure and represent the only family member that lacks a typical V-set IgSF domain. However, in the rodent SIRP
3 genes and primate SIRP
3 pseudogene, there is evidence for the remains of two V-like sequences located between the third C1 domain exon and the TM region-encoding exon, suggesting that perhaps in early mammals there was a SIRP family member with a C1-C1-C1-V-V-TM-Cyt structure. Despite the low sequence similarity (
23%) between the C1-set domains of SIRP
3 and the C1-set domains of, for example, SIRP
, a distant relationship can still be seen. It seems that a putative primordial SIRP
3 arose by an incomplete duplication of the two tandem C1-set domains as present in the SIRP
, SIRP
1, and SIRP
subgroup genes. As compared with primates and chicken, the organization of SIRP genes in the rodent genome appears special in two aspects. Firstly, the rodent cluster I is uniquely flanked by the IL-1
and -1
genes, which is likewise the result of multiple translocations. Furthermore, there is a second cluster of SIRP genes (cluster II), which is located on corresponding regions of the rat chromosome 2q23 and mouse chromosome 3A1. Cluster II shows a relatively high degree of divergence among mice and rats. In mice, but not in rats, there is a SIRP
member (SIRP
1) representing the SIRP
molecule described by Hayashi et al. (16). It is clear that this mSIRP
1 is closely related to members of the primate SIRP
-SIRP
1-SIRP
subgroup as well as to the mouse SIRP
(all identities
55%), but because the homologies among the members of the primate subgroup are considerably higher (
75%), they probably arose later (i.e., independently), and thus mSIRP
1 cannot be considered a direct ortholog of any of these. However, because it contains the typical transmembrane lysine residue and can also associate with and signal via DAP12 (16), it may serve a function analogous to the primate SIRP
1. The rodent rSIRP
1, rSIRP
2, rSIRP
4, and mSIRP
2 molecules, i.e., with variable numbers of only V-set IgSF domains and a transmembrane region with a charged lysine, are not particularly related to the primate SIRP
2, which within the context of the whole SIRP family appears rather divergent. A phylogenetic tree for the individual V-like domains strongly suggests that the various SIRP members from cluster II arose independently in the rat and mouse lineage by either single or tandem V-like domain exon duplication events (Fig. 2). All this appears consistent with the translocation of a cluster I-derived SIRP
- or SIRP
1-like founder gene giving rise to cluster II.
|
| SIRP genes in other species and the evolution of SIRPs |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Considering the evolutionary relationship of SIRPs with AgRs, which has previously led us to propose a common nonrearranging SIRP-like predecessor in early vertebrates (6), it was of interest to know whether nonmammalian vertebrates such as birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fish encode SIRP family members. The availability of the chicken, xenopus, zebrafish, and fugu (pufferfish) genome sequences provided a means to explore this. In chicken, we found three family members, termed chicken (g)SIRP
, gSIRP
, and gSIRP
, which are encoded in a position syntenic to the mammalian cluster I. These chicken SIRP-like molecules are not obvious orthologs of the primate SIRP
, SIRP
, or SIRP
genes but may still serve analogous functions. The presence of SIRPs with a V-C1-C1 structure as well as a gene with ITIMs (i.e., gSIRP
) suggests that these comprise perhaps the original ingredients of a primordial SIRP. Of interest, our extensive searches have not provided evidence for the presence of typical SIRP family members in other major phylogenetic groups, including amphibians, fish, and invertebrates. Our analysis included the complete (draft) genome sequences of zebrafish (Danio rerio), Torafugu pufferfish (Takifugu rubripes), spotted green pufferfish (Tetraodon nigroviridis), clawed toad (Xenopus tropicalis), fruit fly (Drosophila melanogaster), mosquito (Anopheles gambiae), and helminth (Caenorhabditis elegans). The closest homologues of SIRPs that can be found by basic local alignment search tool searches in for instance the complete genomes of zebrafish and fugu are either AgR chains or members of the novel immune type receptor families (18) (at
2030% identity), which clearly represent related but distinct IgSF families. This apparent lack of SIRPs in the other major vertebrate groups (i.e., amphibians and fish) is perhaps surprising considering the previously suggested relationship between SIRPs and AgRs that predicted an ancient SIRP-like molecule in early (jawed) vertebrates (6). It seems likely that SIRP family members did indeed exist in early vertebrates and continued to exist in birds and mammals but were lost at some point(s) during fish and amphibian evolution or that they arose later. Clearly, it is more difficult to trace the evolution of proteins such as these as they are diverging very rapidly compared with, for example, cytosolic enzymes where phylogenetic analysis is simpler, and also it is likely that there has been extensive duplication and gene loss within the species making direct orthologs difficult to identify (see discussion above on mouse SIRP
1 and primate SIRPs).
| The functions of SIRP family members in immunity |
|---|
|
|
|---|
also expressed on neurons (19, 20) (the relevant properties of human SIRPs are summarized in Table I). SIRP
is relatively ubiquitously expressed on myeloid cells, including macrophages, granulocytes, myeloid dendritic cells (DCs), mast cells, and their precursors, including hemopoietic stem cells (19, 20, 21). CD47, a broadly expressed transmembrane glycoprotein with a single Ig-like domain and five membrane spanning regions, functions as a cellular ligand for SIRP
(21, 22) with binding mediated through the NH2-terminal V-like domain of SIRP
(23). CD47 can itself signal, and hence, engagement can potentially give two-way signaling (24). The cytoplasmic region of SIRP
contains four ITIMs, which upon ligand binding become phosphorylated, and mediate recruitment and activation of the tyrosine phosphatases SHP-1 and SHP-2 (8, 11, 25). SHP-1 and SHP-2 can, in turn, dephosphorylate specific protein substrates and thereby regulate cellular functions, generally in a negative fashion. Probably the best documented role of SIRP
is its inhibitory role in the phagocytosis of host cells by macrophages (26). In particular, the ligation of SIRP
on macrophages by CD47 expressed on the host target cell generates an inhibitory signal mediated by SHP-1 that negatively regulates phagocytosis. The role of SIRP
in host cell phagocytosis is supported by in vivo studies with target cells from CD47-deficient mice (27, 28), as well as by using macrophages from SIRP
-mutant mice (26, 27). Mice that lack the SIRP
cytoplasmic domain are thrombocytopenic, which apparently results from an increased rate of clearance of circulating platelets (26, 27). Recent evidence also implies SIRP
in the clearance of aged erythrocytes (29). This strongly suggests that SIRP
acts to detect signals provided by "self," in this case CD47 on host cells, to negatively control innate immune effector function against these cells. This is analogous to the "self" signals provided by MHC class I molecules to NK cells via Ig-like or Ly49 receptors. Another example of negative regulation through SIRP
is the inhibition of LPS-induced TNF-
production in macrophages (30). However, the role of SIRP
may be more complex than previously anticipated, and the molecule may not only provide negative signals. For instance, we have shown recently that engagement of SIRP
by CD47 in macrophages can promote the production of NO via the SIRP
-associated Janus kinase (JAK2), suggesting that SIRP
can also activate certain effector functions (31). Finally, there is the potential for a variety of other components, which can also bind to SIRP
, to regulate its signaling. These include the tyrosine kinases CSK and PYK2 and the adaptor molecules Grb2, FyB/SLAP-130, and SKAP55hom (11, 12, 25, 32). In fact, apart from the ITIMs, the SIRP
cytoplasmic tail contains two proline-rich regions that may form a docking site for the SH3 domains in some of these proteins. Thus, SIRP
does not only function as a typical inhibitory receptor but may also act as a scaffold for a variety of other signaling molecules at the plasma membrane.
|
-CD47 interactions play a role in macrophage fusion to form multinucleated cells in vitro (33, 34). It remains to be established whether the SIRP
-CD47 interaction is also relevant for osteoclast fusion and multinucleated giant cell formation in vivo.
In addition to the regulatory functions in macrophages, interactions between CD47 on T cells and SIRP
on DCs have been shown to regulate, in a bidirectional fashion, DC and T cell activation. Furthermore, it seems that SIRP
provides signals that can modulate DC maturation (35). The contributions of the different signals are difficult to discern as these in vitro studies with human cells did not really clarify whether the effects observed were the result of agonistic or antagonistic action of the reagents used. Apart from this, it will be interesting to investigate more directly the possible role of SIRP
in adaptive immunity.
Finally, SIRP
appears to control myeloid cell migration. Studies using SIRP
-mutant mice provide evidence for a role of SIRP
in the emigration of Langerhans cells from the skin (36). Furthermore, interactions of SIRP
on monocytes or granulocytes with CD47 on endothelial or epithelial cells are important for transendothelial or epithelial migration (37, 38, 39). Collectively, these findings picture SIRP
as a versatile regulator of myeloid cell function.
SIRP
1 was reported originally by Kharitonenkov et al. (11) in humans and is expressed on myeloid cells, including monocytes, granulocytes, and DCs (40, 41, 42, 43). Interestingly, SIRP
1, although closely related to SIRP
, does not appear to bind CD47 and lacks cytoplasmic ITIMs or any other recognizable cytosolic motifs for signaling. Instead, SIRP
1 contains a transmembrane region with a positively charged lysine residue that mediates association with DAP12, an adaptor protein that carries an ITAM (41, 43). Phosphorylation of the DAP12 ITAM mediates recruitment of the protein tyrosine kinase Syk and consequent activation of the MAPK pathway that regulates various functions (9, 41, 43, 44). Triggering of the murine SIRP
1 receptor, for instance, which also complexes with DAP12, promotes phagocytosis in macrophages (16). This indicates that mSIRP
1 acts as an activating SIRP family member. Further evidence for the rapid evolution of this family of proteins is given by the differences in SIRP
1 sequences from different mouse strains (16).
SIRP
, the third member of the human SIRP family, is expressed on T cells and activated NK cells (13, 14, 15). It can bind CD47, albeit with 10-fold lower affinity as compared with SIRP
(13). Moreover, SIRP
-CD47 interaction mediates cell-cell adhesion and supports APC-T cell contact, enhancing Ag presentation, the consequent T cell proliferation, and cytokine secretion (15). It seems unlikely that SIRP
itself generates intracellular signals because it does not have any recognizable signaling motifs. Instead, SIRP
may trigger signaling of CD47 in APCs.
| Concluding remarks |
|---|
|
|
|---|
receptor member, which is consistent with a homeostatic function. Indeed, SIRP
is capable of recognizing "self" in the form of the broadly expressed surface marker CD47, and this negatively controls effector functions of innate immune cells, such as macrophages. It also seems possible that SIRP
-CD47 interactions regulate the induction of adaptive immune responses, but clearly more in vivo investigation is desired in this area.
In contrast to the single SIRP
, multiple SIRP
-like molecules with putative activating potential appear to be present in the various species. For some SIRP
-like members, which may associate with and signal via the adaptor molecule DAP12, there is evidence that they can trigger activation and phagocytosis in myeloid cells. The strong diversification, which has led to significant differences in SIRP
composition, even among closely related species such as mouse and rat, is more in line with a function in host defense, perhaps even involving direct pathogen recognition. If so, the SIRP repertoire may have been shaped by the continuous molecular battle between host and pathogens. It is noteworthy in this context that essentially all poxviruses encode a homologue of CD47 termed vCD47. It seems feasible that vCD47 has, at least at some point during evolution, mediated poxvirus immune evasion by negative regulation of myeloid cell function via SIRP
. Of interest, very recent evidence indicates indeed that the myxoma virus vCD47 protein (also known as M128L), which is expressed on the surface of infected cells, is required for the production of a lethal infection in its natural host (i.e., the rabbit) and, at the same time, contributes to the suppression of macrophage activation (45). Although this study did not provide direct evidence for an interaction between vCD47 and SIRP
, it is clearly consistent with a possible role of vCD47-SIRP
interactions in virus-mediated immune evasion. Inversely, the generation of activating SIRP
variants by duplication from SIRP
, particularly if they acquired a certain degree of specificity toward the viral CD47 molecule, would likewise have provided the host with a selective advantage. The precedent for this type of reaction has been shown with the Ly49 system. This family of NK-paired receptors in mice has extracellular lectin-like domains, and like SIRPs have forms with intracellular ITIMs (for inhibitory genes) such as Ly49I or associate with DAP12 (for activatory genes) such as Ly49H. These particular proteins bind the m157 viral product from mouse CMV and determine the susceptibility of mice toward virus infection (46, 47). It will clearly be of interest to further explore the interactions of SIRP family members with poxvirus vCD47 and other ligands expressed by pathogens.
Note added in proof. Recent evidence suggests that apoptosis of cells can be accompanied by a down-regulation of (functional) CD47 expression (48). As a result, the apoptotic cells will no longer provide an inhibitory signal for phagocytosis via SIRP
which will facilitate their uptake by macrophages. CD47 may thus act as a "viability" or "dont eat me" signal to the phagocyte.
| Acknowledgments |
|---|
| Footnotes |
|---|
1 Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dr. Timo K. van den Berg, VU University Medical Center, P.O. Box 7057, 1007 MB Amsterdam, The Netherlands. E-mail address: t.vandenberg{at}vumc.nl ![]()
2 Abbreviations used in this paper: SIRP, signal regulatory protein; IgSF, Ig superfamily domain; SHP, Src homology region 2 domain-containing phosphatase; EST, expressed sequence tag; m, murine; DC, dendritic cell; r, rat; g, chicken. ![]()
Received for publication July 13, 2005. Accepted for publication September 26, 2005.
| References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
family of protein tyrosine phosphatase binding proteins in cattle that are expressed on monocytes and a subpopulation of dendritic cells and which mediate binding to CD4 T cells. Eur. J. Immunol. 28: 1-11. [Medline]
2-CD47 interaction costimulates T cell proliferation. Blood 105: 2421-2427. [Medline]
and its signaling mechanism in macrophages. J. Biol. Chem. 279: 29450-29460.
in primären Macrophagen der Maus. Doctoral dissertation Ruprecht-Karls-University, Heidelberg, Germany.
determines its cellular binding-specificity. J. Cell Sci. 114: 1321-1329. [Abstract]
1. Eur. J. Immunol. 30: 2130-2137. [Medline]
) signaling pathway that inhibits LPS-induced TNF-
production by monocytes. Blood 102: 2532-2540.
ligation induces macrophage nitric oxide production through JAK/. Mol. Cell Biol. 25: 7181-7192.
. J. Biol. Chem. 275: 28222-28229.
: down-regulation of IL-12 responsiveness and inhibition of dendritic cell activation. J. Immunol. 167: 2547-2554.
-CD47 interactions are required for the transmigration of monocytes across cerebral endothelium. J. Immunol. 168: 5832-5839.
), a cellular ligand for CD47, regulates neutrophil transmigration. J. Biol. Chem. 277: 10028-10036.
1 is expressed as a disulfide linked homodimer in leukocytes and positively regulates neutrophil transepithelial migration. J. Biol. Chem. 280: 36132-36140.
1 is a DAP12-associated activating receptor expressed in myeloid cells. J. Immunol. 164: 9-12.
(SIRP
) but not SIRP
is involved in T cell activation, binds to CD47 with high affinity, and is expressed on immature CD34+CD38 hematopoietic cells. Blood 97: 2741-2749. [Medline]
with KARAP/DAP-12. Eur. J. Immunol. 30: 2147-2156. [Medline]This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
S. Kusakari, H. Ohnishi, F.-J. Jin, Y. Kaneko, T. Murata, Y. Murata, H. Okazawa, and T. Matozaki Trans-endocytosis of CD47 and SHPS-1 and its role in regulation of the CD47-SHPS-1 system J. Cell Sci., April 15, 2008; 121(8): 1213 - 1223. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. S. Isenberg, D. D. Roberts, and W. A. Frazier CD47: A New Target in Cardiovascular Therapy Arterioscler. Thromb. Vasc. Biol., April 1, 2008; 28(4): 615 - 621. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Miyake, Y. Murata, H. Okazawa, H. Ikeda, Y. Niwayama, H. Ohnishi, Y. Hirata, and T. Matozaki Negative regulation by SHPS-1 of Toll-like receptor-dependent proinflammatory cytokine production in macrophages. Genes Cells, February 1, 2008; 13(2): 209 - 219. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
W. Y. Lee, D. A. Weber, O. Laur, E. A. Severson, I. McCall, R. P. Jen, A. C. Chin, T. Wu, K. M. Gernet, and C. A. Parkos Novel Structural Determinants on SIRP{alpha} that Mediate Binding to CD47 J. Immunol., December 1, 2007; 179(11): 7741 - 7750. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. Tomizawa, Y. Kaneko, Y. Kaneko, Y. Saito, H. Ohnishi, J. Okajo, C. Okuzawa, T. Ishikawa-Sekigami, Y. Murata, H. Okazawa, et al. Resistance to Experimental Autoimmune Encephalomyelitis and Impaired T Cell Priming by Dendritic Cells in Src Homology 2 Domain-Containing Protein Tyrosine Phosphatase Substrate-1 Mutant Mice J. Immunol., July 15, 2007; 179(2): 869 - 877. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. Okajo, Y. Kaneko, Y. Murata, T. Tomizawa, C. Okuzawa, Y. Saito, Y. Kaneko, T. Ishikawa-Sekigami, H. Okazawa, H. Ohnishi, et al. Regulation by Src Homology 2 Domain-Containing Protein Tyrosine Phosphatase Substrate-1 of {alpha}-Galactosylceramide-Induced Antimetastatic Activity and Th1 and Th2 Responses of NKT Cells J. Immunol., May 15, 2007; 178(10): 6164 - 6172. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
D. Hatherley, K. Harlos, D. C. Dunlop, D. I. Stuart, and A. N. Barclay The Structure of the Macrophage Signal Regulatory Protein {alpha} (SIRP{alpha}) Inhibitory Receptor Reveals a Binding Face Reminiscent of That Used by T Cell Receptors J. Biol. Chem., May 11, 2007; 282(19): 14567 - 14575. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. Subramanian, E. T. Boder, and D. E. Discher Phylogenetic Divergence of CD47 Interactions with Human Signal Regulatory Protein {alpha} Reveals Locus of Species Specificity: IMPLICATIONS FOR THE BINDING SITE J. Biol. Chem., January 19, 2007; 282(3): 1805 - 1818. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. Shi, K. Luo, D. Xia, T. Chen, G. Chen, Y. Jiang, N. Li, and X. Cao DIgR2, dendritic cell-derived immunoglobulin receptor 2, is one representative of a family of IgSF inhibitory receptors and mediates negative regulation of dendritic cell-initiated antigen-specific T-cell responses Blood, October 15, 2006; 108(8): 2678 - 2686. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
M. Fornaro, P. M. Burch, W. Yang, L. Zhang, C. E. Hamilton, J. H. Kim, B. G. Neel, and A. M. Bennett SHP-2 activates signaling of the nuclear factor of activated T cells to promote skeletal muscle growth J. Cell Biol., October 9, 2006; 175(1): 87 - 97. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
T. K. van den Berg, E. M. van Beek, H.-J. Buhring, M. Colonna, M. Hamaguchi, C. J. Howard, M. Kasuga, Y. Liu, T. Matozaki, B. G. Neel, et al. A Nomenclature for Signal Regulatory Protein Family Members J. Immunol., December 15, 2005; 175(12): 7788 - 7789. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||