Báo cáo khoa học: WFIKKN1 and WFIKKN2 bind growth factors TGFb1, BMP2 and BMP4 but do not inhibit their signalling activity docx

WFIKKN1 and WFIKKN2 bind growth factors TGFb1, BMP2
and BMP4 but do not inhibit their signalling activity
Gyo
¨
rgy Szla
´
ma, Katalin Konda
´
s, Ma
´
ria Trexler and La
´
szlo
´
Patthy
Institute of Enzymology, Budapest, Hungary
Introduction
Growth factors of the transforming growth factor b
(TGFb) family regulate many cellular processes, includ-
ing cell proliferation, differentiation and lineage deter-
mination. In humans, more than 30 structurally related
proteins belong to this family [1]. Members of this protein
family are usually assigned to three main subfamilies:
activins, TGFbs and bone morphogenic proteins
(BMPs) ⁄ growth and differentiation factors (GDFs).
TGFb family members are secreted as large precursor
proteins and the mature growth factors are released from
these precursors through cleavage by furin-type prote-
ases. In several cases, the prodomain and the mature
Keywords
BMP; GDF11; GDF8; TGFb; WFIKKN

Correspondence
L. Patthy, Institute of Enzymology,
Budapest, Karolina ut 29, Hungary
Fax: +361 466 5465
Tel: + 361 209 3537
E-mail:
(Received 1 June 2010, revised 5 October
2010, accepted 8 October 2010)
doi:10.1111/j.1742-4658.2010.07909.x
WFIKKN1 and WFIKKN2 are large extracellular multidomain proteins
consisting of a WAP domain, a follistatin domain, an immunoglobulin
domain, two Kunitz-type protease inhibitor domains and an NTR domain.
Recent experiments have shown that both proteins have high affinity for
growth and differentiation factor (GDF)8 and GDF11. Here we study the
interaction of WFIKKN proteins with several additional representatives of
the transforming growth factor (TGF)b family using SPR measurements.
Analyses of SPR sensorgrams suggested that, in addition to GDF8 and
GDF11, both WFIKKN proteins bind TGFb1, bone morphogenetic pro-
tein (BMP)2 and BMP4 with relatively high affinity (K
d
 10
)6
M). To
assess the biological significance of these interactions we studied the effect
of WFIKKN proteins on the activity of GDF8, GDF11, TGFb1, BMP2
and BMP4 using reporter assays. These studies revealed that WFIKKN1
and WFIKKN2 inhibited the biological activity of GDF8 and GDF11 in
the nanomolar range, whereas they did not inhibit the activities of TGFb1,
BMP2 and BMP4 even in the micromolar range. Our data indicate that
WFIKKN proteins are antagonists of GDF8 and GDF11, but in the case

of TGFb1, BMP2 and BMP4 they function as growth factor binding pro-
teins. It is suggested that the physical association of WFIKKN proteins
with these growth factors may localize their action and thus help to estab-
lish growth factor gradients in the extracellular space.
Structured digital abstract
l
A list of the large number of protein-protein interactions described in this article is available
via the MINT article
MINT-8044119
Abbreviations
ACRIIB, activin receptor IIB; BMP2, bone morphogenetic protein 2; BMP3, bone morphogenetic protein 3; BMP4, bone morphogenetic
protein 4; BMP8b, bone morphogenetic protein 8b; BMP11, bone morphogenetic protein 11 or growth and differentiation factor 11;
BMPRIA, bone morphogenetic protein receptor IA; ECD, extracellular domain; GDF11, growth and differentiation factor 11 or bone
morphogenetic protein 11; GDF8, growth and differentiation factor 8 or myostatin; TGFb1, transforming growth factor b1; TGF-bsRII,
recombinant protein corresponding to the extracellular domain of TGFb1 receptor TGF-bbRII; WFIKKN1 and WFIKKN2 – WAP, follistatin,
immunoglobulin, kunitz and netrin domain containing protein 1 and 2.
5040 FEBS Journal 277 (2010) 5040–5050 ª 2010 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2010 FEBS
disulfide-bonded homodimer growth factor remain asso-
ciated after proteolytic cleavage [2–4]. The prodo-
main ⁄ growth factor complexes confer latency on the
growth factors and the active homodimeric growth fac-
tors may be liberated from the latent complexes through
degradation of the propeptides by proteases [4–6].
TGFb family proteins signal through type I and
type II serine–threonine kinase receptors; in verte-
brates, seven type I receptors and five type II receptors
have been identified [1]. Homodimeric growth factors
bind to two type I and two type II receptors to form a
hexameric signalling complex. In these complexes,
type II receptors phosphorylate a short segment of

type I receptors, which in turn phosphorylate down-
stream targets [7,8].
The number of growth factors available for signal-
ling is tightly regulated by several, structurally differ-
ent antagonists that, by interacting with the growth
factors, alter or diminish their binding to the receptors.
Similar to the prodomain in latent complexes, inhibi-
tory proteins, like chordin, noggin, follistatin, follista-
tin-related protein and gremlin bind various members
of the TGFb family with high affinity and block their
interaction with their receptors [9].
Recent studies have expanded the list of TGFb
antagonists to include WFIKKN1 and WFIKKN2
proteins: these proteins bind GDF8 (myostatin) and
GDF11 (BMP11) with high affinity [10]. WFIKKN
proteins are large extracellular multidomain proteins
that contain a WAP domain, a Follistatin ⁄ Kazal
domain, an immunoglobulin domain, two Kunitz-type
protease inhibitor domains and an NTR domain
[11,12]. The fact that, in luciferase reporter assays,
WFIKKN2 inhibited the activity of myostatin and
GDF11 [13] suggests that WFIKKNs may play crucial
roles in the regulation of processes (muscle growth,
anterior ⁄ posterior patterning of the axial skeleton, etc.)
that are under the control of these growth factors.
WFIKKN proteins are, however, expressed in
numerous tissues other than those controlled by GDF8
or GDF11. For example, the WFIKKN1 gene is
expressed in pancreas, thymus, liver, kidney, lung, tes-
tis and inner ear, and the WFIKKN2 gene is expressed

in ovary, testis, pancreas, brain and lung [11,12,14],
raising the possibility that the proteins may have addi-
tional functions. To investigate this possibility, we used
SPR and luciferase reporter assays to study the inter-
action of WFIKKN1 and WFIKKN2 proteins with
several representatives of the TGFb family.
Analyses of SPR sensorgrams have shown that both
WFIKKN proteins bind TGFb1, BMP2 and BMP4
with relatively high affinity (K
d
 10
)6
m), but in
reporter assays they do not inhibit their activities, even
in the micromolar range. Our data suggest that
WFIKKN proteins may function not only as antago-
nists of GDF8 and GDF11, but also as proteins that
localize the action of growth factors.
Results
Characterization of the interaction of WFIKKN1
and WFIKKN2 with BMP2, BMP3, BMP4, BMP8b
and TGFb1 by SPR
SPR analyses suggested that both WFIKKN proteins
may bind BMP2, BMP3, BMP4, BMP8b and TGFb1
(Fig. 1), although the affinities of WFIKKN1 and
WFIKKN2 for these growth factors are significantly
lower than those determined for GDF8 and GDF11
(Table 1). No interaction was detected with activin A,
even when high (up to 4 lm) concentrations of
WFIKKNs were injected on the surface of immobi-

lized activin A.
The K
d
values calculated for the interactions of
WFIKKN1 with BMP2 (7.2 · 10
)7
m), BMP3 (3.3 ·
10
)6
m), BMP4 (8.2 · 10
)7
m), TGFb1 (4.5 · 10
)7
m)
or for the interactions of WFIKKN2 with BMP2
(4.3 · 10
)8
m), BMP3 (1.8 · 10
)7
m), BMP4 (6.5 · 10
)8
m), TGFb1 (2.8 · 10
)8
m) were suggestive of relatively
high affinities, raising the possibility that these interac-
tions may have biological importance.
It should be noted, however, that there was a major
additional difference between sensorgrams obtained
with GDF8 ⁄ GDF11 and TGFb1 ⁄ BMP2 ⁄ BMP3 ⁄ BMP4 ⁄
BMP8b: the former gave good fits with the simple

model of a 1 : 1 Langmuir interaction [10], whereas the
association and dissociation curves of the interaction of
WFIKKN proteins with the various BMPs gave accept-
able fits only with the model of ‘two state reaction with
conformational change’. The association and dissocia-
tion curves of the interaction of WFIKKN proteins
with TGFb1 could be fitted to the model of ‘heteroge-
neous ligand parallel reaction’ (see Experimental proce-
dures). Because it has been pointed out recently in a
critical review of the biosensor literature that parame-
ters calculated with the 1 : 1 interaction model are most
likely to give reliable estimates of binding constants
[15], it may be doubtful whether the K
d
values calcu-
lated for the interaction of WFIKKN proteins with
TGFb1, BMP2, BMP3, BMP4, BMP8b are valid, and
whether WFIKKNs are efficient inhibitors of the bind-
ing of these growth factors to their cognate receptors.
To answer these questions, we studied the ability of
WFIKKN proteins to block the binding of growth fac-
tors to their receptors using SPR in a solution-competi-
tion format, as well as luciferase reporter assays.
G. Szla
´
ma et al. WFIKKNs bind several members of the TGFb family
FEBS Journal 277 (2010) 5040–5050 ª 2010 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2010 FEBS 5041
20
60
100

0 200 400 600 800
C
Time (s)
40
100
160
220
0 200 400 600 800
D
Time (s)
60
220
380
0 200 400 600 800
E
Time (s)
Time (s)
220
460
700
0 200 400 600 800
F
Time (s)
140
300
0 200 400 600 800
G
150
550
950

0 200 400 600 800
H
Time (s )
300
620
0 200 400 600 800
I
Time (s)
0
40
80
0 200 400 600 800
J
Time (s)
20
100
0 200 400 600 800
A
Time (s)
RURURURURU
RU
RU RU RU RU
WFIKKN1-BMP4
60
220
380
0 200 400 600 800
B
Time (s)
WFIKKN2-BMP4

WFIKKN1-TGFβ1WFIKKN2-TGF
1
WFIKKN1-BMP2 WFIKKN2-BMP2
WFIKKN1-BMP3 WFIKKN2-BMP3
WFIKKN1-BMP8b WFIKKN2-BMP8b
Fig. 1. Characterization of the interaction of WFIKKN1 and WFIKKN2 with members of the TGFb family using SPR assays. Sensorgrams of
the interactions of: (A) WFIKKN1 (500 n
M, 1, 1.25, 1.5 and 2 lM) with BMP4; (B) WFIKKN2 (25, 50, 100, 250, 500 and 1000 nM) with BMP4;
(C) WFIKKN1 (1
, 2, 3, 4 and 6 lM) with TGFb1; (D) WFIKKN2 (250 AND 500 nM, and 1, 2 and 4 lM) with TGFb1; (E) WFIKKN1 (400 and
750 n
M, 2 and 3 lM) with BMP2; (F) WFIKKN2 (50, 100, 250 and 500 nM) with BMP2; (G) WFIKKN1 (500 and 750 nM, 1 and 1.5 lM) with
BMP3; (H) WFIKKN2 (100
, 250 and 500 nM, 1 and 2 l M) with BMP3; (I) WFIKKN1 (250, 500 and 750 nM, 1, 1.25, 1.5 and 2 lM) with BMP8b;
(J) WFIKKN2 (250
, 500 and 750 nM, 1 and 1.5 lM) with BMP8b. Various concentrations of WFIKKN1 or WFIKKN2 in 20 mM Hepes buffer,
pH 7.5, containing 150 m
M NaCl, 5 mM EDTA, 0.005% Tween 20 were injected over CM5 sensorchips containing the immobilized growth
factors. For each type of experiment, one set of representative data from three parallel experiments are shown. For the sake of clarity, the
concentrations of WFIKKN proteins are not indicated in the panels; in each case, the SPR response increased parallel to the increase in
WFIKKN concentration.
WFIKKNs bind several members of the TGFb family G. Szla
´
ma et al.
5042 FEBS Journal 277 (2010) 5040–5050 ª 2010 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2010 FEBS
Effect of WFIKKN1 and WFIKKN2 on binding of
GDF8, GDF11, BMP2, BMP4 and TGFb1 to the
extracellular domains of their cognate receptors
As shown in Fig. 2A, GDF8 binds tightly to the extra-
cellular domain (ECD) of its receptor, activin recep-

tor IIB (ACRIIB), with a K
d
value of 1.6 · 10
)9
m,
comparable with that determined for intact receptors
present on cells (Table 2). Preincubation of GDF8
with increasing concentrations of WFIKKN1 (Fig. 2B)
or WFIKKN2 (Fig. 2C) efficiently decreased the
recorded SPR response and association rate, indicating
that GDF8–WFIKKN1 and GDF8–WFIKKN2 com-
plexes formed are unable to bind to the ECD of the
receptor protein. Analysis of the data revealed that
WFIKKN1 and WFIKKN2 caused a 50% decrease in
the rate of association of GDF8 to the ECD of ACRI-
IB at  20 and 12 nm, respectively. GDF11 also
binds tightly to the ECD of its receptor (Fig. 2D), with
a K
d
value of 4.8 · 10
)10
m (Table 2). Preincubation of
GDF11 with increasing concentrations of WFIKKN1
(Fig. 2E) or WFIKKN2 (Fig. 2F) efficiently decreased
the recorded SPR response and association rate:
WFIKKN1 and WFIKKN2 caused a 50% decrease
in the rate of association of GDF11 to the ECD of
ACRIIB at  40 and  5nm, respectively.
In similar experiments, we investigated the effect of
WFIKKN1 and WFIKKN2 on the binding of BMP2

and BMP4 to the ECD of their high-affinity receptor
bone morphogenetic protein receptor IA (BMPRIA).
As shown in Fig. 3, both BMP2 (Fig. 3A) and BMP4
(Fig. 3B) had high affinity for the ECD of BMPRIA,
with K
d
values comparable with those determined by
others (Table 2).
Preincubation of BMP2 or BMP4 with increasing
concentrations of WFIKKN1 resulted only in weak
inhibition even at the highest (4 lm) concentration of
WFIKKN1 (Fig. 3C,D). WFIKKN2 proved to be a
slightly more efficient inhibitor of both BMP2 and
BMP4 than WFIKKN1. As shown in Fig. 3E,F,
WFIKKN2 decreased both the recorded SPR response
and the association rate; WFIKKN2 caused a 50%
decrease in the rate of association of BMP2 and
BMP4 to the ECD of BMPRIA at  2 and 3 lm,
respectively.
TGFb1 had high affinity for the immobilized ECD
of TGFbRII; based on analyses of sensorgrams, the
interaction is characterized by a K
d
value of
5 · 10
)11
m (Table 2). Preincubation of TGF b1 with
increasing concentrations of WFIKKN2 caused a 50%
decrease in the rate of association to its receptor at
 1 lm. In the case of WFIKKN1, even the highest

concentration used (2 lm) caused only a 20% decrease
in the rate of association of the growth factor to its
receptor (data not shown).
Effect of WFIKKN1 and WFIKKN2 on growth
factor activity of GDF8, GDF11, BMP2, BMP4
and TGFb1
As shown in Fig. 4A, both WFIKKN1 and WFIKKN2
efficiently inhibited the activity of GDF8 in luciferase
reporter assays, half-maximal inhibition being achieved
by  6nm WFIKKN1 and by  3nm WFIKKN2.
Similarly, WFIKKN1 and WFIKKN2 inhibited the
activity of GDF11; 50 nm WFIKKN1 and WFIKKN2
caused 80% and 90% inhibition, respectively (data not
shown). By contrast with GDF8 and GDF11, in the
case of TGFb1, BMP2 and BMP4, neither WFIKKN1
nor WFIKKN2 was able to cause inhibition even at
the highest concentrations (1 lm) used (Fig. 4B–D).
Discussion
SPR studies on the interaction of WFIKKN1 and
WFIKKN2 proteins have raised the possibility that
both proteins may bind several members of the TGFb
family: their affinities for ligands were found to decrease
in the order GDF8 ⁄ GDF11 >> TGFb1 ⁄ BMP2 ⁄
BMP4 > BMP3 > BMP8b, with no detectable affinity
for activin A (Fig. 1 and Table 1). The lack of affinity
of WFIKKNs for activin A is in harmony with the
observation that, in luciferase reporter assays,
WFIKKN2 had no effect on the activity of activin [13].
Our observation, however, that both WFIKKN1 and
WFIKKN2 appeared to bind TGFb1, BMP2 and

BMP4 with relatively high affinity in SPR experiments
does not necessarily mean that they are efficient inhibi-
tors of these growth factors. The use of SPR to
Table 1. Kinetic parameters of the interaction of BMP2, BMP3
BMP4, BMP8b, TGFb1, GDF8 and GDF11 with WFIKKN1 and
WFIKKN2. The equilibrium dissociation constants of the interactions
were determined from SPR measurements with
BIAEVALUATION soft-
ware 4.0. The K
d
values of the interaction of GDF8 and GDF11 with
WFIKKN proteins are taken from Konda
´
s et al. [10].
Interacting proteins K
d
(M) Interacting proteins K
d
(M)
BMP2
a
–WFIKKN1 7.2 · 10
)7
BMP2
a
–WFIKKN2 4.3 · 10
)8
BMP3
a
–WFIKKN1 3.3 · 10

)6
BMP3
a
–WFIKKN2 1.8 · 10
)7
BMP4
a
–WFIKKN1 8.2 · 10
)7
BMP4
a
–WFIKKN2 6.5 · 10
)8
BMP8b
a
–WFIKKN1 3.0 · 10
)5
BMP8b
a
–WFIKKN2 5.3 · 10
)5
TGFb1
a
–WFIKKN1 4.5 · 10
)7
TGFb1
a
–WFIKKN2 2.8 · 10
)8
8.9 · 10

)5
3.3 · 10
)5
GDF8
a
–WFIKKN1 3.3 · 10
)8
GDF8
a
–WFIKKN2 2.8 · 10
)10
GDF11
a
–WFIKKN1 2.2 · 10
)9
GDF11
a
–WFIKKN2 1.6 · 10
)10
a
These proteins were immobilized on the sensorchips.
G. Szla
´
ma et al. WFIKKNs bind several members of the TGFb family
FEBS Journal 277 (2010) 5040–5050 ª 2010 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2010 FEBS 5043
determine dissociation constants of protein–protein
interactions has numerous pitfalls, including problems
associated with the immobilization of one of the inter-
acting partners. As pointed out by Rich and Myszka
[15], parameters calculated with the 1 : 1 Langmuir

interaction model are most likely to give reliable esti-
mates of binding constants, therefore that the interac-
tion of WFIKKN proteins with TGFb1, BMP2, BMP3,
BMP4, BMP8b gave acceptable fits only with alterna-
tive models raised doubts about whether the dissocia-
tion constants are valid and, consequently, whether the
interactions detected by SPR have physiological rele-
vance. To overcome this problem, we studied the ability
of WFIKKN proteins to block the binding of growth
factors to their receptors using SPR solution-competi-
tion assay formats as well as reporter assays.
These studies have shown that the conclusions
drawn from the different types of assays are in agree-
ment in the case of GDF8 and GDF11. For example,
the high affinity of WFIKKN1 for GDF8 determined
with SPR (K
d
 33 nm) is in agreement with its
efficiency in inhibiting the binding of GDF8 to its
receptor in vitro (IC
50
 20 nm) and its ability to block
the activity of GDF8 in reporter assays (IC
50
 6nm).
Similarly, the efficiency of WFIKKN2 to inhibit
the binding of GDF8 to its receptor in vitro (IC
50

12 nm) is in agreement with its ability to block the

activity of GDF8 in reporter assays (IC
50
 3nm).
0
5
10
15
50 150 250 350 450 550 650 750
Time (s)
RURURU
RURURU
A
GDF8
0
5
10
15
50 150 250 350 450 550 650
Time (s)
D
GDF11
B
–10
0
–10
5
15
50 150
250 350 450 550 650 750
Time (s)

GDF8-WFIKKN1
0
5
10
15
50 150 250 350 450 550 650
Time (s)
E
GDF11-WFIKKN1
C
0
5
15
50 150 250 350 450 550 650 750 850
Time (s)
GDF8-WFIKKN2
0
5
10
15
50
150 250 350 450 550 650
Time (s)
F
GDF11-WFIKKN2
Fig. 2. Effect of WFIKKN1 and WFIKKN2 on the binding of GDF8 and GDF11 with the ECD of ACRIIB monitored using SPR. Sensorgrams
of the interactions of immobilized ECD of ACRIIB with: (A) GDF8, 5
, 10, 20 and 50 nM; (B) 50 nM GDF8 preincubated with 0, 25, 50, 100 and
250 n
M WFIKKN1; (C) 50 nM GDF8 preincubated with 0, 12.5, 25, 30 and 50 nM WFIKKN2; (D) GDF11, 2, 2.5, 5, 7.5 and 10 nM; (E) 10 nM

GDF11 preincubated with 0, 5, 10, 50, 100 and 200 nM WFIKKN1; (F) 10 nM GDF11 preincubated with 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6 and 8 nM WFIKKN2.
Various concentrations of WFIKKN1 or WFIKKN2 and 50 n
M GDF8 or 10 nM GDF11 were preincubated in 20 mM Hepes buffer, pH 7.5, con-
taining 150 m
M NaCl, 5 mM EDTA, 0.005% Tween 20 for 30 min at room temperature and were injected over CM5 sensorchips containing
immobilized ECD of ACRIIB. For the sake of clarity, the concentrations of the proteins injected over the sensorchips are not indicated; in (A)
and (D) the SPR response increased parallel to the increase in GDF8 and GDF11 concentration, respectively. In (B), (C), (E) and (F) the SPR
response decreased parallel to the increase in WFIKKN concentration.
WFIKKNs bind several members of the TGFb family G. Szla
´
ma et al.
5044 FEBS Journal 277 (2010) 5040–5050 ª 2010 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2010 FEBS
The differences in the parameters in the different
assays are likely to reflect true variations in the assay
formats: in interactions with immobilized partner
versus competition in the solution phase, immobilized
ECD may not properly represent the structure of the
intact receptor complex present on the cell-surface. The
three types of experiments suggest that WFIKKN1 and
WFIKKN2 are potent inhibitors of GDF8 and GDF11
and may play a significant role in the regulation of
biological processes controlled by these growth factors.
In the case of BMP2 and BMP4, solution-competi-
tion assays revealed that WFIKKNs inhibit the bind-
ing of these growth factors to immobilized ECDs of
their cognate receptors at higher concentrations (IC
50
values of 2–3 lm) than expected from the affinities of
WFIKKNs for immobilized BMP2 and BMP4
(Table 1). In reporter assays, WFIKKNs failed to inhi-

bit the activity of BMP2 and BMP4.
In the case of TGFb1, solution-competition assays
also indicated that WFIKKNs inhibit the binding of
this growth factor to its receptor at higher concentra-
tions than expected from the affinities of WFIKKNs
for immobilized TGFb1 (Table 1). In reporter gene
assays, neither WFIKKN1 nor WFIKKN2 inhibited
the biological activity of this growth factor, even at
1 lm (Fig. 4B). This observation is in agreement with
the finding of Hill et al. [13] that WFIKKN2 did not
inhibit the activity of TGFb1.
Although WFIKKN proteins do not inhibit the sig-
nalling activites of BMP2, BMP4 and TGFb1, this
does not necessarily mean that the interactions of
WFIKKNs with BMP2, BMP4 and TGFb1 do not
have physiological relevance. Growth factor binding
proteins may control the action of growth factors not
only by inhibiting their action, but also, by serving as
a reservoir for growth factors, may localize their action
in the vicinity of the binding proteins and thus help to
establish growth factor gradients in the extracellular
space through physical association.
As a result, the same growth factor binding protein
may serve as either an agonist or antagonist of a given
growth factor in a context-dependent manner [16–20].
It may be relevant in this respect that WFIKKN1 was
shown to be preferentially expressed in the developing
inner ear, mainly in the BMP4-positive presumptive
cristae, and it was suggested that WFIKKN1 may be
involved in the early development of the inner ear

sensory organ by controlling the action of BMP4 [14].
Because BMP4 not only specifies the sensory epithe-
lium of the inner ear, but also regulates its structural
development [21,22] we suggest that WFIKKN1 may
influence this process by acting as a short-range diffus-
ible protein that binds BMP4.
Experimental procedures
Reagents, enzymes, PCR primers, proteins,
bacterial strains, cell lines and media
Restriction enzymes, T4 DNA Ligase and Klenow polymer-
ase were from New England Biolabs (Beverly, MA, USA).
PCR primers were obtained from Integrated DNA Technol-
ogies (Coralville, IA, USA). For amplification reactions, we
used Taq DNA polymerase from Fermentas (Vilnius, Lith-
uania) or the proofreading thermostable polymerase Accu-
zyme (Bioline, London, UK). DNA purification was
performed with Nucleospin Extract PCR purification kit
(Macherey-Nagel, Duren, Germany). Escherichia coli
JM109 bacterial strain was used for DNA propagation
during DNA manipulation steps. Mature mouse GDF8
(O08689, GDF8_MOUSE), human GDF11 (O95390,
GDF11_HUMAN), activin A (A4D1W7, A4D1W7_HU-
MAN), BMP2 (P12643, BMP2_HUMAN), BMP3 (P12645,
BMP3_HUMAN), BMP4 (P12644, BMP4_HUMAN),
BMP8b (P34820, BMP8B_HUMAN), TGFb1 (P01137,
TGFB1_HUMAN) and TGF-bsRII (P37173, TGFR2_HU-
MAN) (corresponding to the ECD of TGF-bRII) were
purchased from R&D Systems (Wiesbaden, Germany).
CM5 sensorchips and the reagents for protein coupling to
the chips were from Biacore AB (Uppsala, Sweden).

Recombinant WFIKKN1 (Q96NZ8, WFKN1_HUMAN)
and WFIKKN2 (Q8TEU8, WFKN2_HUMAN) were
produced as described previously [10]. The Cignal SMAD
Reporter Kit was purchased from SaBiosciences (Frederick,
MD, USA), the firefly and Renilla luciferase kits were from
Biotium (Hayward, CA, USA). Rhabdomyosarcoma A204
cells were from the German Collection of Microorganisms
Table 2. Interaction of GDF8, BMP2 and BMP4 with immobilized
extracellular domains of their receptors. The equilibrium dissocia-
tion constants of the interactions were determined from SPR mea-
surements with
BIAEVALUATION software 4.0. For comparison K
d
values determined by others for the interaction of the growth
factors with ECDs of receptors or intact receptors present on cell
surfaces are also shown.
Interacting proteins K
d
(M) References
GDF8–cell surface 1.4 · 10
)10
3
GDF8–ECD ACRIIB 1.6 · 10
)9
GDF11–ECD ACRIIB 4.8 · 10
)10
TGFb1–ECD TbRII 6 · 10
)12
26
TGFb1–cell surface 25 · 10

)12
27
TGFb1–ECD TbRII 5 · 10
)11
BMP4–ECD BMPRIA 9.6 · 10
)9
28
BMP4–cell surface 2.5 · 10
)10
29
BMP4–ECD BMPRIA 1.2 · 10
)9
BMP2–ECD BMPRIA 2.6 · 10
)9
30
BMP2–ECD BMPRIA 3.3 · 10
)10
G. Szla
´
ma et al. WFIKKNs bind several members of the TGFb family
FEBS Journal 277 (2010) 5040–5050 ª 2010 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2010 FEBS 5045
and Cell Cultures (DSMZ, Braunschweig, Germany). Mink
lung epithelial cells stably transfected with a truncated PAI-
1 promoter ⁄ firefly luciferase construct (MLEC-clone32) [23]
and HepG2-BRA cells stably transfected with the BRE–luc
reporter construct [24] were generously provided by Profes-
sor Daniel Rifkin (New York University). Culture media
Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s medium, McCoy’s 5A and
heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum were obtained from
Sigma-Aldrich (St Louis, MO, USA).

Expression of the ECD of human BMPR1a and
AVRIIB in Pichia pastoris
The cDNA fragment coding for the extracellular domain of
BMPR1A (P36894, BMR1A_HUMAN) was amplified from
a human prostate first-strand cDNA library (Clontech,
Mountain View, CA,USA) using 5¢-GAGGAATTCCAG
AATCTGGATAGTATGCTT-3¢ sense and 5¢-GAGGTCG
ACTCGAATGCTGCCATCAAAAAACGG-3¢ antisense
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Time (s)
B
Time (s)
0
50
100
150
200
250
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
RURURU
RURURU
A
0

50
100
150
200
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Time (s)
C
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Time (s)
D
0
50
100
150
200
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Time (s)
E
0
20
40
60
80

100
120
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Time (s)
F
BMP2 BMP4
BMP2-WFIKKN1 BMP4-WFIKKN1
BMP2-WFIKKN2 BMP4-WFIKKN2
Fig. 3. Effect of WFIKKN1 and WFIKKN2 on the binding of BMP2 and BMP4 to the ECD of BMPRIA monitored using SPR. Sensorgrams of
the interactions of immobilized ECD of BMPRIA with: (A) BMP2, 5
, 10, 15 and 25 nM; (B) BMP4, 10, 15, 20 and 25 nM; (C) 15 nM BMP2
preincubated with 0
, 750, 2250 and 3900 nM WFIKKN1; (D) 25 nM BMP4 preincubated with 0, 500, 2500 and 4000 nM WFIKKN1; (E) 15 nM
BMP2 preincubated with 0, 750, 2250 and 3900 nM WFIKKN2; and (F) 25 nM BMP4 preincubated with 0, 500, 2500 and 4000 nM WFIKKN2.
Various concentrations of WFIKKN1 or WFIKKN2 and 50 n
M GDF8 were preincubated in 20 mM Hepes buffer, pH 7.5, containing 150 mM
NaCl, 5 mM EDTA, 0.005% Tween 20 for 30 min at room temperature and were injected over CM5 sensorchips containing immobilized
ECD of BMPRIA. For the sake of clarity, the concentrations of the proteins injected over the sensorchips are not indicated; in (A) and (B) the
SPR response increased parallel to the increase in BMP concentration, in (C), (D), (E) and (F) the SPR response decreased parallel to the
increase in WFIKKN concentration.
WFIKKNs bind several members of the TGFb family G. Szla
´
ma et al.
5046 FEBS Journal 277 (2010) 5040–5050 ª 2010 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2010 FEBS
primers. The cDNA of the ECD of human AVRIIB
(Q13705, AVR2B_HUMAN) was amplified with 5¢-GAGG
AATTCTCTGGGCGTGGGGAGGCTGAG-3¢ sense and
5¢-GAGGTCGACCGTGAGCAGGGTGGGGGCTGT-3¢
antisense primers from a skeletal muscle cDNA library. Both
reactions were performed with Accuzyme proofreading Taq

DNA polymerase over 35 reaction cycles. The annealing
temperature was 60 °C for amplification of the ECD of
BMPRIA and 63.5 °C in the case of the ECD of AVRIIB.
In both cases, amplified DNAs were digested with EcoRI
and SalI restriction enzymes and ligated into pPiczalphaA
Pichia pastoris expression vector digested with the same
enzymes. The introduction of the linearized pPICZal-
phaA_BMPR1A and pPICZalphaA_AVRIIB plasmids into
Pichia pastoris GS115 cells and the expression of the recom-
binant protein was performed according to the protocol
described for WFIKKN proteins [10].
The calculated molecular mass of the ECDs of AVRIIB
and BMPRIA are 14 971 and 15 499 Da, respectively.
SDS ⁄ PAGE analysis of the proteins purified from the
induction media showed diffuse bands with molecular
masses higher than the expected, suggesting that the recom-
binant proteins may be glycosylated. Deglycosylation of the
proteins by EndoH digestion decreased the molecular
mass of the proteins to  15–16 kDa. The N-terminal
sequence of the recombinant ECD of BMPRIA was
EFQNLDSMLHGT and that of the recombinant ECD of
AVRIIB was EFSGRGEAETRE (residues in bold corre-
0 200 400 600 800 1000
20
40
60
80
100
120
140

160
B
0 200 400 600 800 1000
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
D
0 1020304050
0
20
40
60
80
100
RLU%RLU%
RLU%RLU%
WFIKKN (nM)
WFIKKN2
WFIKKN1
WFIKKN2
WFIKKN1
WFIKKN2
WFIKKN1
0 200 400 600 800 1000
0
20

40
60
80
100
120
140
WFIKKN (nM)
WFIKKN (n
M)
WFIKKN (n
M)
C
WFIKKN2
WFIKKN1
A
Fig. 4. Effect of WFIKKN1 and WFIKKN2 on the growth factor activities. (A) Rhabdomyosarcoma A204 cells transiently transfected with Cig-
nal SMAD Luciferase Reporter vector and a Renilla luciferase vector were incubated for 16 h with 0.8 n
M GDF8 preincubated with different
concentrations of WFIKKN1 (
) and WFIKKN2 ( ). Firefly luciferase units were normalized to Renilla luciferase units and background values
obtained from control cells were subtracted. (B) Mink lung epithelial cells stably transfected with a truncated PAI-1 promoter ⁄ firefly lucifer-
ase construct (MLEC-clone32) were incubated for 15 h with 8 p
M TGFb1 preincubated with different concentrations of WFIKKN1 ( ) and
WFIKKN2 (
). (C) HepG2 cells stably transfected with the BRE–luc reporter construct were incubated for 15 h with 250 pM BMP2 preincu-
bated with different concentrations of WFIKKN1 (
) and WFIKKN2 ( ). (D) HepG2 cells stably transfected with the BRE–luc reporter con-
struct were incubated for 15 h with 250 p
M BMP4 preincubated with different concentrations of WFIKKN1 ( ) and WFIKKN2 ( ). In the
case of (B), (C) and (D), the luciferase activities were normalized to the protein content of the wells and background values obtained from

control cells were subtracted. The figure shows the mean values of three parallel experiments. Error bars represent the SEM.
G. Szla
´
ma et al. WFIKKNs bind several members of the TGFb family
FEBS Journal 277 (2010) 5040–5050 ª 2010 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2010 FEBS 5047
spond to residues of the ECDs, the N-terminal residues EF
originate from the expression constructs).
The structural integrity and stability of recombinant
ECDs was checked by CD spectroscopy. CD spectra were
measured over the range 195–250 nm by using a JASCO
J-720 spectropolarimeter thermostatted with a N eslab RT-111
water bath. The measurements were carried out in 1 mm
pathlength cells and protein solutions of 0.1 mgÆmL
)1
in
10 mm Tris ⁄ HCl buffer, pH 8.0. Spectra were measured at
25 °C with a 16 s time constant and 20 nmÆmin
)1
scan rate.
The spectral slit width was 1.0 nm. The spectra of the
recombinant proteins were also recorded at different temper-
atures from 25 to 95 °Cat10°C intervals. The thermal
unfolding of the recombinant ECD of BMPRIA and the
ECD of AVRIIB were monitored at 213 and 230 nm,
respectively, where the difference of the CD spectra recorded
at different temperatures was the largest. The heating rate
was 60 °CÆh
)1
. The native fold of both recombinant ECDs
collapsed with single melting temperatures: T

m
=72°C for
the ECD of BMPRIA and 67 °C for the ECD of AVRIIB.
Protein analyses
The composition of protein samples was analysed by
SDS ⁄ PAGE under both reducing and nonreducing condi-
tions. The gels were stained with Coomassie Brilliant Blue
G-250. The concentration of the recombinant proteins was
determined using the following extinction coefficients:
WFIKKN1, 64 440 m
)1
Æcm
)1
; WFIKKN2, 57 470 m
)1
Æcm
)1
;
ECD of BMPRIA, 5095 m
)1
Æcm
)1
; ECD of AVRIIB,
26 065 m
)1
Æcm
)1
. The extinction coefficients were calculated
with the online protein analysis tool protparam.
SPR analysis

SPR measurements were performed on a BIACORE X (GE
Healthcare, Stockholm, Sweden) instrument. Proteins to be
immobilized were dissolved in 50 mm sodium acetate, pH
4.5, and 100 lL of 0.7 lm activin A or 50 lL of 0.8 lm
BMP2 or 100 lL of 0.83 lm BMP3 or 75 lL of 0.7 lm
BMP8b or 50 lL of 0.8 lm BMP4 solutions were injected
with a 5 lLÆmin
)1
flow rate on a CM5 sensor chip activated
by the amine coupling method, according to the manufac-
turer’s instructions. TGFb1 was dissolved in 50 mm sodium
acetate, pH 4.1, and 42 lL of a 0.8 lm solution was
injected with a 3 lLÆmin
)1
flow rate. The ECDs of ACRIIB
and BMPRIA were dissolved in 50 mm sodium acetate, pH
4.0 or 4.2 respectively, and 100 lL of 17.5 l m solutions
were injected with 5 lLÆmin
)1
flow rate. TGFbsRII was dis-
solved in 50 mm sodium acetate, pH 4.2, and 100 lLof
6.6 lm solution was injected with 5 lLÆmin
)1
flow rate.
For interaction measurements, 80-lL aliquots of pro-
tein solutions were injected over the sensor chips with a
20 lLÆmin
)1
flow rate, followed by 10 min flow of buffer.
Binding and washes were performed in 20 mm Hepes,

150 mm NaCl, 5 mm EDTA, 0.005% Tween 20 pH 7.5
buffer. After each cycle the chips were regenerated with
20 mm Hepes, 150 m m NaCl, 5 mm EDTA, 0.005%
Tween 20, pH 7.5 buffer containing 8 m urea.
In solution-competition assays, constant concentrations
of growth factors were incubated with increasing concentra-
tions of WFIKKN1 or WFIKKN2 in 20 mm Hepes,
150 mm NaCl, 5 mm EDTA, 0.005% Tween 20 pH 7.5 buf-
fer for 30 min at room temperature prior to injection on
chips with immobilized ECDs of growth factor receptors.
Control flow cells were prepared by executing the cou-
pling reaction in the presence of coupling buffer alone.
Control flow cells were used to obtain control sensorgrams
showing nonspecific binding to the surface as well as refrac-
tive index changes resulting from changes in the bulk prop-
erties of the solution. Control sensorgrams were subtracted
from sensorgrams obtained with immobilized ligand. To
correct for differences between the reaction and reference
surfaces, we also subtracted the average of sensorgrams
obtained with blank running buffer injections.
The kinetic parameters for each interaction were deter-
mined by globally fitting the experimental data with bia-
evaluation software 4.0 and the closeness of the fit was
characterized by the chi-square values. Fits were accepted
only if the v
2
values were < 5% of R
max
[25]. The associa-
tion and dissociation curves of the interaction of GDF8,

GDF11, BMP2 and BMP4 with the ECDs of their recep-
tors gave good fits with the model of 1 : 1 Langmuir inter-
action. The sensorgrams of the interaction of WFIKKN
proteins with BMPs, however, gave acceptable fits only
with the model of ‘two state reaction with conformational
change’. In the case of the interaction of WFIKKN pro-
teins with TGFb1, the data gave acceptable fits with the
model ‘of heterogeneous ligand parallel reaction’.
Cell culture
Rhabdomyosarcoma A204 cells were cultured in McCoy’s
5A medium supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum,
penicillin (100 UÆmL
)1
) and streptomycin (100 lgÆmL
)1
)at
37 °C, 5% CO
2
. Mink lung epithelial cells and HepG2-
BRA cells were cultured in Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s
medium supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum, peni-
cillin (100 UÆmL
)1
) streptomycin (100 lgÆmL
)1
) and geneti-
cin at a concentration of 200 lgÆmL
)1
(MLEC-clone32) or
700 lgÆmL

)1
(HEPG2-BRA) at 37 °C, 5%CO
2
.
Reporter assays
TGFb1 activity was measured with MLEC-clone32 cells,
whereas the activities of BMP2 and BMP4 were monitored
with HEPG2-BRA cells, using 96-well tissue culture dishes.
In these reporter assays MLEC-clone32 cells (1.6 · 10
4
cellsÆwell
)1
) or HEPG2-BRA cells (5 · 10
3
cellsÆwell
)1
) were
allowed to attach for 3 or 24 h respectively, then the
WFIKKNs bind several members of the TGFb family G. Szla
´
ma et al.
5048 FEBS Journal 277 (2010) 5040–5050 ª 2010 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2010 FEBS
medium was changed to Dulbecco’s modified Eagle’s med-
ium supplemented with 0.1% BSA, penicillin (100 UÆmL
)1
)
streptomycin (100 lgÆmL
)1
) containing 8 pm TGFb1,
250 pm BMP2 or 250 pm BMP4, preincubated for 30 min

with different concentrations of WFIKKN1 or WFIKKN2.
Control experiments were performed similarly, except that
no growth factor was added.
After incubation for 15 h at 37 °C, 5% CO
2
, cells were
lysed in 100 lL lysis buffer and the luciferase activity of the
samples was determined using the firefly luciferase assay kit
of Biotium on an Appliskan luminometer (Thermo Electron
Corp., Beverly, MA, USA). The protein content of the
samples was determined with the Bio-Rad protein assay
(Bio-Rad, Hercules, CA, USA) and the luciferase activity
was normalized to the protein content of the wells.
The activities of GDF8 and GDF11 were studied on
Rhabdomyosarcoma A204 cells. 2.5–3 · 10
4
cells were pla-
ted in wells of a 96-well plate and were allowed to attach
for 24 h, then transiently transfected with 150 ng Cignal
SMAD Luciferase Reporter vector mixture with 0.4 lL
Lipofectamin 2000 reagent per well, according to the manu-
facturer’s instructions.
Transfections were performed in serum-free McCoy’s 5A
medium containing 1 mgÆmL
)1
BSA without antibiotics.
The plasmid preparation used for transfections was a 40 : 1
ratio mixture of an inducible, TGFb-responsive firefly lucif-
erase construct and a constitutively expressing Renilla lucif-
erase construct. Sixteen hours later, the transfection

medium was changed to McCoy’s 5A containing
1mgÆmL
)1
BSA and conditioned for 5 h. WFIKKN1 and
WFIKKN2 were incubated with 0.8 nm growth factors for
30 min at 37 °C and were added to the cells. After 16 h,
the cells were washed with NaCl ⁄ P
i
and lysed using 50 lL
passive lysis buffer from the Biotium luciferase kit, and fire-
fly and Renilla luciferase activities were measured.
The firefly luciferase units obtained were normalized to
the Renilla luciferase units and background values obtained
from cells grown in McCoy’s 5A medium–1 mgÆmL
)1
BSA
alone were subtracted to generate relative luciferase units.
Three parallel experiments were performed in all cases
and were repeated at least twice. Control experiments were
also performed to check whether WFIKKNs have any
influence on luciferase activity in the absence of added
growth factor.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by grant 72125 of the
National Scientific Research Fund of Hungary
(OTKA) and by grant RET14 ⁄ 2005 of the National
Office for Research and Technology of Hungary
(NKTH). The authors thank Professor Daniel Rifkin
(New York University) for the generous gift of
HepG2-BRA and MLEC-clone32 cells.

References
1 de Caestecker M (2004) The transforming growth fac-
tor-beta superfamily of receptors. Cytokine & Growth
Factor Rev 15, 1–11.
2 Miyazono K & Heldin CH (1991) Latent forms of
TGF-beta: molecular structure and mechanisms of acti-
vation. Ciba Found Symp 157, 81–89.
3 Thies RS, Chen T, Davies MV, Tomkinson KN, Pear-
son AA, Shakey QA & Wolfman NM (2001) GDF-8
propeptide binds to GDF-8 and antagonizes biological
activity by inhibiting GDF-8 receptor binding. Growth
Factors 18, 251–259.
4 Ge G, Hopkins DR, Ho WB & Greenspan DS (2005)
GDF11 forms a bone morphogenetic protein 1-acti-
vated latent complex that can modulate nerve growth
factor-induced differentiation of PC12 cells. Mol Cell
Biol 25, 5846–5858.
5 Jenkins G (2008) The role of proteases in transforming
growth factor-beta activation. Int J Biochem Cell Biol
40, 1068–1078.
6 Ge G & Greenspan DS (2006) Developmental roles of
the BMP1 ⁄ TLD metalloproteinases. Birth Defects Res
C Embryo Today 78, 47–68.
7 Wrana JL (1998) TGF-beta receptors and signalling
mechanisms. Miner Electrolyte Metab 24, 120–130.
8 ten Dijke P, Miyazono K & Heldin CH (1996) Signal-
ing via hetero-oligomeric complexes of type I and
type II serine ⁄ threonine kinase receptors. Curr Opin
Cell Biol 8, 139–145.
9 Rosen V (2006) BMP and BMP inhibitors in bone.

Ann NY Acad Sci 1068, 19–25.
10 Konda
´
s K, Szla
´
ma G, Trexler M & Patthy L (2008)
Both WFIKKN1 and WFIKKN2 have high affinity for
growth and differentiation factors 8 and 11. J Biol
Chem 283, 23677–23684.
11 Trexler M, Ba
´
nyai L & Patthy L (2001) A human pro-
tein containing multiple types of protease-inhibitory
modules. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98, 3705–3709.
12 Trexler M, Ba
´
nyai L & Patthy L (2002) Distinct expres-
sion pattern of two related human proteins containing
multiple types of protease-inhibitory modules. Biol
Chem 383, 223–228.
13 Hill JJ, Qiu Y, Hewick RM & Wolfman NM (2003)
Regulation of myostatin in vivo by growth and differen-
tiation factor-associated serum protein-1: a novel pro-
tein with protease inhibitor and follistatin domains.
Mol Endocrinol 17, 1144–1154.
14 Nishida AT, Kobuke K, Kojima K, Ito J, Honjo T &
Tashiro K (2004) OC29 is preferentially expressed in
the presumptive sensory organ region of the otocyst.
Dev Dynam 231, 766–774.
15 Rich RL & Myszka DG (2010) Grading the commercial

optical biosensor literature – class of 2008: ‘the mighty
binders’. J Mol Recognit 23, 1–64.
G. Szla
´
ma et al. WFIKKNs bind several members of the TGFb family
FEBS Journal 277 (2010) 5040–5050 ª 2010 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2010 FEBS 5049
16 Ashe HL & Levine M (1999) Local inhibition and long-
range enhancement of Dpp signal transduction by Sog.
Nature 398, 427–431.
17 Decotto E & Ferguson EL (2001) A positive role for
Short gastrulation in modulating BMP signaling during
dorsoventral patterning in the Drosophila embryo.
Development 128, 3831–3841.
18 Shimmi O, Ralston A, Blair SS & O’Connor MB (2005)
The crossveinless gene encodes a new member of the
Twisted gastrulation family of BMP-binding proteins
which, with Short gastrulation, promotes BMP signal-
ing in the crossveins of the Drosophila wing. Dev Biol
282, 70–83.
19 Rentzsch F, Zhang J, Kramer C, Sebald W &
Hammerschmidt M (2006) Crossveinless 2 is an
essential positive feedback regulator of Bmp signaling
during zebrafish gastrulation. Development 133,
801–811.
20 Fung WY, Fat KF, Eng CK & Lau CK (2007) crm-1
facilitates BMP signaling to control body size in
Caenorhabditis elegans. Dev Biol 311, 95–105.
21 Chang W, Nunes FD, De Jesus-Escobar JM, Harland
R & Wu DK (1999) Ectopic noggin blocks sensory and
nonsensory organ morphogenesis in the chicken inner

ear. Dev Biol 216, 369–381.
22 Gerlach LM, Hutson MR, Germiller JA, Nguyen-Luu
D, Victor JC & Barald KF (2000) Addition of the
BMP4 antagonist, noggin, disrupts avian inner ear
development. Development 127, 45–54.
23 Abe M, Harpel JG, Metz CN, Nunes I, Loskutoff DJ
& Rifkin DB (1994) An assay for transforming growth
factor-beta using cells transfected with a plasminogen
activator inhibitor-1 promoter–luciferase construct. Anal
Biochem 216, 276–284.
24 Zilberberg L, ten Dijke P, Sakai LY & Rifkin DB
(2007) A rapid and sensitive bioassay to measure
bone morphogenetic protein activity. BMC Cell Biol 8,
41.
25 Lin X, Takahashi K, Campion SL, Liu Y, Gustavsen
GG, Pen
˜
a LA & Zamora PO (2006) Synthetic peptide
F2A4-K-NS mimics fibroblast growth factor-2 in vitro
and is angiogenic in vivo. Int J Mol Med 17, 833–839.
26 De Crescenzo G, Pham PL, Durocher Y & O’Connor-
McCourt MD (2003) Transforming growth factor-beta
(TGF-b) binding to the extracellular domain of the
type II TGF-b receptor: receptor capture on a biosensor
surface using a new coiled-coil capture system demon-
strates that avidity contributes significantly to high
affinity binding. J Mol Biol 328, 1173–1183.
27 Lin HY, Moustakas A, Knaus P, Wells RG, Henis YI
& Lodish HF (1995) The soluble exoplasmic domain of
the type II transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta

receptor. A heterogeneously glycosylated protein with
high affinity and selectivity for TGF-beta ligands. J Biol
Chem 270, 2747–2754.
28 Natsume T, Tomita S, Iemura S, Kinto N, Yamaguchi
A & Ueno N (1997) Interaction between soluble type I
receptor for bone morphogenetic protein and bone mor-
phogenetic protein-4. J Biol Chem 272, 11535–11540.
29 Koenig BB, Cook JS, Wolsing DH, Ting J, Tiesman JP,
Correa PE, Olson CA, Pecquet AL, Ventura F, Grant
RA et al. (1994) Characterization and cloning of a
receptor for BMP-2 and BMP-4 from NIH 3T3 cells.
Mol Cell Biol 14, 5961–5974.
30 Allendorph GP, Isaacs MJ, Kawakami Y, Belmonte JC
& Choe S (2007) BMP-3 and BMP-6 structures illumi-
nate the nature of binding specificity with receptors.
Biochemistry 46
, 12238–12247.
WFIKKNs bind several members of the TGFb family G. Szla
´
ma et al.
5050 FEBS Journal 277 (2010) 5040–5050 ª 2010 The Authors Journal compilation ª 2010 FEBS