Signaling through G protein coupled receptors

Heterotrimeric G proteins (Gα, Gβ/Gγ subunits) constitute one of the most important components of cell signaling cascade. G Protein Coupled Receptors (GPCRs) perceive many extracellular signals and transduce them to heterotrimeric G proteins, which further transduce these signals intracellular to appropriate downstream effectors and thereby play an important role in various signaling pathways. GPCRs exist as a superfamily of integral membrane protein receptors that contain seven transmembrane α-helical regions, which bind to a wide range of ligands. Upon activation by a ligand, the GPCR undergoes a conformational change and then activate the G proteins by promoting the exchange of GDP/GTP associated with the Gα subunit. This leads to the dissociation of Gβ/Gγ dimer from Gα. Both these moieties then become free to act upon their downstream effectors and thereby initiate unique intracellular signaling responses. After the signal propagation, the GTP of Gα-GTP is hydrolyzed to GDP and Gα becomes inactive (Gα-GDP), which leads to its re-association with the Gβ/Gγ dimer to form the inactive heterotrimeric complex. The GPCR can also transduce the signal through G protein independent pathway. GPCRs also regulate cell cycle progression. Till to date thousands of GPCRs are known from animal kingdom with little homology among them, but only single GPCR has been identified in plant system. The Arabidopsis GPCR was reported to be cell cycle regulated and also involved in ABA and in stress signaling. Here I have described a general mechanism of signal transduction through GPCR/G proteins, structure of GPCRs, family of GPCRs and plant GPCR and its role.Key words: heterotrimeric G proteins, GPCRs, seven-transmembrane receptors, signal transduction, stress signaling     

Drosophila GoLoco-Protein Pins Is a Target of Gαo-mediated G Protein–coupled Receptor Signaling

G protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs) transduce their signals through trimeric G proteins, inducing guanine nucleotide exchange on their Gα-subunits; the resulting Gα-GTP transmits the signal further inside the cell. GoLoco domains present in many proteins play important roles in multiple trimeric G protein–dependent activities, physically binding Gα-subunits of the Gα_i/o class. In most cases GoLoco binds exclusively to the GDP-loaded form of the Gα-subunits. Here we demonstrate that the poly-GoLoco–containing protein Pins of Drosophila can bind to both GDP- and GTP-forms of Drosophila Gα_o. We identify Pins GoLoco domain 1 as necessary and sufficient for this unusual interaction with Gα_o-GTP. We further pinpoint a lysine residue located centrally in this domain as necessary for the interaction. Our studies thus identify Drosophila Pins as a target of Gα_o-mediated GPCR receptor signaling, e.g., in the context of the nervous system development, where Gα_o acts downstream from Frizzled and redundantly with Gα_i to control the asymmetry of cell divisions.     

Heterotrimeric G protein subunits differentially respond to endoplasmic reticulum stress in Arabidopsis

Canonical heterotrimeric G proteins in eukaryotes are major components that localize at plasma membrane and transmit extracellular stimuli into the cell. Genome of a seed plant Arabidopsis thaliana encodes at least one Gα (GPA1), one Gβ (AGB1), and 3 Gγ (AGG1, AGG2 and AGG3) subunits. The loss-of-function mutations of G protein subunit(s) cause multiple defects in development as well as biotic and abiotic stress responses. However, it remains elusive how these subunits differentially express these defects. Here, we report that Arabidopsis heterotrimeric G protein subunits differentially respond to the endoplasmic reticulum (ER) stress. An isolated homozygous mutant of AGB1, agb1-3, was more sensitive to the tunicamycin-induced ER stress compared to the wild type and the other loss-of-function mutants of G protein subunits. Moreover, ER stress responsive genes were highly expressed in the agb1-3 plant. Our results indicate that AGB1 positively contributes to ER stress tolerance in Arabidopsis.     

Selection of Gβ Subunits with Point Mutations That Fail to Activate Specific Signaling Pathways In Vivo: Dissecting Cellular Responses Mediated by a Heterotrimeric G Protein in Dictyostelium discoideum

In Dictyostelium discoideum, a unique Gβ subunit is required for a G protein–coupled receptor system that mediates a variety of cellular responses. Binding of cAMP to cAR1, the receptor linked to the G protein G2, triggers a cascade of responses, including activation of adenylyl cyclase, gene induction, actin polymerization, and chemotaxis. Null mutations of the cAR1, Gα2, and Gβ genes completely impair all these responses. To dissect specificity in Gβγ signaling to downstream effectors in living cells, we screened a randomly mutagenized library of Gβ genes and isolated Gβ alleles that lacked the capacity to activate some effectors but retained the ability to regulate others. These mutant Gβ subunits were able to link cAR1 to G2, to support gene expression, and to mediate cAMP-induced actin polymerization, and some were able to mediate to chemotaxis toward cAMP. None was able to activate adenylyl cyclase, and some did not support chemotaxis. Thus, we separated in vivo functions of Gβγ by making point mutations on Gβ. Using the structure of the heterotrimeric G protein displayed in the computer program CHAIN, we examined the positions and the molecular interactions of the amino acids substituted in each of the mutant Gβs and analyzed the possible effects of each replacement. We identified several residues that are crucial for activation of the adenylyl cyclase. These residues formed an area that overlaps but is not identical to regions where bovine Gtβγ interacts with its regulators, Gα and phosducin.     

Ste18p Is a Positive Control Element in the Mating Process of Candida albicans

Heterotrimeric G proteins are an important class of eukaryotic signaling molecules that have been identified as central elements in the pheromone response pathways of many fungi. In the fungal pathogen Candida albicans, the STE18 gene (ORF19.6551.1) encodes a potential γ subunit of a heterotrimeric G protein; this protein contains the C-terminal CAAX box characteristic of γ subunits and has sequence similarity to γ subunits implicated in the mating pathways of a variety of fungi. Disruption of this gene was shown to cause sterility of MTLa mating cells and to block pheromone-induced gene expression and shmoo formation; deletion of just the CAAX box residues is sufficient to inactivate Ste18 function in the mating process. Intriguingly, ectopic expression behind the strong ACT1 promoter of either the Gα or the Gβ subunit of the heterotrimeric G protein is able to suppress the mating defect caused by deletion of the Gγ subunit and restore both pheromone-induced gene expression and morphology changes.     

Arabidopsis Heterotrimeric G-Proteins Play a Critical Role in Host and Nonhost Resistance against Pseudomonas syringae Pathogens

Heterotrimeric G-proteins have been proposed to be involved in many aspects of plant disease resistance but their precise role in mediating nonhost disease resistance is not well understood. We evaluated the roles of specific subunits of heterotrimeric G-proteins using knock-out mutants of Arabidopsis Gα, Gβ and Gγ subunits in response to host and nonhost Pseudomonas pathogens. Plants lacking functional Gα, Gβ and Gγ1Gγ2 proteins displayed enhanced bacterial growth and disease susceptibility in response to host and nonhost pathogens. Mutations of single Gγ subunits Gγ1, Gγ2 and Gγ3 did not alter bacterial disease resistance. Some specificity of subunit usage was observed when comparing host pathogen versus nonhost pathogen. Overexpression of both Gα and Gβ led to reduced bacterial multiplication of nonhost pathogen P. syringae pv. tabaci whereas overexpression of Gβ, but not of Gα, resulted in reduced bacterial growth of host pathogen P. syringae pv. maculicola, compared to wild-type Col-0. Moreover, the regulation of stomatal aperture by bacterial pathogens was altered in Gα and Gβ mutants but not in any of the single or double Gγ mutants. Taken together, these data substantiate the critical role of heterotrimeric G-proteins in plant innate immunity and stomatal modulation in response to P. syringae.     

A Highlights from MBoC Selection: Drosophila Ric-8 interacts with the Gα12/13 subunit,Concertina, during activation of the Folded gastrulation pathway

Heterotrimeric G proteins, composed of α, β, and γ subunits, are activated by exchange of GDP for GTP on the Gα subunit. Canonically, Gα is stimulated by the guanine-nucleotide exchange factor (GEF) activity of ligand-bound G protein–coupled receptors. However, Gα subunits may also be activated in a noncanonical manner by members of the Ric-8 family, cytoplasmic proteins that also act as GEFs for Gα subunits. We used a signaling pathway active during Drosophila gastrulation as a model system to study Ric-8/Gα interactions. A component of this pathway, the Drosophila Gα_12/13 subunit, Concertina (Cta), is necessary to trigger actomyosin contractility during gastrulation events. Ric-8 mutants exhibit similar gastrulation defects to Cta mutants. Here we use a novel tissue culture system to study a signaling pathway that controls cytoskeletal rearrangements necessary for cellular morphogenesis. We show that Ric-8 regulates this pathway through physical interaction with Cta and preferentially interacts with inactive Cta and directs its localization within the cell. We also use this system to conduct a structure–function analysis of Ric-8 and identify key residues required for both Cta interaction and cellular contractility.     

A Gs-RhoGEF interaction: An old G protein finds a new job

The heterotrimeric G proteins are known to have a variety of downstream effectors, but G_s was long thought to be specifically coupled to adenylyl cyclases. A new study indicates that activated G_s can also directly interact with a guanine nucleotide exchange factor for Rho family small GTPases, PDZ-RhoGEF. This novel interaction mediates activation of the small G protein Cdc42 by G_s-coupled GPCRs, inducing cytoskeletal rearrangements and formation of filopodia-like structures. Furthermore, overexpression of a minimal PDZ-RhoGEF fragment can down-regulate cAMP signaling, suggesting that this effector competes with canonical signaling. This first demonstration that the Gα_s subfamily regulates activity of Rho GTPases extends our understanding of Gα_s activity and establishes RhoGEF coupling as a universal Gα function.

The canonical G protein pathway consists of a cell surface receptor, a heterotrimeric G protein, and an effector protein that controls signaling within the cells. This fundamental paradigm, familiar to every biologist, is rooted in discoveries by the laboratories of Sutherland, Rodbell, and Gilman, which in the 1970s and 1980s dissected biochemical mechanisms of adenylyl cyclase activation by hormones. Their breakthrough came after experiments showing that the G protein G_s is essential to transfer agonist stimulation from the receptor to adenylyl cyclase (1). This G protein consists of the ∼42-kDa α subunit, which binds and hydrolyzes GTP, and the permanently associated dimer of 35-kDa β and ∼10-kDa γ subunits (Gβγ). Their findings helped establish a canonical model in which the agonist-bound receptor causes the G protein to release GDP, and the heterotrimer dissociates into Gα-GTP and free Gβγ; in this state, the G protein can activate its effector (i.e. Gα_s will activate adenylyl cyclase until GTP is hydrolyzed). Although the rod photoreceptor G protein, transducin, was discovered by that time (2), the ubiquitously expressed G_s can be considered the founding member of the G protein family.The subsequent cloning and identification of the other three families (G_i, G_q, and G₁₂) completed the rough map of G protein–mediated transduction. These initial studies suggested that the α subunits were responsible for activation of one type of effector (e.g. Gα_s for adenylyl cyclase and cAMP; Gα_q for phospholipase C, phosphoinositides, and Ca²⁺; and Gα_i for ion channels and inhibition of adenylyl cyclase), whereas the free Gβγ complexes interact with a remarkably large number of binding partners, including some effector enzymes and ion channels (3). Later, Gα₁₂ and Gα₁₃ were found to regulate a distinct type of effectors, the RhoGEFs (4, 5). These multidomain proteins contain pleckstrin homology (PH) domains, which facilitate their membrane localization, and Dbl homology (DH) domains, which catalyze GDP-for-GTP exchange (guanine nucleotide exchange factor; GEF) in the Rho family of small (∼20-kDa) G proteins. At the time, the G₁₂-RhoGEF pathway seemed odd as it contained two G proteins: the receptor-activated “large” G₁₂ class protein and the “small” Rho G protein, which is activated by RhoGEF. However, it was then discovered that Gα_q could activate a RhoGEF called Trio (6), and that Gβγ complexes activate other RhoGEFs, indicating that this pathway, if unusual, is at least popular. Gα_s, however, mostly appeared to be faithful to its originally determined role—to stimulate adenylyl cyclase(s)—possibly contributing to the enduring perception that regulation of a second messenger–generating enzyme is the “real” function of a heterotrimeric G protein.In the current issue of JBC, Castillo-Kauil et al. (7) force a reexamination of the existing canon, presenting data that show Gα_s can also interact with a specific RhoGEF, in this case PDZ-RhoGEF (PRG). The authors made this discovery as part of an examination of the regulation of cell shape by the Rho family. They began by expressing a series of short constructs of three RhoGEF proteins, p115RhoGEF, PRG, and LARG, all of which activated RhoA as expected, promoting cell contraction. However, they noticed that the DH/PH domain of PRG also activated Cdc42 and induced filopodia-like cell protrusions. To investigate which G protein is responsible for activation of this Cdc42-mediated pathway, they overexpressed constitutively active mutants of different Gα subunits. These mutants are stabilized in the active GTP-bound state due to substitution of the glutamine residue crucial for GTP hydrolysis. Surprisingly, the PRG-Cdc42 pathway was stimulated by Gα_sQ227L, the one Gα subtype not known for interaction with RhoGEFs. Furthermore, they showed that binding of PRG to Cdc42 was promoted only by G_s-coupled receptors, and not by G_q- or G_i-coupled GPCRs. The authors then investigated the PRG site responsible for the interaction with Gα_s, narrowing it down to the isolated PRG DH and PH domains and their linker region. A construct encompassing these domains was able to inhibit (i) GPCR-mediated activation of Cdc42, (ii) the Gα_sQ227L-promoted interaction of PRG with Cdc42, and (iii) some protein phosphorylation events downstream of the canonical cAMP pathway. Taken together, their work identifies PRG as a novel effector for G_s; the Gα_s-PRG interaction mediates activation of Rho family protein Cdc42, leading to cytoskeletal remodeling.The unexpected results of Castillo-Kauil et al. open up new opportunities to explore this mechanism at different levels of biology. The experiments described in the paper were performed in vitro using cultured cells, imaging, and pulldown of protein complexes containing the overexpressed Gα_s Q227L mutant. Considering the multitude of G_s-coupled receptors and RhoGEFs in the body (8, 9), it will be important to understand the physiological context where the new G_s-mediated pathway plays a significant role. This will require experimentation in vivo and possibly reevaluation of the phenotypes associated with known pathogenic mutations in Gα_s (GNAS) and other relevant genes. At the molecular level, it would be important to delineate the biochemical mechanisms of Gα_s interaction with PRG. For example, at what stage of the GTP/GDP cycle does Gα_s bind to PRG: in the GTP-bound state, which also activates adenylate cyclase, or in the transition state (i.e. just before the terminal phosphate of GTP is removed)? Indeed, there is precedent for proteins that bind preferentially with the transition state—specifically RGS proteins, which accelerate the GTPase reaction. Another possibility is that, by analogy with p115RhoGEF, which stimulates GTPase activity of Gα₁₂ and Gα₁₃, PRG (and other RhoGEFs with similar DH-PH sequences) can influence interaction of Gα_s with nucleotides, Gβγ, and other partners.Since defining the receptor, G protein, and effector as the three essential members of the G protein pathway, researchers have discovered many additional proteins that regulate the amplitude and duration of the stimulus and/or participate in cross-talk with other signaling circuits. These “new” proteins include arrestins, receptor kinases, nonreceptor exchange factors, GTPase-activating proteins, special chaperones, etc. Thus, in a way, discovering a novel binding partner for a signaling molecule is not as surprising as it would have been 20 years ago. However, the new partner identified by Castillo-Kauil et al. makes the result of extra significance; until now, we knew that three of four G protein subfamilies could regulate Rho GTPases by activating RhoGEFs: G₁₂ and G_q via their α subunits and G_i via the Gβγ subunits (10). The demonstration that the G_s subfamily is no exception shows that activation of RhoGEFs by heterotrimeric G proteins may be a truly universal mechanism (Fig. 1). The significance of this insight is that the multitude of biological processes regulated by Rho-GTPase networks can potentially respond to the entire repertoire of GPCR-mediated stimuli.Open in a separate windowFigure 1.Activation of the Rho family by heterotrimeric G proteins. The Rho family of small GTPases is activated by RhoGEF proteins, some of which can be stimulated by heterotrimeric G proteins. Of four families of heterotrimeric G proteins, three (G₁₂, G_q, and G_i, shown in shades of gray) were known to activate certain RhoGEFs. The new results (highlighted in orange) (7) show that G_s, the G protein known to stimulate production of cAMP, can also stimulate a particular RhoGEF; this suggests that the Rho GTPases can potentially be stimulated by the multitude of signals from the entire class of GPCRs, including those coupled to G_s. IP₃, inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate.

Funding and additional information—This work was supported in part by National Institutes of Health Grant R56DK119262 (to V. Z. S.). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.Conflict of interest—The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest with the contents of this article.

Abbreviations—The abbreviations used are:

PH

pleckstrin homology

DH

Dbl homology

GEF

guanine nucleotide exchange factor

PRG

PDZ-RhoGEF

GPCR

G protein–coupled receptor.

     

Gαi2 Signaling Is Required for Skeletal Muscle Growth,Regeneration, and Satellite Cell Proliferation and Differentiation

We have previously shown that activation of Gαi2, an α subunit of the heterotrimeric G protein complex, induces skeletal muscle hypertrophy and myoblast differentiation. To determine whether Gαi2 is required for skeletal muscle growth or regeneration, Gαi2-null mice were analyzed. Gαi2 knockout mice display decreased lean body mass, reduced muscle size, and impaired skeletal muscle regeneration after cardiotoxin-induced injury. Short hairpin RNA (shRNA)-mediated knockdown of Gαi2 in satellite cells (SCs) leads to defective satellite cell proliferation, fusion, and differentiation ex vivo. The impaired differentiation is consistent with the observation that the myogenic regulatory factors MyoD and Myf5 are downregulated upon knockdown of Gαi2. Interestingly, the expression of microRNA 1 (miR-1), miR-27b, and miR-206, three microRNAs that have been shown to regulate SC proliferation and differentiation, is increased by a constitutively active mutant of Gαi2 [Gαi2(Q205L)] and counterregulated by Gαi2 knockdown. As for the mechanism, this study demonstrates that Gαi2(Q205L) regulates satellite cell differentiation into myotubes in a protein kinase C (PKC)- and histone deacetylase (HDAC)-dependent manner.     

Self-activating G protein α subunits engage seven-transmembrane regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins and a Rho guanine nucleotide exchange factor effector in the amoeba Naegleria fowleri

The free-living amoeba Naegleria fowleri is a causative agent of primary amoebic meningoencephalitis and is highly resistant to current therapies, resulting in mortality rates >97%. As many therapeutics target G protein–centered signal transduction pathways, further understanding the functional significance of G protein signaling within N. fowleri should aid future drug discovery against this pathogen. Here, we report that the N. fowleri genome encodes numerous transcribed G protein signaling components, including G protein–coupled receptors, heterotrimeric G protein subunits, regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins, and candidate Gα effector proteins. We found N. fowleri Gα subunits have diverse nucleotide cycling kinetics; Nf Gα5 and Gα7 exhibit more rapid nucleotide exchange than GTP hydrolysis (i.e., “self-activating” behavior). A crystal structure of Nf Gα7 highlights the stability of its nucleotide-free state, consistent with its rapid nucleotide exchange. Variations in the phosphate binding loop also contribute to nucleotide cycling differences among Gα subunits. Similar to plant G protein signaling pathways, N. fowleri Gα subunits selectively engage members of a large seven-transmembrane RGS protein family, resulting in acceleration of GTP hydrolysis. We show Nf Gα2 and Gα3 directly interact with a candidate Gα effector protein, RGS-RhoGEF, similar to mammalian Gα_12/13 signaling pathways. We demonstrate Nf Gα2 and Gα3 each engage RGS-RhoGEF through a canonical Gα/RGS domain interface, suggesting a shared evolutionary origin with G protein signaling in the enteric pathogen Entamoeba histolytica. These findings further illuminate the evolution of G protein signaling and identify potential targets of pharmacological manipulation in N. fowleri.     

Mode of interaction of the Gαo subunit of heterotrimeric G proteins with the GoLoco1 motif of Drosophila Pins is determined by guanine nucleotides

Drosophila GoLoco motif-containing protein Pins is unusual in its highly efficient interaction with both GDP- and the GTP-loaded forms of the α-subunit of the heterotrimeric Go protein. We analysed the interactions of Gαo in its two nucleotide forms with GoLoco1–the first of the three GoLoco domains of Pins–and the possible structures of the resulting complexes, through combination of conventional fluorescence and FRET measurements as well as through molecular modelling. Our data suggest that the orientation of the GoLoco1 motif on Gαo significantly differs between the two nucleotide states of the latter. In other words, a rotation of the GoLoco1 peptide in respect with Gαo must accompany the nucleotide exchange in Gαo. The sterical hindrance requiring such a rotation probably contributes to the guanine nucleotide exchange inhibitor activity of GoLoco1 and Pins as a whole. Our data have important implications for the mechanisms of Pins regulation in the process of asymmetric cell divisions.     

Nucleobindin 1 Is a Calcium-regulated Guanine Nucleotide Dissociation Inhibitor of Gαi1

Nucleobindin 1 (NUCB1) is a widely expressed multidomain calcium-binding protein whose precise physiological and biochemical functions are not well understood. We engineered and heterologously expressed a soluble form of NUCB1 (sNUCB1) and characterized its biophysical and biochemical properties. We show that sNUCB1 exists as a dimer in solution and that each monomer binds two divalent calcium cations. Calcium binding causes conformational changes in sNUCB1 as judged by circular dichroism and fluorescence spectroscopy experiments. Earlier reports suggested that NUCB1 might interact with heterotrimeric G protein α subunits. We show that dimeric calcium-free sNUCB1 binds to expressed Gα_i1 and that calcium binding inhibits the interaction. The binding of sNUCB1 to Gα_i1 inhibits its basal rate of GDP release and slows its rate and extent of GTPγS uptake. Additionally, our tissue culture experiments show that sNUCB1 prevents receptor-mediated Gα_i-dependent inhibition of adenylyl cyclase. Thus, we conclude that sNUCB1 is a calcium-dependent guanine nucleotide dissociation inhibitor (GDI) for Gα_i1. To our knowledge, sNUCB1 is the first example of a calcium-dependent GDI for heterotrimeric G proteins. We also show that the mechanism of GDI activity of sNUCB1 is unique and does not arise from the consensus GoLoco motif found in RGS proteins. We propose that cytoplasmic NUCB1 might function to regulate heterotrimeric G protein trafficking and G protein-coupled receptor-mediated signal transduction pathways.     

Cell cycle–regulated membrane binding of NuMA contributes to efficient anaphase chromosome separation

Accurate and efficient separation of sister chromatids during anaphase is critical for faithful cell division. It has been proposed that cortical dynein–generated pulling forces on astral microtubules contribute to anaphase spindle elongation and chromosome separation. In mammalian cells, however, definitive evidence for the involvement of cortical dynein in chromosome separation is missing. It is believed that dynein is recruited and anchored at the cell cortex during mitosis by the α subunit of heterotrimeric G protein (Gα)/mammalian homologue of Drosophila Partner of Inscuteable/nuclear mitotic apparatus (NuMA) ternary complex. Here we uncover a Gα/LGN-independent lipid- and membrane-binding domain at the C-terminus of NuMA. We show that the membrane binding of NuMA is cell cycle regulated—it is inhibited during prophase and metaphase by cyclin-dependent kinase 1 (CDK1)–mediated phosphorylation and only occurs after anaphase onset when CDK1 activity is down-regulated. Further studies indicate that cell cycle–regulated membrane association of NuMA underlies anaphase-specific enhancement of cortical NuMA and dynein. By replacing endogenous NuMA with membrane-binding-deficient NuMA, we can specifically reduce the cortical accumulation of NuMA and dynein during anaphase and demonstrate that cortical NuMA and dynein contribute to efficient chromosome separation in mammalian cells.     

Effector Contributions to Gβγ-mediated Signaling as Revealed by Muscarinic Potassium Channel Gating

Receptor-mediated activation of heterotrimeric G proteins leading to dissociation of the Gα subunit from Gβγ is a highly conserved signaling strategy used by numerous extracellular stimuli. Although Gβγ subunits regulate a variety of effectors, including kinases, cyclases, phospholipases, and ion channels (Clapham, D.E., and E.J. Neer. 1993. Nature (Lond.). 365:403–406), few tools exist for probing instantaneous Gβγ-effector interactions, and little is known about the kinetic contributions of effectors to the signaling process. In this study, we used the atrial muscarinic K⁺ channel, which is activated by direct interactions with Gβγ subunits (Logothetis, D.E., Y. Kurachi, J. Galper, E.J. Neer, and D.E. Clap. 1987. Nature (Lond.). 325:321–326; Wickman, K., J.A. Iniguez-Liuhi, P.A. Davenport, R. Taussig, G.B. Krapivinsky, M.E. Linder, A.G. Gilman, and D.E. Clapham. 1994. Nature (Lond.). 366: 654–663; Huang, C.-L., P.A. Slesinger, P.J. Casey, Y.N. Jan, and L.Y. Jan. 1995. Neuron. 15:1133–1143), as a sensitive reporter of the dynamics of Gβγ-effector interactions. Muscarinic K⁺ channels exhibit bursting behavior upon G protein activation, shifting between three distinct functional modes, characterized by the frequency of channel openings during individual bursts. Acetylcholine concentration (and by inference, the concentration of activated Gβγ) controls the fraction of time spent in each mode without changing either the burst duration or channel gating within individual modes. The picture which emerges is of a Gβγ effector with allosteric regulation and an intrinsic “off” switch which serves to limit its own activation. These two features combine to establish exquisite channel sensitivity to changes in Gβγ concentration, and may be indicative of the factors regulating other Gβγ-modulated effectors.     

Membrane-Localized Extra-Large G Proteins and Gβγ of the Heterotrimeric G Proteins Form Functional Complexes Engaged in Plant Immunity in Arabidopsis

In animals, heterotrimeric G proteins, comprising Gα, Gβ, and Gγ subunits, are molecular switches whose function tightly depends on Gα and Gβγ interaction. Intriguingly, in Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), multiple defense responses involve Gβγ, but not Gα. We report here that the Gβγ dimer directly partners with extra-large G proteins (XLGs) to mediate plant immunity. Arabidopsis mutants deficient in XLGs, Gβ, and Gγ are similarly compromised in several pathogen defense responses, including disease development and production of reactive oxygen species. Genetic analysis of double, triple, and quadruple mutants confirmed that XLGs and Gβγ functionally interact in the same defense signaling pathways. In addition, mutations in XLG2 suppressed the seedling lethal and cell death phenotypes of BRASSINOSTEROID INSENSITIVE1-associated receptor kinase1-interacting receptor-like kinase1 mutants in an identical way as reported for Arabidopsis Gβ-deficient mutants. Yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) three-hybrid and bimolecular fluorescent complementation assays revealed that XLG2 physically interacts with all three possible Gβγ dimers at the plasma membrane. Phylogenetic analysis indicated a close relationship between XLGs and plant Gα subunits, placing the divergence point at the dawn of land plant evolution. Based on these findings, we conclude that XLGs form functional complexes with Gβγ dimers, although the mechanism of action of these complexes, including activation/deactivation, must be radically different form the one used by the canonical Gα subunit and are not likely to share the same receptors. Accordingly, XLGs expand the repertoire of heterotrimeric G proteins in plants and reveal a higher level of diversity in heterotrimeric G protein signaling.Heterotrimeric GTP-binding proteins (G proteins), classically consisting of Gα, Gβ, and Gγ subunits, are essential signal transduction elements in most eukaryotes. In animals and fungi, ligand perception by G protein-coupled receptors leads to replacement of GDP with GTP in Gα, triggering activation of the heterotrimer (Li et al., 2007; Oldham and Hamm, 2008). Upon activation, GTP-bound Gα and Gβγ are released and interact with downstream effectors, thereby transmitting signals to multiple intracellular signaling cascades. Signaling terminates when the intrinsic GTPase activity of Gα hydrolyzes GTP to GDP and the inactive heterotrimer reforms at the receptor. The large diversity of mammalian Gα subunits confers specificity to the multiple signaling pathways mediated by G proteins (Wettschureck and Offermanns, 2005). Five distinct classes of Gα have been described in animals (Gαi, Gαq, Gαs, Gα12 and Gαv), with orthologs found in evolutionarily primitive organisms such as sponges (Oka et al., 2009). Humans possess four classes of Gα involving 23 functional isoforms encoded by 16 genes (McCudden et al., 2005), while only a single prototypical Gα is usually found per plant genome (Urano et al., 2013). Multiple copies of Gα are present in some species with recently duplicated genomes, such as soybean (Glycine max) with four Gα genes (Blanc and Wolfe, 2004; Bisht et al., 2011). In the model plant Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana), a prototypical Gα subunit (GPA1) is involved in a number of important processes, including cell proliferation (Ullah et al., 2001), inhibition of inward K⁺ channels and activation of anion channels in guard cells by mediating the abscisic acid pathway (Wang et al., 2001; Coursol et al., 2003), blue light responses (Warpeha et al., 2006, 2007), and germination and postgermination development (Chen et al., 2006; Pandey et al., 2006).It is well established that heterotrimeric G proteins play a fundamental role in plant innate immunity. In Arabidopsis, two different Gβγ dimers (Gβγ1 and Gβγ2) are generally considered to be the predominant elements in G protein defense signaling against a variety of fungal pathogens (Llorente et al., 2005; Trusov et al., 2006, 2007, 2009; Delgado-Cerezo et al., 2012; Torres et al., 2013). By contrast, these studies attributed a small or no role to Gα, because mutants deficient in Gα displayed only slightly increased resistance against the fungal pathogens (Llorente et al., 2005; Trusov et al., 2006; Torres et al., 2013). The Gβγ-mediated signaling also contributes to defense against a model bacterial pathogen Pseudomonas syringae, by participating in programmed cell death (PCD) and inducing reactive oxygen species (ROS) production in response to at least three pathogen-associated molecular patterns (PAMPs; Ishikawa, 2009; Liu et al., 2013; Torres et al., 2013). Gα is not involved in PCD or PAMP-triggered ROS production (Liu et al., 2013; Torres et al., 2013). Nonetheless, Arabidopsis Gα plays a positive role in defense against P. syringae, probably by mediating stomatal function and hence physically restricting bacterial entry to the leaf interior (Zhang et al., 2008; Zeng and He, 2010; Lee et al., 2013). Given the small contribution from Gα, the involvement of heterotrimeric G proteins in Arabidopsis resistance could be explained in two ways: either the Gβγ dimer acts independently from Gα, raising a question of how is it activated upon a pathogen attack, or Gα is replaced by another protein for heterotrimer formation.The Arabidopsis genome contains at least three genes encoding Gα-like proteins that have been classified as extra-large G proteins (XLGs; Lee and Assmann, 1999; Ding et al., 2008). XLGs comprise two structurally distinct regions. The C-terminal region is similar to the canonical Gα, containing the conserved helical and GTPase domains, while the N-terminal region is a stretch of approximately 400 amino acids including a putative nuclear localization signal (Ding et al., 2008). GTP binding and hydrolysis were confirmed for all three XLG proteins, although their enzymatic activities are very slow and require Ca²⁺ as a cofactor, whereas canonical Gα utilizes Mg²⁺ (Heo et al., 2012). Several other features differentiate XLGs from Gα subunits. Comparative analysis of XLG1 and Gα at the DNA level showed that the genes are organized in seven and 13 exons, respectively, without common splicing sites (Lee and Assmann, 1999). XLGs have been reported to localize to the nucleus (Ding et al., 2008). Analysis of knockout mutants revealed a nuclear function for XLG2, as it physically interacts with the Related To Vernalization1 (RTV1) protein, enhancing the DNA binding activity of RTV1 to floral integrator gene promoters and resulting in flowering initiation (Heo et al., 2012). Therefore, it appears that XLGs may act independently of G protein signaling. On the other hand, functional similarities between XLGs and the Arabidopsis Gβ subunit (AGB1) were also discovered. For instance, XLG3- and Gβ-deficient mutants were similarly impaired in root gravitropic responses (Pandey et al., 2008). Knockout of all three XLG genes caused increased root length, similarly to the Gβ-deficient mutant (Ding et al., 2008). Furthermore, as observed in Gβ-deficient mutants, xlg2 mutants displayed increased susceptibility to P. syringae, indicating a role in plant defense (Zhu et al., 2009). Nevertheless, a genetic analysis of the possible functional interaction between XLGs and Gβ has not been established.In this report, we performed in-depth genetic analyses to test the functional interaction between the three XLGs and Gβγ dimers during defense-related responses in Arabidopsis. We also examined physical interaction between XLG2 and the Gβγ dimers using yeast (Saccharomyces cerevisiae) three-hybrid (Y3H) and bimolecular fluorescent complementation (BiFC) assays. Our findings indicate that XLGs function as direct partners of Gβγ dimers in plant defense signaling. To estimate relatedness of XLGs and Gα proteins, we carried out a phylogenetic analysis. Based on our findings, we conclude that plant XLG proteins most probably originated from a canonical Gα subunit and retained prototypical interaction with Gβγ dimers. They function together with Gβγ in a number of processes including plant defense, although they most probably evolved activation/deactivation mechanisms very different from those of a prototypical Gα.     

The β Subunit of the Heterotrimeric G Protein Triggers the Kluyveromyces lactis Pheromone Response Pathway in the Absence of the γ Subunit

The Kluyveromyces lactis heterotrimeric G protein is a canonical Gαβγ complex; however, in contrast to Saccharomyces cerevisiae, where the Gγ subunit is essential for mating, disruption of the KlGγ gene yielded cells with almost intact mating capacity. Expression of a nonfarnesylated Gγ, which behaves as a dominant-negative in S. cerevisiae, did not affect mating in wild-type and ΔGγ cells of K. lactis. In contrast to the moderate sterility shown by the single ΔKlGα, the double ΔKlGα ΔKlGγ mutant displayed full sterility. A partial sterile phenotype of the ΔKlGγ mutant was obtained in conditions where the KlGβ subunit interacted defectively with the Gα subunit. The addition of a CCAAX motif to the C-end of KlGβ, partially suppressed the lack of both KlGα and KlGγ subunits. In cells lacking KlGγ, the KlGβ subunit cofractionated with KlGα in the plasma membrane, but in the ΔKlGα ΔKlGγ strain was located in the cytosol. When the KlGβ-KlGα interaction was affected in the ΔKlGγ mutant, most KlGβ fractionated to the cytosol. In contrast to the generic model of G-protein function, the Gβ subunit of K. lactis has the capacity to attach to the membrane and to activate mating effectors in absence of the Gγ subunit.     

Pivotal Role of Extended Linker 2 in the Activation of Gα by G Protein-coupled Receptor

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) relay extracellular signals mainly to heterotrimeric G-proteins (Gαβγ) and they are the most successful drug targets. The mechanisms of G-protein activation by GPCRs are not well understood. Previous studies have revealed a signal relay route from a GPCR via the C-terminal α5-helix of Gα to the guanine nucleotide-binding pocket. Recent structural and biophysical studies uncover a role for the opening or rotating of the α-helical domain of Gα during the activation of Gα by a GPCR. Here we show that β-adrenergic receptors activate eight Gα_s mutant proteins (from a screen of 66 Gα_s mutants) that are unable to bind Gβγ subunits in cells. Five of these eight mutants are in the αF/Linker 2/β2 hinge region (extended Linker 2) that connects the Ras-like GTPase domain and the α-helical domain of Gα_s. This extended Linker 2 is the target site of a natural product inhibitor of G_q. Our data show that the extended Linker 2 is critical for Gα activation by GPCRs. We propose that a GPCR via its intracellular loop 2 directly interacts with the β₂/β₃ loop of Gα to communicate to Linker 2, resulting in the opening and closing of the α-helical domain and the release of GDP during G-protein activation.     

Expression profile of the α subunit of the heterotrimeric G protein in rice

Previous studies on the activity of the rice Gα promoter using a β-Glucuronidase (GUS) reporter construct indicated that Gα expression was highest in developing organs and changed in a developmental stage-dependent manner. In this paper, GUS activity derived from the rice Gα promoter was analyzed in seeds and developing leaves. In seeds, GUS activity was detected in the aleurone layer, embryo, endosperm and scutellar epithelium. In developing leaves, the activity was detected in the mesophyll tissues, phloem and xylem of the leaf sheath and in the mesophyll tissue of the leaf blade. The activity in the aleurone layer and scutellar epithelium suggests that the Gα subunit may be involved in gibberellin signaling. The activity in the mesophyll tissues of the leaf blade suggests that the Gα subunit may be related to the intensity of disease resistance. The pattern of the activity in the developing leaf also indicates that the expression of Gα follows a developmental profile at the tissue level.Key words: expression pattern, Gα subunit, GUS staining pattern, heterotrimeric G protein, riceThe rice mutant d1 is deficient in the heterotrimeric G protein α subunit (Gα). Recently it was found that the dwarfism phenotype of d1 is due to a reduction in cell numbers.¹ This discovery has led to new questions regarding how rice Gα regulates cell number, and which other signaling molecules are involved in this process in various tissues and at different development stages. Studies of d1 suggest that rice Gα participates in both gibberellin signaling^2–4 and brassinosteroid signaling.^5–8 Promoter studies using the β-Glucuronidase (GUS) reporter indicate that Gα expression is highest in developing organs.¹ In this paper, we report on the expression pattern of a Gα promoter::GUS construct in seeds and developing leaves of rice.