Inscuteable regulates the Pins-Mud spindle orientation pathway

During asymmetric cell division, alignment of the mitotic spindle with the cell polarity axis ensures that the cleavage furrow separates fate determinants into distinct daughter cells. The protein Inscuteable (Insc) is thought to link cell polarity and spindle positioning in diverse systems by binding the polarity protein Bazooka (Baz; aka Par-3) and the spindle orienting protein Partner of Inscuteable (Pins; mPins or LGN in mammals). Here we investigate the mechanism of spindle orientation by the Insc-Pins complex. Previously, we defined two Pins spindle orientation pathways: a complex with Mushroom body defect (Mud; NuMA in mammals) is required for full activity, whereas binding to Discs large (Dlg) is sufficient for partial activity. In the current study, we have examined the role of Inscuteable in mediating downstream Pins-mediated spindle orientation pathways. We find that the Insc-Pins complex requires Gαi for partial activity and that the complex specifically recruits Dlg but not Mud. In vitro competition experiments revealed that Insc and Mud compete for binding to the Pins TPR motifs, while Dlg can form a ternary complex with Insc-Pins. Our results suggest that Insc does not passively couple polarity and spindle orientation but preferentially inhibits the Mud pathway, while allowing the Dlg pathway to remain active. Insc-regulated complex assembly may ensure that the spindle is attached to the cortex (via Dlg) before activation of spindle pulling forces by Dynein/Dynactin (via Mud).     

Membrane targeting and asymmetric localization of Drosophila partner of inscuteable are discrete steps controlled by distinct regions of the protein

Asymmetric division of neural progenitors is a key mechanism by which neuronal diversity in the Drosophila central nervous system is generated. The distinct fates of the daughter cells derived from these divisions are achieved through preferential segregation of the cell fate determinants Prospero and Numb to one of the two daughters. This is achieved by coordinating apical and basal mitotic spindle orientation with the basal cortical localization of the cell fate determinants during mitosis. A complex of apically localized proteins, including Inscuteable (Insc), Partner of Inscuteable (Pins), Bazooka (Baz), DmPar-6, DaPKC, and G alpha i, is required to mediate and coordinate basal protein localization with mitotic spindle orientation. Pins, a molecule which directly interacts with Insc, is a key component required for the integrity of this complex; in the absence of Pins, other components become mislocalized or destabilized, and basal protein localization and mitotic spindle orientation are defective. Here we define the functional domains of Pins. We show that the C-terminal region containing the G alpha i binding GoLoco motifs is necessary and sufficient for targeting to the neuroblast cortex, which appears to be a prerequisite for apical localization of Pins. The N-terminal tetratricopeptide repeat-containing region of Pins is required for two processes; TPR repeats 1 to 3 plus the C-terminal region are required for apical localization but are insufficient to recruit Insc to the apical cortex, whereas TPR repeats 1 to 7 plus C-terminal Pins can perform both functions. Hence, the abilities of Pins to cortically localize, to apically localize, and to restore Insc apical localization are all separable, and all three capabilities are necessary to mediate asymmetric division. Moreover, the need for N-terminal Pins can be obviated by fusing a minimal Insc functional domain with the C-terminal region of Pins; this chimeric molecule is apically localized and can fulfill the functions of both Insc and Pins.     

Canoe binds RanGTP to promote Pins(TPR)/Mud-mediated spindle orientation

Regulated spindle orientation maintains epithelial tissue integrity and stem cell asymmetric cell division. In Drosophila melanogaster neural stem cells (neuroblasts), the scaffolding protein Canoe (Afadin/Af-6 in mammals) regulates spindle orientation, but its protein interaction partners and mechanism of action are unknown. In this paper, we use our recently developed induced cell polarity system to dissect the molecular mechanism of Canoe-mediated spindle orientation. We show that a previously uncharacterized portion of Canoe directly binds the Partner of Inscuteable (Pins) tetratricopeptide repeat (TPR) domain. The Canoe-Pins(TPR) interaction recruits Canoe to the cell cortex and is required for activation of the Pins(TPR)-Mud (nuclear mitotic apparatus in mammals) spindle orientation pathway. We show that the Canoe Ras-association (RA) domains directly bind RanGTP and that both the Canoe(RA) domains and RanGTP are required to recruit Mud to the cortex and activate the Pins/Mud/dynein spindle orientation pathway.     

Galpha/LGN-mediated asymmetric spindle positioning does not lead to unequal cleavage of the mother cell in 3-D cultured MDCK cells

The position of the mitotic spindle plays a key role in spatial control of cell division. It is generally believed that when a spindle is positioned asymmetrically in a dividing cell, the resulting daughter cells are usually unequal in size due to eccentric cleavage of the mother cell. Molecular mechanisms underlying the generation of unequal sized daughter cells have been extensively studied in Drosophila neuroblast and Caenorhabditis elegans zygote where the Gα subunit of the heterotrimeric G proteins and its binding partner - Pins in Drosophila and GPR-1/2 in C. elegans - are shown to be critical in governing spindle positioning and asymmetric cleavage of the mother cell. In mammalian system, although Gα and LGN (mammalian Pins homolog) are also required for spindle orientation, whether they can mediate asymmetric spindle positioning or asymmetric cleavage of the mother cell is not known. Here, by artificially targeting Gαi to the apical cortex in 3-D cultured MDCK cells, we established a system where asymmetric spindle positioning can be consistently induced. Interestingly, this asymmetrically positioned spindle does not lead to asymmetric cleavage; instead it results in equal sized daughter cells. Live cell time-lapse analysis revealed that anaphase spindle elongation compensated the original asymmetric spindle positioning. Our findings demonstrate that asymmetric spindle positioning does not necessarily lead to unequal sized daughter cells in mammalian system. We discuss potential mechanisms in generating unequal sized daughter cells.     

Ultrasensitive synthetic protein regulatory networks using mixed decoys

Cellular protein interaction networks exhibit sigmoidal input-output relationships with thresholds and steep responses (i.e. ultrasensitivity). Although cooperativity can be a source of ultrasensitivity, we examined whether the presence of "decoy" binding sites that are not coupled to activation could also lead to this effect. To systematically vary key parameters of the system, we designed a synthetic regulatory system consisting of an autoinhibited PDZ domain coupled to an activating SH3 domain binding site. In the absence of a decoy binding site, this system is non-ultrasensitive, as predicted by modeling of this system. Addition of a high-affinity decoy site adds a threshold, but the response is not ultrasensitive. We found that sigmoidal activation profiles can be generated utilizing multiple decoys with mixtures of high and low affinities, where high affinity decoys act to set the threshold and low affinity decoys ensure a sigmoidal response. Placing the synthetic decoy system in a mitotic spindle orientation cell culture system thresholds this physiological activity. Thus, simple combinations of non-activating binding sites can lead to complex regulatory responses in protein interaction networks.     

Crystal Structures of the Scaffolding Protein LGN Reveal the General Mechanism by Which GoLoco Binding Motifs Inhibit the Release of GDP from Gαi

GoLoco (GL) motif-containing proteins regulate G protein signaling by binding to Gα subunit and acting as guanine nucleotide dissociation inhibitors. GLs of LGN are also known to bind the GDP form of Gα_i/o during asymmetric cell division. Here, we show that the C-terminal GL domain of LGN binds four molecules of Gα_i·GDP. The crystal structures of Gα_i·GDP in complex with LGN GL3 and GL4, respectively, reveal distinct GL/Gα_i interaction features when compared with the only high resolution structure known with GL/Gα_i interaction between RGS14 and Gα_i1. Only a few residues C-terminal to the conserved GL sequence are required for LGN GLs to bind to Gα_i·GDP. A highly conserved “double Arg finger” sequence (RΨ(D/E)(D/E)QR) is responsible for LGN GL to bind to GDP bound to Gα_i. Together with the sequence alignment, we suggest that the LGN GL/Gα_i interaction represents a general binding mode between GL motifs and Gα_i. We also show that LGN GLs are potent guanine nucleotide dissociation inhibitors.     

Loss of the canonical spindle orientation function in the Pins/LGN homolog AGS3

In many cell types, mitotic spindle orientation relies on the canonical “LGN complex” composed of Pins/LGN, Mud/NuMA, and Gα_i subunits. Membrane localization of this complex recruits motor force generators that pull on astral microtubules to orient the spindle. Drosophila Pins shares highly conserved functional domains with its two vertebrate homologs LGN and AGS3. Whereas the role of Pins and LGN in oriented divisions is extensively documented, involvement of AGS3 remains controversial. Here, we show that AGS3 is not required for planar divisions of neural progenitors in the mouse neocortex. AGS3 is not recruited to the cell cortex and does not rescue LGN loss of function. Despite conserved interactions with NuMA and Gα_i in vitro, comparison of LGN and AGS3 functional domains in vivo reveals unexpected differences in the ability of these interactions to mediate spindle orientation functions. Finally, we find that Drosophila Pins is unable to substitute for LGN loss of function in vertebrates, highlighting that species‐specific modulations of the interactions between components of the Pins/LGN complex are crucial in vivo for spindle orientation.     

Apical complex genes control mitotic spindle geometry and relative size of daughter cells in Drosophila neuroblast and pI asymmetric divisions

Drosophila neuroblast asymmetric divisions generate two daughters of unequal size and fate. A complex of apically localized molecules mediates basal localization of cell fate determinants and apicobasal orientation of the mitotic spindle, but how daughter cell size is controlled remains unclear. Here we show that mitotic spindle geometry and unequal daughter cell size are controlled by two parallel pathways (Bazooka/DaPKC and Pins/G alpha i) within the apical complex. While the localized activity of either pathway alone is sufficient to mediate the generation of an asymmetric mitotic spindle and unequal size neuroblast daughters, loss of both pathways results in symmetric divisions. In sensory organ precursors, Bazooka/DaPKC and Pins/G alpha i localize to opposite sides of the cortex and function in opposition to generate a symmetric spindle.     

Identification of critical residues in G(alpha)13 for stimulation of p115RhoGEF activity and the structure of the G(alpha)13-p115RhoGEF regulator of G protein signaling homology (RH) domain complex

RH-RhoGEFs are a family of guanine nucleotide exchange factors that contain a regulator of G protein signaling homology (RH) domain. The heterotrimeric G protein Gα(13) stimulates the guanine nucleotide exchange factor (GEF) activity of RH-RhoGEFs, leading to activation of RhoA. The mechanism by which Gα(13) stimulates the GEF activity of RH-RhoGEFs, such as p115RhoGEF, has not yet been fully elucidated. Here, specific residues in Gα(13) that mediate activation of p115RhoGEF are identified. Mutation of these residues significantly impairs binding of Gα(13) to p115RhoGEF as well as stimulation of GEF activity. These data suggest that the exchange activity of p115RhoGEF is stimulated allosterically by Gα(13) and not through its interaction with a secondary binding site. A crystal structure of Gα(13) bound to the RH domain of p115RhoGEF is also presented, which differs from a previously crystallized complex with a Gα(13)-Gα(i1) chimera. Taken together, these data provide new insight into the mechanism by which p115RhoGEF is activated by Gα(13).     

G protein-coupled receptors and resistance to inhibitors of cholinesterase-8A (Ric-8A) both regulate the regulator of g protein signaling 14 RGS14·Gαi1 complex in live cells

Regulator of G protein Signaling 14 (RGS14) is a multifunctional scaffolding protein that integrates both conventional and unconventional G protein signaling pathways. Like other RGS (regulator of G protein signaling) proteins, RGS14 acts as a GTPase accelerating protein to terminate conventional Gα(i/o) signaling. However, unlike other RGS proteins, RGS14 also contains a G protein regulatory/GoLoco motif that specifically binds Gα(i1/3)-GDP in cells and in vitro. The non-receptor guanine nucleotide exchange factor Ric-8A can bind and act on the RGS14·Gα(i1)-GDP complex to play a role in unconventional G protein signaling independent of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Here we demonstrate that RGS14 forms a Gα(i/o)-dependent complex with a G(i)-linked GPCR and that this complex is regulated by receptor agonist and Ric-8A (resistance to inhibitors of cholinesterase-8A). Using live cell bioluminescence resonance energy transfer, we show that RGS14 functionally associates with the α(2A)-adrenergic receptor (α(2A)-AR) in a Gα(i/o)-dependent manner. This interaction is markedly disrupted after receptor stimulation by the specific agonist UK14304, suggesting complex dissociation or rearrangement. Agonist-mediated dissociation of the RGS14·α(2A)-AR complex occurs in the presence of Gα(i/o) but not Gα(s) or Gα(q). Unexpectedly, RGS14 does not dissociate from Gα(i1) in the presence of stimulated α(2A)-AR, suggesting preservation of RGS14·Gα(i1) complexes after receptor activation. However, Ric-8A facilitates dissociation of both the RGS14·Gα(i1) complex and the Gα(i1)-dependent RGS14·α(2A)-AR complex after receptor activation. Together, these findings indicate that RGS14 can form complexes with GPCRs in cells that are dependent on Gα(i/o) and that these RGS14·Gα(i1)·GPCR complexes may be substrates for other signaling partners such as Ric-8A.     

Backbone resonance assignments for G protein αi3 subunit in the GTP-bound state

Guanine-nucleotide binding proteins (G proteins) act as molecular switches in signaling pathways, by coupling the activation of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) at the cell surface to intracellular responses. In the resting state, G protein forms a heterotrimer, consisting of GDP-bound form of the G protein α subunit (Gα(GDP)) and G protein βγ subunit (Gβγ). Ligand binding to GPCRs promotes the GDP-GTP exchange on Gα, leading to the dissociation of the GTP-bound form of Gα (Gα(GTP)) and Gβγ. Then, Gα(GTP) and Gβγ bind to their downstream effector enzymes or ion channels and regulate their activities, leading to a variety of cellular responses. Finally, Gα hydrolyzes the bound GTP to GDP and returns to the resting state by re-associating with Gβγ. G proteins are classified with four major families based on the amino acid sequences of Gα: i/o, s, q/11, and 12/13. Each family transduces the signaling from different GPCRs to the specific effectors. Here, we established the backbone resonance assignments of human Gα_i3, a member of the i/o family, with a molecular weight of 41 K in complex with a GTP analogue, GTPγS.     

A protein complex containing Inscuteable and the Galpha-binding protein Pins orients asymmetric cell divisions in Drosophila

BACKGROUND: In the fruit fly Drosophila, the Inscuteable protein localises to the apical cell cortex in neuroblasts and directs both the apical-basal orientation of the mitotic spindle and the basal localisation of the protein determinants Numb and Prospero during mitosis. Asymmetric localisation of Inscuteable is initiated during neuroblast delamination by direct binding to Bazooka, an apically localised protein that contains protein-interaction motifs known as PDZ domains. How apically localised Inscuteable directs asymmetric cell divisions is unclear. RESULTS: A novel 70 kDa protein called Partner of Inscuteable (Pins) and a heterotrimeric G-protein alpha subunit were found to bind specifically to the functional domain of Inscuteable in vivo. The predicted sequence of Pins contained tetratrico-peptide repeats (TPRs) and motifs implicated in binding Galpha proteins. Pins colocalised with Inscuteable at the apical cell cortex in interphase and mitotic neuroblasts. Asymmetric localisation of Pins required both Inscuteable and Bazooka. In epithelial cells, which do not express inscuteable, Pins was not apically localised but could be recruited to the apical cortex by ectopic expression of Inscuteable. In pins mutants, these epithelial cells were not affected, but neuroblasts showed defects in the orientation of their mitotic spindle and the basal asymmetric localisation of Numb and Miranda during metaphase. Although localisation of Inscuteable in pins mutants was initiated correctly during neuroblast delamination, Inscuteable became homogeneously distributed in the cytoplasm during mitosis. CONCLUSIONS: Pins and Inscuteable are dependent on each other for asymmetric localisation in delaminated neuroblasts. The binding of Pins to Galpha protein offers the intriguing possibility that Inscuteable and Pins might orient asymmetric cell divisions by localising or locally modulating a heterotrimeric G-protein signalling cascade at the apical cell cortex.     

Mammalian Pins is a conformational switch that links NuMA to heterotrimeric G proteins

During asymmetric cell divisions, mitotic spindles align along the axis of polarization. In invertebrates, spindle positioning requires Pins or related proteins and a G protein alpha subunit. A mammalian Pins, called LGN, binds Galphai and also interacts through an N-terminal domain with the microtubule binding protein NuMA. During mitosis, LGN recruits NuMA to the cell cortex, while cortical association of LGN itself requires the C-terminal Galpha binding domain. Using a FRET biosensor, we find that LGN behaves as a conformational switch: in its closed state, the N and C termini interact, but NuMA or Galphai can disrupt this association, allowing LGN to interact simultaneously with both proteins, resulting in their cortical localization. Overexpression of Galphai or YFP-LGN causes a pronounced oscillation of metaphase spindles, and NuMA binding to LGN is required for these spindle movements. We propose that a related switch mechanism might operate in asymmetric cell divisions in the fly and nematode.     

Activation of the regulator of G protein signaling 14-Gαi1-GDP signaling complex is regulated by resistance to inhibitors of cholinesterase-8A

RGS14 is a brain scaffolding protein that integrates G protein and MAP kinase signaling pathways. Like other RGS proteins, RGS14 is a GTPase activating protein (GAP) that terminates Gαi/o signaling. Unlike other RGS proteins, RGS14 also contains a G protein regulatory (also known as GoLoco) domain that binds Gαi1/3-GDP in cells and in vitro. Here we report that Ric-8A, a nonreceptor guanine nucleotide exchange factor (GEF), functionally interacts with the RGS14-Gαi1-GDP signaling complex to regulate its activation state. RGS14 and Ric-8A are recruited from the cytosol to the plasma membrane in the presence of coexpressed Gαi1 in cells, suggesting formation of a functional protein complex with Gαi1. Consistent with this idea, Ric-8A stimulates dissociation of the RGS14-Gαi1-GDP complex in cells and in vitro using purified proteins. Purified Ric-8A stimulates dissociation of the RGS14-Gαi1-GDP complex to form a stable Ric-8A-Gαi complex in the absence of GTP. In the presence of an activating nucleotide, Ric-8A interacts with the RGS14-Gαi1-GDP complex to stimulate both the steady-state GTPase activity of Gαi1 and binding of GTP to Gαi1. However, sufficiently high concentrations of RGS14 competitively reverse these stimulatory effects of Ric-8A on Gαi1 nucleotide binding and GTPase activity. This observation correlates with findings that show RGS14 and Ric-8A share an overlapping binding region within the last 11 amino acids of Gαi1. As further evidence that these proteins are functionally linked, native RGS14 and Ric-8A coexist within the same hippocampal neurons. These findings demonstrate that RGS14 is a newly appreciated integrator of unconventional Ric-8A and Gαi1 signaling.     

Neu1 sialidase and matrix metalloproteinase-9 cross-talk is essential for Toll-like receptor activation and cellular signaling

The signaling pathways of mammalian Toll-like receptors (TLRs) are well characterized, but the precise mechanism(s) by which TLRs are activated upon ligand binding remains poorly defined. Recently, we reported a novel membrane sialidase-controlling mechanism that depends on ligand binding to its TLR to induce mammalian neuraminidase-1 (Neu1) activity, to influence receptor desialylation, and subsequently to induce TLR receptor activation and the production of nitric oxide and proinflammatory cytokines in dendritic and macrophage cells. The α-2,3-sialyl residue of TLR was identified as the specific target for hydrolysis by Neu1. Here, we report a membrane signaling paradigm initiated by endotoxin lipopolysaccharide (LPS) binding to TLR4 to potentiate G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling via membrane Gα(i) subunit proteins and matrix metalloproteinase-9 (MMP9) activation to induce Neu1. Central to this process is that a Neu1-MMP9 complex is bound to TLR4 on the cell surface of naive macrophage cells. Specific inhibition of MMP9 and GPCR Gα(i)-signaling proteins blocks LPS-induced Neu1 activity and NFκB activation. Silencing MMP9 mRNA using lentivirus MMP9 shRNA transduction or siRNA transfection of macrophage cells and MMP9 knock-out primary macrophage cells significantly reduced Neu1 activity and NFκB activation associated with LPS-treated cells. These findings uncover a molecular organizational signaling platform of a novel Neu1 and MMP9 cross-talk in alliance with TLR4 on the cell surface that is essential for ligand activation of TLRs and subsequent cellular signaling.     

Ric-8B is a GTP-dependent G protein alphas guanine nucleotide exchange factor

ric-8 (resistance to inhibitors of cholinesterase 8) genes have positive roles in variegated G protein signaling pathways, including Gα(q) and Gα(s) regulation of neurotransmission, Gα(i)-dependent mitotic spindle positioning during (asymmetric) cell division, and Gα(olf)-dependent odorant receptor signaling. Mammalian Ric-8 activities are partitioned between two genes, ric-8A and ric-8B. Ric-8A is a guanine nucleotide exchange factor (GEF) for Gα(i)/α(q)/α(12/13) subunits. Ric-8B potentiated G(s) signaling presumably as a Gα(s)-class GEF activator, but no demonstration has shown Ric-8B GEF activity. Here, two Ric-8B isoforms were purified and found to be Gα subunit GDP release factor/GEFs. In HeLa cells, full-length Ric-8B (Ric-8BFL) bound endogenously expressed Gα(s) and lesser amounts of Gα(q) and Gα(13). Ric-8BFL stimulated guanosine 5'-3-O-(thio)triphosphate (GTPγS) binding to these subunits and Gα(olf), whereas the Ric-8BΔ9 isoform stimulated Gα(s short) GTPγS binding only. Michaelis-Menten experiments showed that Ric-8BFL elevated the V(max) of Gα(s) steady state GTP hydrolysis and the apparent K(m) values of GTP binding to Gα(s) from ～385 nm to an estimated value of ～42 μM. Directionality of the Ric-8BFL-catalyzed Gα(s) exchange reaction was GTP-dependent. At sub-K(m) GTP, Ric-BFL was inhibitory to exchange despite being a rapid GDP release accelerator. Ric-8BFL binds nucleotide-free Gα(s) tightly, and near-K(m) GTP levels were required to dissociate the Ric-8B·Gα nucleotide-free intermediate to release free Ric-8B and Gα-GTP. Ric-8BFL-catalyzed nucleotide exchange probably proceeds in the forward direction to produce Gα-GTP in cells.     

Mass-dependent signaling between G protein coupled receptors

The present study provides evidence that G protein coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling pathways participate in an interactive signaling network governed by the principles of mass action. Using an inducible thromboxane A2 receptor (TPR)/platelet activating factor receptor (PAFR) co-expressing cell model, TPR or PAFR expression was independently up-regulated. Immunostaining and radioligand binding experiments demonstrated that this receptor up-regulation resulted in increased GPCR:G protein mass ratios. This increase in mass ratio impacted both TPR and PAFR ligand affinity. Specifically, up-regulating TPR expression not only decreased TPR ligand affinity, but also decreased the ligand affinity of PAFRs. A similar effect on ligand affinities was observed when PAFRs were up-regulated. In addition, increasing the GPCR:G protein mass ratio for TPRs led to desensitization of the calcium mobilization response to PAFR activation, and increasing PAFR mass desensitized the TPR-mediated calcium response. Finally, it was observed that an increased TPR:G protein mass ratio was associated with a shift in the TPR signaling response, and revealed an additional TPR signaling pathway through G(S). Collectively, these results describe a novel mechanism, i.e., mass-dependent GPCR signaling, by which cells can modulate their GPCR signaling pathways and signaling priorities.     

A spatial focusing model for G protein signals. Regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) protien-mediated kinetic scaffolding

Regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) are GTPase-accelerating proteins (GAPs), which can inhibit heterotrimeric G protein pathways. In this study, we provide experimental and theoretical evidence that high concentrations of receptors (as at a synapse) can lead to saturation of GDP-GTP exchange making GTP hydrolysis rate-limiting. This results in local depletion of inactive heterotrimeric G-GDP, which is reversed by RGS GAP activity. Thus, RGS enhances receptor-mediated G protein activation even as it deactivates the G protein. Evidence supporting this model includes a GTP-dependent enhancement of guanosine 5'-3-O-(thio)triphosphate (GTPgammaS) binding to G(i) by RGS. The RGS domain of RGS4 is sufficient for this, not requiring the NH(2)- or COOH-terminal extensions. Furthermore, a kinetic model including only the GAP activity of RGS replicates the GTP-dependent enhancement of GTPgammaS binding observed experimentally. Finally in a Monte Carlo model, this mechanism results in a dramatic "spatial focusing" of active G protein. Near the receptor, G protein activity is maintained even with RGS due to the ability of RGS to reduce depletion of local Galpha-GDP levels permitting rapid recoupling to receptor and maintained G protein activation near the receptor. In contrast, distant signals are suppressed by the RGS, since Galpha-GDP is not depleted there. Thus, a novel RGS-mediated "kinetic scaffolding" mechanism is proposed which narrows the spatial range of active G protein around a cluster of receptors limiting the spill-over of G protein signals to more distant effector molecules, thus enhancing the specificity of G(i) protein signals.     

Backbone resonance assignments for G protein αi3 subunit in the GDP-bound state

Guanine-nucleotide binding proteins (G proteins) serve as molecular switches in signaling pathways, by coupling the activation of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) at the cell surface to intracellular responses. In the resting state, G protein forms a heterotrimer, consisting of the G protein α subunit with GDP (Gα·GDP) and the G protein βγ subunit (Gβγ). Ligand binding to GPCRs promotes the GDP–GTP exchange on Gα, leading to the dissociation of the GTP-bound form of Gα (Gα·GTP) and Gβγ. Then, Gα·GTP and Gβγ bind to their downstream effector enzymes or ion channels and regulate their activities, leading to a variety of cellular responses. Finally, Gα hydrolyzes the bound GTP to GDP and returns to the resting state by re-associating with Gβγ. The G proteins are classified with four major families based on the amino acid sequences of Gα: i/o, s, q/11, and 12/13. Here, we established the backbone resonance assignments of human Gα_i3, a member of the i/o family with a molecular weight of 41 K, in complex with GDP. The chemical shifts were compared with those of Gα_i3 in complex with a GTP-analogue, GTPγS, which we recently reported, indicating that the residues with significant chemical shift differences are mostly consistent with the regions with the structural differences between the GDP- and GTPγS-bound states, as indicated in the crystal structures. The assignments of Gα_i3·GDP would be useful for the analyses of the dynamics of Gα_i3 and its interactions with various target molecules.