A direct fluorescence-based assay for RGS domain GTPase accelerating activity

Diverse extracellular signals regulate seven transmembrane-spanning receptors to modulate cellular physiology. These receptors signal primarily through activation of heterotrimeric guanine nucleotide binding proteins (G proteins). A major determinant of heterotrimeric G protein signaling in vivo and in vitro is the intrinsic GTPase activity of the Galpha subunit. RGS (regulator of G protein signaling) domain-containing proteins are GTPase accelerating proteins specific for Galpha subunits. In this article, we describe the use of the ribose-conjugated fluorescent guanine nucleotide analog BODIPYFL-GTP as a spectroscopic probe to measure intrinsic and RGS protein-catalyzed nucleotide hydrolysis by Galphao. BODIPYFL-GTP bound to Galphao exhibits a 200% increase in fluorescence quantum yield. Hydrolysis of BODIPYFL-GTP to BODIPYFL-GDP reduces the quantum yield to 27% above its unbound value. We demonstrate that BODIPYFL-GTP can be used as a rapid real-time probe for measuring RGS domain-catalyzed GTP hydrolysis by Galphao. We demonstrate the effectiveness of this assay in the analysis of loss-of-function point mutants of both Galphao and RGS12. This assay should be useful in screening for and analyzing RGS protein inhibitory compounds.     

RGS6 and RGS7 Discriminate between the Highly Similar Gαi and Gαo Proteins Using a Two-Tiered Specificity Strategy

RGS6 and RGS7 are regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins that inactivate heterotrimeric (αβγ) G proteins and mediate diverse biological functions, such as cardiac and neuronal signaling. Uniquely, both RGS6 and RGS7 can discriminate between Gα_o and Gα_i1—two similar Gα subunits that belong to the same G_i sub-family. Here, we show that the isolated RGS domains of RGS6 and RGS7 are sufficient to achieve this specificity. We identified three specific RGS6/7 “disruptor residues” that can attenuate RGS interactions toward Gα subunits and demonstrated that their insertion into a representative high-activity RGS causes a significant, yet non-specific, reduction in activity. We further identified a unique “modulatory” residue that bypasses this negative effect, specifically toward Gα_o. Hence, the exquisite specificity of RGS6 and RGS7 toward closely related Gα subunits is achieved via a two-tier specificity system, whereby a Gα-specific modulatory motif overrides the inhibitory effect of non-specific disruptor residues. Our findings expand the understanding of the molecular toolkit used by the RGS family to achieve specific interactions with selected Gα subunits—emphasizing the functional importance of the RGS domain in determining the activity and selectivity of RGS R7 sub-family members toward particular Gα subunits.     

The GAPs, GEFs, and GDIs of heterotrimeric G-protein alpha subunits

The heterotrimeric G-protein alpha subunit has long been considered a bimodal, GTP-hydrolyzing switch controlling the duration of signal transduction by seven-transmembrane domain (7TM) cell-surface receptors. In 1996, we and others identified a superfamily of "regulator of G-protein signaling" (RGS) proteins that accelerate the rate of GTP hydrolysis by Galpha subunits (dubbed GTPase-accelerating protein or "GAP" activity). This discovery resolved the paradox between the rapid physiological timing seen for 7TM receptor signal transduction in vivo and the slow rates of GTP hydrolysis exhibited by purified Galpha subunits in vitro. Here, we review more recent discoveries that have highlighted newly-appreciated roles for RGS proteins beyond mere negative regulators of 7TM signaling. These new roles include the RGS-box-containing, RhoA-specific guanine nucleotide exchange factors (RGS-RhoGEFs) that serve as Galpha effectors to couple 7TM and semaphorin receptor signaling to RhoA activation, the potential for RGS12 to serve as a nexus for signaling from tyrosine kinases and G-proteins of both the Galpha and Ras-superfamilies, the potential for R7-subfamily RGS proteins to couple Galpha subunits to 7TM receptors in the absence of conventional Gbetagamma dimers, and the potential for the conjoint 7TM/RGS-box Arabidopsis protein AtRGS1 to serve as a ligand-operated GAP for the plant Galpha AtGPA1. Moreover, we review the discovery of novel biochemical activities that also impinge on the guanine nucleotide binding and hydrolysis cycle of Galpha subunits: namely, the guanine nucleotide dissociation inhibitor (GDI) activity of the GoLoco motif-containing proteins and the 7TM receptor-independent guanine nucleotide exchange factor (GEF) activity of Ric8/synembryn. Discovery of these novel GAP, GDI, and GEF activities have helped to illuminate a new role for Galpha subunit GDP/GTP cycling required for microtubule force generation and mitotic spindle function in chromosomal segregation.     

How regulators of G protein signaling achieve selective regulation

The regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) are a family of cellular proteins that play an essential regulatory role in G protein-mediated signal transduction. There are multiple RGS subfamilies consisting of over 20 different RGS proteins. They are basically the guanosine triphosphatase (GTPase)-accelerating proteins that specifically interact with G protein alpha subunits. RGS proteins display remarkable selectivity and specificity in their regulation of receptors, ion channels, and other G protein-mediated physiological events. The molecular and cellular mechanisms underlying such selectivity are complex and cooperate at many different levels. Recent research data have provided strong evidence that the spatiotemporal-specific expression of RGS proteins and their target components, as well as the specific protein-protein recognition and interaction through their characteristic structural domains and functional motifs, are determinants for RGS selectivity and specificity. Other molecular mechanisms, such as alternative splicing and scaffold proteins, also significantly contribute to RGS selectivity. To pursue a thorough understanding of the mechanisms of RGS selective regulation will be of great significance for the advancement of our knowledge of molecular and cellular signal transduction.     

RGS11 interacts preferentially with R7BP over Gαoa - Characterization of Gβ5-free RGS11

Regulator of G protein signaling 11 (RGS11) is the least characterized member of the R7 family of Gγ-like GGL domain-containing RGS proteins. All R7-RGS proteins of a variety of cell types are found in Gβ5-containing complexes that exhibit a number of unique functional properties. However, presence of Gβ5 reduced the affinity of R7-RGS7 for Gα subunits, also only RGS7 bound to Muscarinic M3-Receptor, but the Gβ5-RGS7 dimer did not, making it difficult to study differential interaction of R7-RGS proteins. Here, we report the successful purification of functionally intact, Gβ5-free recombinant RGS11 (rRGS11), obtained by expressing N- and C-terminally truncated form of RGS11 in Escherichia coli BL 21 (DE3), that differentially interact with R7BP and Gα_oa. rRGS11 was capable of interacting with Gα_oa and R7BP (RGS7 family binding protein) with equilibrium dissociation constants (K_D) of 904 (±208) nM, and 308 (±97) nM, respectively. It also induced several-fold increase in the GTPase activity of Gα_oa. The binding of rRGS11 was differential with a binding preference for R7BP over Gα_oa implying extended roles of R7BP. In addition, we identified a novel interaction between Gα_oa and R7BP with a K_D of 592 (±150) nM. The production of stable and functional rRGS11 would provide chances to discover more functions of RGS11 yet to be identified.     

Development of inhibitors of heterotrimeric Gαi subunits

Heterotrimeric G-proteins are the immediate downstream effectors of G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs). Endogenous protein guanine nucleotide dissociation inhibitors (GDIs) like AGS3/4 and RGS12/14 function through GPR/Goloco GDI domains. Extensive characterization of GPR domain peptides indicate they function as selective GDIs for Gα_i by competing for the GPCR and Gβγ and preventing GDP release. We modified a GPR consensus peptide by testing FGF and TAT leader sequences to make the peptide cell permeable. FGF modification inhibited GDI activity while TAT preserved GDI activity. TAT-GPR suppresses G-protein coupling to the receptor and completely blocked α₂-adrenoceptor (α₂AR) mediated decreases in cAMP in HEK293 cells at 100 nM. We then sought to discover selective small molecule inhibitors for Gα_i. Molecular docking was used to identify potential molecules that bind to and stabilize the Gα_i–GDP complex by directly interacting with both Gα_i and GDP. Gα_i–GTP and Gα_q–GDP were used as a computational counter screen and Gα_q–GDP was used as a biological counter screen. Thirty-seven molecules were tested using nucleotide exchange. STD NMR assays with compound 0990, a quinazoline derivative, showed direct interaction with Gα_i. Several compounds showed Gα_i specific inhibition and were able to block α₂AR mediated regulation of cAMP. In addition to being a pharmacologic tool, GDI inhibition of Gα subunits has the advantage of circumventing the upstream component of GPCR-related signaling in cases of overstimulation by agonists, mutations, polymorphisms, and expression-related defects often seen in disease.     

Structure of the Regulator of G Protein Signaling 8 (RGS8)-Gαq Complex: MOLECULAR BASIS FOR Gα SELECTIVITY*

Regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins interact with activated Gα subunits via their RGS domains and accelerate the hydrolysis of GTP. Although the R4 subfamily of RGS proteins generally accepts both Gα_i/o and Gα_q/11 subunits as substrates, the R7 and R12 subfamilies select against Gα_q/11. In contrast, only one RGS protein, RGS2, is known to be selective for Gα_q/11. The molecular basis for this selectivity is not clear. Previously, the crystal structure of RGS2 in complex with Gα_q revealed a non-canonical interaction that could be due to interfacial differences imposed by RGS2, the Gα subunit, or both. To resolve this ambiguity, the 2.6 Å crystal structure of RGS8, an R4 subfamily member, was determined in complex with Gα_q. RGS8 adopts the same pose on Gα_q as it does when bound to Gα_i3, indicating that the non-canonical interaction of RGS2 with Gα_q is due to unique features of RGS2. Based on the RGS8-Gα_q structure, residues in RGS8 that contact a unique α-helical domain loop of Gα_q were converted to those typically found in R12 subfamily members, and the reverse substitutions were introduced into RGS10, an R12 subfamily member. Although these substitutions perturbed their ability to stimulate GTP hydrolysis, they did not reverse selectivity. Instead, selectivity for Gα_q seems more likely determined by whether strong contacts can be maintained between α6 of the RGS domain and Switch III of Gα_q, regions of high sequence and conformational diversity in both protein families.     

GPCR-induced dissociation of G-protein subunits in early stage signal transduction

G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) form a ternary complex of agonist, receptor and G-proteins during primary signal transduction at the cell membrane. Downstream signalling is thought to be preceded by the process of dissociation of Gα and Gβγ subunits, thus exposing new surfaces to interact with downstream effectors. We demonstrate here for the first time, the dissociation of heterotrimeric G-protein subunits (i.e., Gα and Gβγ) following agonist-induced GPCR (α_2A-adrenergic receptor; α_2A-AR) activation in a cell-free assay system. α_2A-AR membranes were reconstituted with the G-proteins (±hexahistidine-tagged) Gα_i1 and Gβ₁γ₂ and functional signalling was determined following activation of the reconstituted receptor:G-protein complex with the potent agonist UK-14304, and [³⁵S]GTPγS. In the presence of Ni²⁺-coated agarose beads, the activated his-tagged Gα_i1his-[³⁵S]GTPγS complex was captured on the Ni²⁺-presenting surface. When his-tagged Gβ₁γ₂ (Gβ₁γ₂his) was used with Gα_i1, the [³⁵S]GTPγS-bound Gα_i1 was not present on the Ni²⁺-coated beads, but rather, it was separated from the β₁γ₂(his)-beads, demonstrating receptor-induced dissociation of Gα and Gβγ subunits. Treatment of the reconstituted α_2A-AR membranes containing Gβ₁γ₂his:Gα_i1 with imidazole confirmed the specificity for the Ni²⁺:G-protein surface dissociation of Gα_i1 from Gβ₁γ₂his. These data demonstrate for the first time, the complete dissociation of the G-protein subunits and extend observations on the role of G-proteins in the assembly and disassembly of the ternary complex in the primary events of GPCR signalling.     

Genetic diversity of microbial eukaryotes in anoxic sediment around fumaroles on a submarine caldera floor based on the small-subunit rDNA phylogeny

Recent culture-independent molecular analyses have shown the diversity and ecological importance of microbial eukaryotes (protists) in various marine environments. In the present study we directly extracted DNA from anoxic sediment near active fumaroles on a submarine caldera floor at a depth of 200 m and constructed genetic libraries of PCR-amplified eukaryotic small-subunit (SSU) rDNA. By sequencing cloned SSU rDNA of the libraries and their phylogenetic analyses, it was shown that most sequences have affiliations with known major lineages of eukaryotes (Cercozoa, Alveolata, stramenopiles and Opisthokonta). In particular, some sequences were closely related to those of representatives of eukaryotic parasites, such as Phagomyxa and Cryothecomonas of Cercozoa, Pirsonia of stramenopiles and Ichthyosporea of Opisthokonta, although it is not clear whether the organisms occur in free-living or parasitic forms. In addition, other sequences did not seem to be related to any described eukaryotic lineages suggesting the existence of novel eukaryotes at a high-taxonomic level in the sediment. The community composition of microbial eukaryotes in the sediment we surveyed was different overall from those of other anoxic marine environments previously investigated.     

The role of PLDα1 in providing specificity to signal‐response coupling by heterotrimeric G‐protein components in Arabidopsis

Heterotrimeric G‐proteins comprised of Gα, Gβ and Gγ subunits are important signal transducers in all eukaryotes. In plants, G‐proteins affect multiple biotic and abiotic stress responses, as well as many developmental processes, even though their repertoire is significantly limited compared with that in metazoan systems. One canonical and three extra‐large Gα, 1 Gβ and 3 Gγ proteins represent the heterotrimeric G‐protein complex in Arabidopsis, and a single regulatory protein, RGS1, is one of the few known biochemical regulators of this signaling complex. This quantitative disparity between the number of signaling components and the range of processes they influence is rather intriguing. We now present evidence that the phospholipase Dα1 protein is a key component and modulator of the G‐protein complex in affecting a subset of signaling pathways. We also show that the same G‐protein subunits and their modulators exhibit distinct physiological and genetic interactions depending on specific signaling and developmental pathways. Such developmental plasticity and interaction specificity likely compensates for the lack of multiplicity of individual subunits, and helps to fine tune the plants' responses to constantly changing environments.     

G蛋白信号调节因子的结构分类和功能

G蛋白信号调节因子是能够直接与激活的Gα亚基结合,显著刺激Gα亚基上的GTP酶活性,加速GTP水解,从而灭活或终止G蛋白信号的一组分子大小各异的多功能蛋白质家族。它们都共同拥有一个130个氨基酸的保守的RGS结构域,其功能是结合激活的Gα亚基,负调节G蛋白信号。许多RGS蛋白还拥有非RGS结构域,能够结合其它信号蛋白,从而整合和调节G蛋白信号之间以及G蛋白和其它信号系统之间的关系。     

Phosphatidic acid binding inhibits RGS1 activity to affect specific signaling pathways in Arabidopsis

Modulation of the active versus inactive forms of the Gα protein is critical for the signaling processes mediated by the heterotrimeric G‐protein complex. We have recently established that in Arabidopsis, the regulator of G‐protein signaling (RGS1) protein and a lipid‐hydrolyzing enzyme, phospholipase Dα1 (PLDα1), both act as GTPase‐activity accelerating proteins (GAPs) for the Gα protein to attenuate its activity. RGS1 and PLDα1 interact with each other, and RGS1 inhibits the activity of PLDα1 during regulation of a subset of responses. In this study, we present evidence that this regulation is bidirectional. Phosphatidic acid (PA), a second messenger typically derived from the lipid‐hydrolyzing activity of PLDα1, is a molecular target of RGS1. PA binds and inhibits the GAP activity of RGS1. A conserved lysine residue in RGS1 (Lys²⁵⁹) is directly involved in RGS1–PA binding. Introduction of this RGS1 protein variant in the rgs1 mutant background makes plants hypersensitive to a subset of abscisic acid‐mediated responses. Our data point to the existence of negative feedback loops between these two regulatory proteins that precisely modulate the level of active Gα, consequently generating a highly controlled signal–response output.     

The Ras‐binding domain region of RGS14 regulates its functional interactions with heterotrimeric G proteins

RGS14 is a 60 kDa protein that contains a regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) domain near its N‐terminus, a central region containing a pair of tandem Ras‐binding domains (RBD), and a GPSM (G protein signaling modulator) domain (a.k.a. Gi/o‐Loco binding [GoLoco] motif) near its C‐terminus. The RGS domain of RGS14 exhibits GTPase accelerating protein (GAP) activity toward Gαi/o proteins, while its GPSM domain acts as a guanine nucleotide dissociation inhibitor (GDI) on Gαi1 and Gαi3. In the current study, we investigate the contribution of different domains of RGS14 to its biochemical functions. Here we show that the full‐length protein has a greater GTPase activating activity but a weaker inhibition of nucleotide dissociation relative to its isolated RGS and GPSM regions, respectively. Our data suggest that these differences may be attributable to an inter‐domain interaction within RGS14 that promotes the activity of the RGS domain, but simultaneously inhibits the activity of the GPSM domain. The RBD region seems to play an essential role in this regulatory activity. Moreover, this region of RGS14 is also able to bind to members of the B/R4 subfamily of RGS proteins and enhance their effects on GPCR‐activated Gi/o proteins. Overall, our results suggest a mechanism wherein the RBD region associates with the RGS domain region, producing an intramolecular interaction within RGS14 that enhances the GTPase activating function of its RGS domain while disfavoring the negative effect of its GPSM domain on nucleotide dissociation. J. Cell. Biochem. 114: 1414–1423, 2013. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

G protein activation without a GEF in the plant kingdom

Animal heterotrimeric G proteins are activated by guanine nucleotide exchange factors (GEF), typically seven transmembrane receptors that trigger GDP release and subsequent GTP binding. In contrast, the Arabidopsis thaliana G protein (AtGPA1) rapidly activates itself without a GEF and is instead regulated by a seven transmembrane Regulator of G protein Signaling (7TM-RGS) protein that promotes GTP hydrolysis to reset the inactive (GDP-bound) state. It is not known if this unusual activation is a major and constraining part of the evolutionary history of G signaling in eukaryotes. In particular, it is not known if this is an ancestral form or if this mechanism is maintained, and therefore constrained, within the plant kingdom. To determine if this mode of signal regulation is conserved throughout the plant kingdom, we analyzed available plant genomes for G protein signaling components, and we purified individually the plant components encoded in an informative set of plant genomes in order to determine their activation properties in vitro. While the subunits of the heterotrimeric G protein complex are encoded in vascular plant genomes, the 7TM-RGS genes were lost in all investigated grasses. Despite the absence of a Gα-inactivating protein in grasses, all vascular plant Gα proteins examined rapidly released GDP without a receptor and slowly hydrolyzed GTP, indicating that these Gα are self-activating. We showed further that a single amino acid substitution found naturally in grass Gα proteins reduced the Gα-RGS interaction, and this amino acid substitution occurred before the loss of the RGS gene in the grass lineage. Like grasses, non-vascular plants also appear to lack RGS proteins. However, unlike grasses, one representative non-vascular plant Gα showed rapid GTP hydrolysis, likely compensating for the loss of the RGS gene. Our findings, the loss of a regulatory gene and the retention of the "self-activating" trait, indicate the existence of divergent Gα regulatory mechanisms in the plant kingdom. In the grasses, purifying selection on the regulatory gene was lost after the physical decoupling of the RGS protein and its cognate Gα partner. More broadly these findings show extreme divergence in Gα activation and regulation that played a critical role in the evolution of G protein signaling pathways.     

Selective Gαi subunits as novel direct activators of transient receptor potential canonical (TRPC)4 and TRPC5 channels

The ubiquitous transient receptor potential canonical (TRPC) channels function as non-selective, Ca(2+)-permeable channels and mediate numerous cellular functions. It is commonly assumed that TRPC channels are activated by stimulation of Gα(q)-PLC-coupled receptors. However, whether the Gα(q)-PLC pathway is the main regulator of TRPC4/5 channels and how other Gα proteins may regulate these channels are poorly understood. We previously reported that TRPC4/TRPC5 can be activated by Gα(i). In the current work, we found that Gα(i) subunits, rather than Gα(q), are the primary and direct activators of TRPC4 and TRPC5. We report a novel molecular mechanism in which TRPC4 is activated by several Gα(i) subunits, most prominently by Gα(i2), and TRPC5 is activated primarily by Gα(i3). Activation of Gα(i) by the muscarinic M2 receptors or expression of the constitutively active Gα(i) mutants equally and fully activates the channels. Moreover, both TRPC4 and TRPC5 are activated by direct interaction of their conserved C-terminal SESTD (SEC14-like and spectrin-type domains) with the Gα(i) subunits. Two amino acids (lysine 715 and arginine 716) of the TRPC4 C terminus were identified by structural modeling as mediating the interaction with Gα(i2). These findings indicate an essential role of Gα(i) proteins as novel activators for TRPC4/5 and reveal the molecular mechanism by which G-proteins activate the channels.     

Engineering a V2 Vasopressin Receptor Agonist- and Regulator of G-Protein-Signaling-Sensitive G Protein

It is extremely difficult to detect guanine nucleotide exchange or hydrolysis stimulated by receptors which couple to G(s)alpha. Furthermore, G(s)alpha is largely resistant to the GTPase-activating properties of RGS proteins. Coexpression of the vasopressin V(2) receptor with a series of chimeric G protein alpha subunits in which the C-terminal 6-12 amino acids of G(i1)alpha were replaced with the equivalent sequence of G(s)alpha allowed robust vasopressin-stimulated [(35)S]GTPgammaS binding. Vasopressin did not stimulate the GTPase activity of fusion proteins between the V(2) receptor and either G(s)alpha or G(i1)alpha. However, it produced a concentration-dependent stimulation of V(max) for a V(2) receptor-G(i1)alpha/Gs6alpha fusion protein. This construct bound [(3)H]vasopressin with high affinity and this was competed by other ligands with rank order anticipated for the V(2) receptor. RGS1 enhanced vasopressin stimulation of V(2) receptor-G(i1)alpha/G(s)6alpha in a concentration-dependent manner. RGS-GAIP was substantially less potent. Enzyme kinetic analysis demonstrated that RGS1 increased both V(max) of the GTPase activity and the observed K(m) for GTP, consistent with RGS1 accelerating the rate of GTP hydrolysis of the chimeric G protein, whereas the agonist vasopressin accelerates guanine nucleotide exchange. This approach provides a sensitive assay for V(2) receptor agonist ligands and may be amenable to many other G(s)alpha-coupled receptors.     

Subcellular localization of regulator of G protein signaling RGS7 complex in neurons and transfected cells

The R7 family of regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) is involved in many functions of the nervous system. This family includes RGS6, RGS7, RGS9, and RGS11 gene products and is defined by the presence of the characteristic first found in Disheveled, Egl-10, Pleckstrin (DEP), DEP helical extension (DHEX), Gγ-like, and RGS domains. Herein, we examined the subcellular localization of RGS7, the most broadly expressed R7 member. Our immunofluorescence studies of retinal and dorsal root ganglion neurons showed that RGS7 concentrated at the plasma membrane of cell bodies, in structures resembling lamellipodia or filopodia along the processes, and at the dendritic tips. At the plasma membrane of dorsal root ganglia neurons, RGS7 co-localized with its known binding partners R7 RGS binding protein (R7BP), Gαo, and Gαq. More than 50% of total RGS7-specific immunofluorescence was present in the cytoplasm, primarily within numerous small puncta that did not co-localize with R7BP. No specific RGS7 or R7BP immunoreactivity was detected in the nuclei. In transfected cell lines, ectopic RGS7 had both diffuse cytosolic and punctate localization patterns. RGS7 also localized in centrosomes. Structure-function analysis showed that the punctate localization was mediated by the DEP/DHEX domains, and centrosomal localization was dependent on the DHEX domain.     

Two chimeric regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS) proteins differentially modulate soybean heterotrimeric G-protein cycle

Heterotrimeric G-proteins and the regulator of G-protein signaling (RGS) proteins, which accelerate the inherent GTPase activity of Gα proteins, are common in animals and encoded by large gene families; however, in plants G-protein signaling is thought to be more limited in scope. For example, Arabidopsis thaliana contains one Gα, one Gβ, three Gγ, and one RGS protein. Recent examination of the Glycine max (soybean) genome reveals a larger set of G-protein-related genes and raises the possibility of more intricate G-protein networks than previously observed in plants. Stopped-flow analysis of GTP-binding and GDP/GTP exchange for the four soybean Gα proteins (GmGα1-4) reveals differences in their kinetic properties. The soybean genome encodes two chimeric RGS proteins with an N-terminal seven transmembrane domain and a C-terminal RGS box. Both GmRGS interact with each of the four GmGα and regulate their GTPase activity. The GTPase-accelerating activities of GmRGS1 and -2 differ for each GmGα, suggesting more than one possible rate of the G-protein cycle initiated by each of the Gα proteins. The differential effects of GmRGS1 and GmRGS2 on GmGα1-4 result from a single valine versus alanine difference. The emerging picture suggests complex regulation of the G-protein cycle in soybean and in other plants with expanded G-protein networks.