Effect of activating and inactivating mutations of GS-and Gi2-alpha protein subunits on growth and differentiation of 3T3-L1 preadipocytes

Previous investigations have demonstrated that both G_s- and the G_i-family of GTP-binding proteins are implicated in differentiation of the 3T3-L1 preadipocyte. In order to further analyze the role of G_sα vs. G_i2α, which are both involved in adenylate cyclase modulation, we transfected undifferentiated 3T3-L1 cells with two sets of G-protein cDNA: the pZEM vector with either wild type, the activating (i.e., GTP-ase inhibiting) R201C-G_sα or the inactivating G226A(H21a)-G_sα point mutations, or the pZIPNeoSV(X) retroviral vector constructs containing the G_i2α wild type or the missense mutations R179E-G_i2α, Q205L-G_i2α, and G204A(H21a)-G_i2α. The activating [R201C]G_sα-mutant did not significantly affect the differentiation process, i.e., increase in the steady-state levels of G-protein subunits, gross appearance, or insulin-elicited deoxy-glucose uptake into 3T3-Ll adipocytes, despite a marked initial increase in hormone-elicited adenylate cyclase activity. The [H21a]G_sα-mutant, on the other hand, enhanced the degree of differentiation slightly, as evidenced by an augmented production of lipid vesicles and insulin-stimulated deoxy-glucose uptake. However, an expected increase in mRNA for hormone-sensitive lipase was not seen. Secondly, it appeared that both activating [R179E]G_i2α or [Q205L]G_i2α mutants reduced cell doubling time in non-confluent 3T3-L1 cell cultures, while [H21a]G_i2α slowed proliferation rate. Furthermore, it seemed that cell proliferation, as evidenced by thymidine incorporation, ceased at a much earlier stage prior to cell confluency when cultures were transfected with the [R179E]G_i2α or [Q205L]G_i2α mutants. Upon differentiation with insulin, dexamethasone, and iBuMeXan, the following cell characteristics emerged: the [R179E]G_i2α and [Q205L]G_i2α mutants consistently enhanced adenylate cyclase activation and cAMP accumulation stimulated by isoproterenol and corticotropin over controls. Deoxy-glucose uptake was also super-activated by the [R179E]G_i2α and [Q205L]G_i2α mutants. Finally, steady-state levels of hormone sensitive lipase mRNA were dramatically increased by [R179E]G_i2α and [Q205L]G_i2α over differentiated controls. The inactivating [H21a]G_i2α-mutant obliterated all signs of preadipocyte differentiation. It is concluded that G_i2 plays a positive and much more important role than G_s in 3T3-L1 preadipocyte differentiation. Cyclic AMP appears to play no role in this process. J. Cell. Biochem. 64:242–257. © 1997 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

Antagonist minigenes identify genes regulated by parathyroid hormone through G protein-selective and G protein co-regulated mechanisms in osteoblastic cells

Parathyroid hormone (PTH) is the major hormone regulating bone remodeling. Binding of PTH to the PTH1 receptor (PTH1R), a heterotrimeric G protein coupled receptor (GPCR), can potentially trigger multiple signal transduction pathways mediated through several different G proteins. In this study, we employed G protein antagonist minigenes inhibiting Gα_s, Gα_q or Gα₁₂ to selectively dissect out which of these G proteins were responsible for effects of PTH(1-34) in targeted signaling and osteogenesis arrays consisting of 159 genes. Among the 32 genes significantly regulated by 24 h PTH treatment in UMR-106 osteoblastic cells, 9 genes were exclusively regulated through G_s, 6 genes were solely mediated through G_q, and 3 genes were only controlled through G₁₂. Such findings support the concept that there is some absolute specificity in downstream responses initiated at the G protein level following binding of PTH to the PTH1R. On the other hand, 6 PTH-regulated genes were regulated by both G_s and G_q, 3 genes were regulated by both G_s and G₁₂, and 3 genes were controlled by G_s, G_q and G₁₂. These findings indicate potential overlapping or sequential interactions among different G protein-mediated pathways. In addition, two PTH-regulated genes were not regulated through any of the G proteins examined, suggesting that additional signaling mechanisms may be involved. Selectivity was largely maintained over a 2-48-hour time period. The minigene effects were mimicked by downstream inhibitors. The dissection of the differential effects of multiple G protein pathways on gene regulation provides a more complete understanding of PTH signaling in osteoblastic cells.     

Activation of ras-dependent signaling pathways by G(14) -coupled receptors requires the adaptor protein TPR1

Many G_q‐coupled receptors mediate mitogenic signals by stimulating extracellular signal‐regulated protein kinases (ERKs) that are typically regulated by the small GTPase Ras. Recent studies have revealed that members of the Gα_q family may possess the ability to activate Ras/ERK by interacting with the adaptor protein tetratricopeptide repeat 1 (TPR1). Within the Gα_q family, the highly promiscuous Gα₁₄ can relay signals from numerous receptors. Here, we examined if Gα₁₄ interacts with TPR1 to stimulate Ras signaling pathways. Expression of the constitutively active Gα₁₄QL mutant in HEK293 cells led to the formation of GTP‐bound Ras as well as increased phosphorylations of downstream signaling molecules including ERK and IκB kinase. Stimulation of endogenous G₁₄‐coupled somatostatin type 2 and α₂‐adrenergic receptors produced similar responses in human hepatocellular HepG2 carcinoma cells. Co‐immunoprecipitation assays using HEK293 cells demonstrated a stronger association of TPR1 for Gα₁₄QL than Gα₁₄, suggesting that TPR1 preferentially binds to the GTP‐bound form of Gα₁₄. Activated Gα₁₄ also interacted with the Ras guanine nucleotide exchange factors SOS1 and SOS2. Expression of a dominant negative mutant of TPR1 or siRNA‐mediated knockdown of TPR1 effectively abolished the ability of Gα₁₄ to induce Ras signaling in native HepG2 or transfected HEK293 cells. Although expression of the dominant negative mutant of TPR1 suppressed Gα₁₄QL‐induced phosphorylations of ERK and IκB kinase, it did not affect Gα₁₄QL‐induced stimulation of phospholipase Cβ or c‐Jun N‐terminal kinase. Our results suggest that TPR1 is required for Gα₁₄ to stimulate Ras‐dependent signaling pathways, but not for the propagation of signals along Ras‐independent pathways. J. Cell. Biochem. 113: 3486–3497, 2012. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Signaling mechanisms and physiological functions of G‐protein Gα13 in blood vessel formation,bone homeostasis,and cancer

Heterotrimeric G‐proteins are cellular signal transducers. They mainly relay signals from G‐protein‐coupled receptors (GPCRs). GPCRs function as guanine nucleotide‐exchange factors to active these G‐proteins. Based on the sequence and functional similarities, these G‐proteins are grouped into four subfamilies: G_s, G_i, G_q, and G_12/13. The G_12/13 subfamily consists of two members: G₁₂ and G₁₃. G_12/13‐mediated signaling pathways play pivotal roles in a variety of physiological processes, while aberrant regulation of this pathway has been identified in various human diseases. Here we summarize the signaling mechanisms and physiological functions of Gα₁₃ in blood vessel formation and bone homeostasis. We further discuss the expanding roles of Gα₁₃ in cancers, serving as oncogenes as well as tumor suppressors.     

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.

     

Multiple G proteins compete for binding with the human gonadotropin releasing hormone receptor

The GnRH receptor is coupled to G proteins of the families G_q and G₁₁. G_q and G₁₁ coupling leads to intracellular signaling through the phospholipase C pathway. GnRHR coupling to other G proteins is controversial. This study provides evidence that G protein families G_s, G_i, G_q and G₁₁ complete for binding with the GnRHR. We quantified interactions of over-expressed G proteins with GnRHR by a competitive binding approach, using measurements of second messengers, IP and cAMP. Transient co-transfection of HEK293 cells with human WT GnRHR and with stimulatory and inhibitory G proteins (G_q, G₁₁ and G_s, G_i) led to either production or inhibition of total inositol phosphate (IP) production, depending on the G protein that was over-expressed. Studies were conducted in different human (COS7, HeLa) and rodent-derived (CHO-K1, GH₃) cell lines in order to confirm that G protein promiscuity observed with the GnRHR was not limited to a particular cell type.     

Glycogen Synthase Kinase-3beta regulates Snail and beta-catenin during gastrin-induced migration of gastric cancer cells

Background

Nucleotide-actived P2Y receptors play critical roles in the growth of tumor cells by regulating cellular proliferation, differentiation and survival.

Results

Here we demonstrate that an avian P2Y purinoceptor (tP2YR) with unique pharmacological and signal transduction properties induces morphologic and growth transformation of rodent fibroblasts. tP2YR induced a transformed phenotype similar to the mas oncogene, a G protein-coupled receptor which causes transformation by activation of Rac-dependent pathways. tP2YR-transformed cells exhibited increased steady-state activation of Rac1 and RhoA. Like activated Rho GTPases, tP2YR cooperated with activated Raf and caused synergistic transformation of NIH3T3 cells. Our data indicate that the ability of tP2YR to cause transformation is due to its unique ability among purinergic receptors to simultaneously activate Gα_q and Gα_i. Co-expression of constitutively activated mutants of these two Gα subunits caused the same transformed phenotype as tP2YR and Mas. Furthermore, transformation by both tP2YR and Mas was blocked by pharmacological inhibition of Gα_I by pertussis toxin (PTX) indicating an essential role for Gα_i in transformation by these G-protein coupled receptors.

Conclusions

Our data suggest that coordinated activation of Gα_q and Gα_i may link the tP2YR and possibility the Mas oncogene with signaling pathways resulting in activation of Rho family proteins to promote cellular transformation.     

Molecular Mechanism of Resistance of Equine (Equus caballus) Platelets to α2-Adrenergic Regulation

Adrenaline is a weak aggregating agonist for human platelets acting through G-protein-coupled α₂-adrenoceptors to inhibit adenylate cyclase and thus reduce cyclic AMP levels. Studies of equine platelets have shown that adrenaline is unable to promote their aggregation. We now confirm that adrenaline is without effect on equine platelet aggregation and demonstrate that it is also without effect on equine platelet membrane adenylate cyclase activity. We have previously shown that equine platelet membranes contain conventionally regulated adenylate cyclase activity, with both stimulatory ligands (forskolin and PGE₁) and inhibitory ligands (collagen and PAF) each showing substantial and dose-dependent effects. We now show, in Western blots, that equine platelet membranes contain G proteins, including G_i2 (which mediates inhibition of adenylate cyclase by adrenaline in human platelets), G_i3, G_s, and G_q. Hence, all the necessary components and responses are in place in equine platelets to provide for a conventional role for cyclic AMP and adenylate cyclase in modulating platelet aggregation. The basis for the failure of adrenaline, unlike other ligands, to deliver such a signal, appears to be a marked lack of α₂-adrenoceptors. This is supported by the low receptor density we found in idazoxan binding studies.     

The role of β1Pix/caveolin-1 interaction in endothelin signaling through Gα subunits

Endothelin-1 (ET-1) is a potent mitogen that transmits signals through its cognate G protein-coupled receptors to stimulate extracellular signal-regulated kinase Erk1/2. Endothelin-1 receptors (ET-Rs) are known to interact with caveolin-1 and co-localize in caveolae which integrate different receptor and signaling proteins. We have recently shown that β₁Pix binds specifically to ET-Rs. Here, we show that β₁Pix binding to caveolin-1 is dependent on heterotrimeric G proteins activation state. β₁Pix interaction with different G proteins is increased in the presence of the G protein activator AMF. Moreover, extraction of cholesterol with methyl-β-cyclodextrin disrupts the binding of β₁Pix to Gα_q, Gα₁₂ and phospho-Erk1/2 but not the binding of β₁Pix to G_β1. The disruption of β₁Pix dimerization strongly reduced the binding of caveolin-1, Gα_q and Gα₁₂. Constitutively active mutants of Gα_q and Gα₁₂ increased Cdc42 activation when co-expressed with β₁Pix but not in the presence of β₁Pix dimerization deficient mutant β₁PixΔ (602-611). ET-1 stimulation increased the binding of phosphorylated Erk1/2 to β₁Pix but not to β₁PixΔ (602-611). RGS3 decreased ET-1-induced Cdc42 activation. These results strongly suggest that the activation of ET-Rs leads to the compartmentalization and the binding of Gα_q to β₁Pix in caveolae, where dimeric β₁Pix acts as platform to facilitate the binding and the activation of Erk1/2.     

Regulator of G protein signaling 2 inhibits Gαq-dependent uveal melanoma cell growth

Activating mutations in Gα_q/11 are a major driver of uveal melanoma (UM), the most common intraocular cancer in adults. While progress has recently been made in targeting Gα_q/11 for UM therapy, the crucial role for these proteins in normal physiology and their high structural similarity with many other important GTPase proteins renders this approach challenging. The aim of the current study was to validate whether a key regulator of Gq signaling, regulator of G protein signaling 2 (RGS2), can inhibit Gα_q-mediated UM cell growth. We used two UM cell lines, 92.1 and Mel-202, which both contain the most common activating mutation Gα_q^Q209L and developed stable cell lines with doxycycline-inducible RGS2 protein expression. Using cell viability assays, we showed that RGS2 could inhibit cell growth in both of these UM cell lines. We also found that this effect was independent of the canonical GTPase-activating protein activity of RGS2 but was dependent on the association between RGS2 and Gα_q. Furthermore, RGS2 induction resulted in only partial reduction in cell growth as compared to siRNA-mediated Gαq knockdown, perhaps because RGS2 was only able to reduce mitogen-activated protein kinase signaling downstream of phospholipase Cβ, while leaving activation of the Hippo signaling mediators yes-associated protein 1/TAZ, the other major pathway downstream of Gα_q, unaffected. Taken together, our data indicate that RGS2 can inhibit UM cancer cell growth by associating with Gα_q^Q209L as a partial effector antagonist.