A knockout mutation of a constitutive GPCR in Tetrahymena decreases both G-protein activity and chemoattraction

Although G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) are a common element in many chemosensory transduction pathways in eukaryotic cells, no GPCR or regulated G-protein activity has yet been shown in any ciliate. To study the possible role for a GPCR in the chemoresponses of the ciliate Tetrahymena, we have generated a number of macronuclear gene knockouts of putative GPCRs found in the Tetrahymena Genome database. One of these knockout mutants, called G6, is a complete knockout of a gene that we call GPCR6 (TTHERM_00925490). Based on sequence comparisons, the Gpcr6p protein belongs to the Rhodopsin Family of GPCRs. Notably, Gpcr6p shares highest amino acid sequence homologies to GPCRs from Paramecium and several plants. One of the phenotypes of the G6 mutant is a decreased responsiveness to the depolarizing ions Ba²⁺ and K⁺, suggesting a decrease in basal excitability (decrease in Ca²⁺ channel activity). The other major phenotype of G6 is a loss of chemoattraction to lysophosphatidic acid (LPA) and proteose peptone (PP), two known chemoattractants in Tetrahymena. Using microsomal [³⁵S]GTPγS binding assays, we found that wild-type (CU427) have a prominent basal G-protein activity. This activity is decreased to the same level by pertussis toxin (a G-protein inhibitor), addition of chemoattractants, or the G6 mutant. Since the basal G-protein activity is decreased by the GPCR6 knockout, it is likely that this gene codes for a constitutively active GPCR in Tetrahymena. We propose that chemoattractants like LPA and PP cause attraction in Tetrahymena by decreasing the basal G-protein stimulating activity of Gpcr6p. This leads to decreased excitability in wild-type and longer runs of smooth forward swimming (less interrupted by direction changes) towards the attractant. Therefore, these attractants may work as inverse agonists through the constitutively active Gpcr6p coupled to a pertussis-sensitive G-protein.     

Critical role of N-terminal N-glycosylation for proper folding of the human formyl peptide receptor

The human formyl peptide receptor (FPR) is N-glycosylated and activates phagocytes via G(i)-proteins. The FPR expressed with G(i)alpha(2)beta(1)gamma(2) in Sf9 insect cells exhibits high constitutive activity as assessed by strong inhibitory effects of an inverse agonist and Na(+) on basal guanosine 5(')-O-(3-thiotriphosphate) (GTPgammaS) binding. The aim of our study was to analyze the role of N-glycosylation in FPR function. Site-directed mutagenesis of extracellular Asn residues prevented FPR glycosylation but not FPR expression in Sf9 membranes. However, in terms of high-affinity agonist binding, kinetics of GTPgammaS binding, number of G(i)-proteins activated, and constitutive activity, non-glycosylated FPR was much less active than native FPR. FPR-Asn4Gln/Asn10Gln/Asn179Gln and FPR-Asn4Gln/Asn10/Gln exhibited similar defects. Our data indicate that N-glycosylation of N-terminal Asn4 and Asn10 but not of Asn179 in the second extracellular loop is essential for proper folding and, hence, function of FPR. FPR deglycosylation by bacterial glycosidases could be a mechanism by which bacteria compromise host defense.     

Regulation of formyl peptide receptor agonist affinity by reconstitution with arrestins and heterotrimeric G proteins

Although heptahelical chemoattractant and chemokine receptors are known to play a significant role in the host immune response and the pathophysiology of disease, the molecular mechanisms and transient macroassemblies underlying their activation and regulation remain largely uncharacterized. We report herein real time analyses of molecular assemblies involving the formyl peptide receptor (FPR), a well described member of the chemoattractant subfamily of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), with both arrestins and heterotrimeric G proteins. In our system, the ability to define and discriminate distinct, in vitro receptor complexes relies on quantitative differences in the dissociation rate of a fluorescent agonist as well as the guanosine 5'-3-O-(thio)triphosphate (GTP gamma S) sensitivity of the complex, as recently described for FPR-G protein interactions. In the current study, we demonstrate a concentration- and time-dependent reconstitution of liganded, phosphorylated FPR with exogenous arrestin-2 and -3 to form a high agonist affinity, nucleotide-insensitive complex with EC(50) values of 0.5 and 0.9 microm, respectively. In contrast, neither arrestin-2 nor arrestin-3 altered the ligand dissociation kinetics of activated, nonphosphorylated FPR. Moreover, we demonstrated that the addition of G proteins was unable to alter the ligand dissociation kinetics or induce a GTP gamma S-sensitive state of the phosphorylated FPR. The properties of the phosphorylated FPR were entirely reversible upon treatment of the receptor preparation with phosphatase. These results represent to our knowledge the first report of the reconstitution of a detergent-solubilized, phosphorylated GPCR with arrestins and, furthermore, the first demonstration that phosphorylation of a nonvisual GPCR is capable of efficiently blocking G protein binding in the absence of arrestin. The significance of these results with respect to receptor desensitization and internalization are discussed.     

3D modeling of the activated states of constitutively active mutants of rhodopsin

The activated (R*) states in constitutively active mutants (CAMs) of G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are presumably characterized by lower energies than the resting (R) states. If specific configurations of TM helices differing by rotations along the long transmembrane axes possess energies lower than that in the R state for pronounced CAMs, but not for non-CAMs, these particular configurations of TM helices are candidate 3D models for the R* state. The hypothesis was studied in the case of rhodopsin, the only GPCR for which experimentally determined 3D models of the R and R* states are currently available. Indeed, relative energies of the R* state were significantly lower than that of the R state for the rhodopsin mutants G90D/M257Y and E113Q/M257Y (strong CAMs), but not for G90D, E113Q, and M257Y (not CAMs). Next, the developed build-up procedure successfully identified few similar configurations of the TM helical bundle of G90D/M257Y and E113Q/M257Y as possible candidates for the 3D model of the R* state of rhodopsin, all of them being in good agreement with the model suggested by experiment. Since constitutively active mutants are known for many of GPCRs belonging to the large rhodopsin-like family, this approach provides a way for predicting possible 3D structures corresponding to the activated states of the TM regions of many GPCRs for which CAMs have been identified.     

Constitutively active Gq/11-coupled receptors enable signaling by co-expressed G(i/o)-coupled receptors

Co-expression of guanine nucleotide-binding regulatory (G) protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), such as the G(i/o)-coupled human 5-hydroxytryptamine receptor 1B (5-HT(1B)R), with the G(q/11)-coupled human histamine 1 receptor (H1R) results in an overall increase in agonist-independent signaling, which can be augmented by 5-HT(1B)R agonists and inhibited by a selective inverse 5-HT(1B)R agonist. Interestingly, inverse H1R agonists inhibit constitutively H1R-mediated as well as 5-HT(1B)R agonist-induced signaling in cells co-expressing both receptors. This phenomenon is not solely characteristic of 5-HT(1B)R; it is also evident with muscarinic M2 and adenosine A1 receptors and is mimicked by mastoparan-7, an activator of G(i/o) proteins, or by over-expression of Gbetagamma subunits. Likewise, expression of the G(q/11)-coupled human cytomegalovirus (HCMV)-encoded chemokine receptor US28 unmasks a functional coupling of G(i/o)-coupled CCR1 receptors that is mediated via the constitutive activity of receptor US28. Consequently, constitutively active G(q/11)-coupled receptors, such as the H1R and HCMV-encoded chemokine receptor US28, constitute a regulatory switch for signal transduction by G(i/o)-coupled receptors, which may have profound implications in understanding the role of both constitutive GPCR activity and GPCR cross-talk in physiology as well as in the observed pathophysiology upon HCMV infection.     

Quantitative analysis of formyl peptide receptor coupling to g(i)alpha(1), g(i)alpha(2), and g(i)alpha(3)

The human formyl peptide receptor (FPR) is a prototypical G(i) protein-coupled receptor, but little is known about quantitative aspects of FPR-G(i) protein coupling. To address this issue, we fused the FPR to G(i)alpha(1), G(i)alpha(2), and G(i)alpha(3) and expressed the fusion proteins in Sf9 insect cells. Fusion of a receptor to Galpha ensures a defined 1:1 stoichiometry of the signaling partners. By analyzing high affinity agonist binding, the kinetics of agonist- and inverse agonist-regulated guanosine 5'-O-(3-thiotriphosphate) (GTPgammaS) binding and GTP hydrolysis and photolabeling of Galpha, we demonstrate highly efficient coupling of the FPR to fused G(i)alpha(1), G(i)alpha(2), and G(i)alpha(3) without cross-talk of the receptor to insect cell G proteins. The FPR displayed high constitutive activity when coupled to all three G(i)alpha isoforms. The K(d) values of high affinity agonist binding were approximately 100-fold lower than the EC(50) (concentration that gives half-maximal stimulation) values of agonist for GTPase activation. Based on the B(max) values of agonist saturation binding and ligand-regulated GTPgammaS binding, it was previously proposed that the FPR activates G proteins catalytically, i.e. one FPR activates several G(i) proteins. Analysis of agonist saturation binding, ligand-regulated GTPgammaS saturation binding and quantitative immunoblotting with membranes expressing FPR-G(i)alpha fusion proteins and nonfused FPR now reveals that FPR agonist binding greatly underestimates the actual FPR expression level. Our data show the following: (i) the FPR couples to G(i)alpha(1), G(i)alpha(2), and G(i)alpha(3) with similar efficiency; (ii) the FPR can exist in a state of low agonist affinity that couples efficiently to G proteins; and (iii) in contrast to the previously held view, the FPR appears to activate G(i) proteins linearly and not catalytically.     

G protein-coupled receptors serve as mechanosensors for fluid shear stress in neutrophils

Many cells respond to fluid shear stress but in a cell type-specific fashion. Fluid shear stress applied to leukocytes serves to control pseudopod formation, migration, and other functions. Specifically, fresh neutrophils or neutrophilic leukocytes derived from differentiated HL60 cells respond to fluid shear stress by cytoplasmic pseudopod retraction. The membrane elements that sense fluid shear and induce such a specific response are still unknown, however. We hypothesized that membrane receptors may serve as fluid shear sensors. We found that fluid shear decreased the constitutive activity of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Inhibition of GPCR constitutive activity by inverse agonists abolished fluid shear stress-induced cell area reduction. Among the GPCRs in neutrophils, the formyl peptide receptor (FPR) exhibits relatively high constitutive activity. Undifferentiated HL60 cells that lacked FPR formed few pseudopods and showed no detectable response to fluid shear stress, whereas expression of FPR in undifferentiated HL60 cells caused pseudopod projection and robust pseudopod retraction during fluid shear. FPR small interfering RNA-transfected differentiated HL60 cells exhibited no response to fluid shear stress. These results suggest that GPCRs serve as mechanosensors for fluid shear stress in neutrophils by decreasing its constitutive activity and reducing pseudopod projection. leukocyte; constitutive activity; mechanotransduction; formyl peptide receptor     

Sequence of interactions in receptor-G protein coupling

Guanine nucleotide exchange in heterotrimeric G proteins catalyzed by G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) is a key event in many physiological processes. The crystal structures of the GPCR rhodopsin and two G proteins as well as binding sites on both catalytically interacting proteins are known, but the temporal sequence of events leading to nucleotide exchange remains to be elucidated. We employed time-resolved near infrared light scattering to study the order in which the Galpha and Ggamma C-terminal binding sites on the holo-G protein interact with the active state of the GPCR rhodopsin (R*) in native membranes. We investigated these key binding sites within mass-tagged peptides and G proteins and found that their binding to R* is mutually exclusive. The interaction of the holo-G protein with R* requires at least one of the lipid modifications of the G protein (i.e. myristoylation of the Galpha N terminus and/or farnesylation of the Ggamma C terminus). A holo-G protein with a high affinity Galpha C terminus shows a specific change of the reaction rate in the GDP release and GTP uptake steps of catalysis. We interpret the data by a sequential fit model where (i) the initial encounter between R* and the G protein occurs with the Gbetagamma subunit, and (ii) the Galpha C-terminal tail then interacts with R* to release bound GDP, thereby decreasing the affinity of R* for the Gbetagamma subunit. The mechanism limits the time in which both C-terminal binding sites of the G protein interact simultaneously with R* to a short lived transitory state.     

Dominant-negative activity of an alpha(1B)-adrenergic receptor signal-inactivating point mutation

alpha(1)-adrenergic receptors (alpha(1)-ARs) are members of the G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) superfamily and activate inositol phosphate (IP) turnover. We show that glycine and asparagine mutations of Phe303 in transmembrane segment VI (TMVI) of the alpha(1B)-AR, a highly conserved residue in GPCRs, although increasing agonist affinity, abolish agonist-activated IP signalling. Co-expression of the Phe303 mutants also inhibited (-)epinephrine-stimulated IP signalling by wild-type alpha(1B)-AR and other G(q)-coupled receptors, as well as IP signalling mediated by AlF(4)(-) stimulation of both wild-type G(q alpha) and a constitutively active mutant. The inability of the Phe303 mutants to signal is due to induction of a receptor conformation that dissociates G-protein binding from activation. As a result, the Phe303 mutants sequester G(q alpha) and stoichiometrically inhibit Gq signalling in a dominant-negative manner. We further show that both the enhanced basal and agonist-stimulated IP-signalling activity of the constitutively active alpha(1B)-AR mutants, C128F and A293E, are inhibited in the double mutants, C128F/F303G and A293E/F303G. Phe303, therefore, appears to be critically involved in coupling TMVI alpha-helical movement, a key step in receptor activation, to activation of the cognate G-protein.     

Disease-causing mutation in PKR2 receptor reveals a critical role of positive charges in the second intracellular loop for G-protein coupling and receptor trafficking

Prokineticins are a pair of signal factors involved in many physiological processes by binding to two closely related G-protein-coupled receptors, PKR1 and PKR2. Recently, mutations in prokineticin 2 (PK2) and PKR2 are found to be associated with Kallmann syndrome and/or idiopathic hypogonadotropic hypogonadism, disorders characterized by delayed puberty and infertility. However, little is known how PKRs interact and activate G-proteins to elicit signal transduction. In the present study, we took advantage of one disease-associated mutation (R164Q) located in the second intracellular (IL2) loop of PKR2, to investigate the role of IL2 loop in the cell signaling, G-protein binding and receptor trafficking. R164Q mutant PKR2 showed normal cell surface expression and ligand binding capacity. However, the PKR2 signaling was abolished by R164Q mutation. We demonstrated that R164Q mutation disrupted the interaction of IL2 loop to the Gα(q), Gα(i), and Gα(16)-proteins. A positive-charged amino acid at this position is required for proper function, and the signaling efficacy and potency depend on the net amount of positive charges. We also demonstrated that the interactive partner of Arg-164 may localize in the C-terminal five residues of Gα(q)-protein. A series of mutation analysis indicated that the basic amino acids at the C terminus of IL2 loop may function cooperatively in GPCRs. Furthermore, R164Q mutation also results in minimal ligand-induced endocytosis of PKR2. As many GPCRs share structural homology in the C terminus of IL2 loop, our findings may have general application in understanding structure and function of GPCRs.     

Formyl peptide receptor-mediated ERK1/2 activation occurs through G(i) and is not dependent on beta-arrestin1/2

Formyl peptide receptor (FPR) and C5a receptor (C5aR) are chemoattractant G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) involved in the innate immune response against bacterial infections and tissue injury. Like other GPCRs, they recruit beta-arrestin1/2 to the plasma membrane and activate the extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1 and 2 (ERK1/2). Previous studies with several GPCRs have suggested that beta-arrestins play an important role as signal transducers by scaffolding signaling molecules such as ERK1/2. This function of the beta-arrestins was not discovered until several years after their role in desensitization and endocytosis had been reported. In this study, we investigated the role of the beta-arrestins in the activation of ERK1/2 and receptor endocytosis. We took advantage of previously described mutants of FPR that have defects in G(i) coupling or beta-arrestin recruitment. The results obtained with the mutant FPRs, as well as experiments using an inhibitor of G(i) and cells overexpressing beta-arrestin2, showed that activation of ERK1/2 takes place through G(i) and is not affected by beta-arrestins. However, overexpression of beta-arrestin2 does enhance FPR sequestration from the cell surface, suggesting a role in desensitization, as shown for many other GPCRs. Experiments with CHO C5aR cells showed similar sensitivity to the G(i) inhibitor as CHO FPR cells, suggesting that the predominant activation of ERK1/2 through G protein may be a common characteristic among chemoattractant receptors.     

Phe(303) in TMVI of the alpha(1B)-adrenergic receptor is a key residue coupling TM helical movements to G-protein activation.

We showed previously that Phe(303) in transmembrane segment (TM) VI of the alpha(1B)-adrenergic receptor, a highly conserved residue in G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), is critically involved in receptor-activation and G-protein-coupling [Chen, S. H., Lin, F., Xu, M., Hwa, J., and Graham, R. M. (2000) EMBO J. 19, 4265-4271]. Here, we show that saturation mutagenesis of Phe(303) results in a series of mutants with different levels of constitutive activity for inositol phosphate (IP) signaling. Mutants F303G and F303N showed neither basal nor agonist-stimulated IP turnover, whereas F303A displayed increased basal activity but an attenuated maximal response to (-)-epinephrine-stimulation. F303L, on the other hand, showed all features of a typical constitutively active GPCR with markedly increased basal activity and increased potency and efficacy of agonist-stimulated IP signaling. All mutants displayed higher agonist-binding affinities than the wild-type receptor, and by thermal stability studies, those able to signal showed increased susceptibility to inactivation with an order of sensitivity (F303L > F303A > WT) directly related to their degree of constitutive activity. Using the substituted cysteine accessibility method (SCAM) and equilibrium binding studies, we further show that the F303A and F303L mutants result in TM helical movements that differ in accordance with their degree of constitutive activity. These findings, therefore, confirm and extend our previous data implicating Phe(303) as a key residue coupling TM helical movements to G-protein-activation.     

Evidence for a single heptahelical domain being turned on upon activation of a dimeric GPCR

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) have been shown to form dimers, but the relevance of this phenomenon in G-protein activation is not known. Among the large GPCR family, metabotropic glutamate (mGlu) receptors are constitutive dimers. Here we examined whether both heptahelical domains (HDs) are turned on upon full receptor activation. To that aim, we measured G-protein coupling efficacy of dimeric mGlu receptors in which one subunit bears specific mutations. We show that a mutation in the third intracellular loop (i3 loop) known to prevent G-protein activation in a single subunit decreases coupling efficacy. However, when a single HD is blocked in its inactive state using an inverse agonist, 2-methyl-6-(phenylethynyl)pyridine (MPEP), no decrease in receptor activity is observed. Interestingly, in a receptor dimer in which the subunit that binds MPEP is mutated in its i3 loop, MPEP enhances agonist-induced activity, reflecting a 'better' activation of the adjacent HD. These data are consistent with a model in which a single HD is turned on upon activation of such homodimeric receptors and raise important issues in deciphering the functional role of GPCR dimer formation for G-protein activation.     

Inhibition of somatostatin receptor 5-signaling by mammalian regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS) in yeast

Regulators of G-protein signaling (RGSs) are negative regulators of G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR)-mediated signaling that function to limit the lifetime of receptor-activated G(alpha)-proteins. Here we show that four mammalian RGSs differentially inhibit the activation of a FUS1--LacZ reporter gene by the STE2 encoded GPCR in yeast. In order to examine the role of the GPCR in modulating RGS function, we functionally expressed the human somatostatin receptor 5 (SST(5)) in yeast. In the absence of RGSs, FUS1--LacZ activation in response to somatostatin increased in a dose-dependent manner in cells expressing SST(5). In contrast to the results obtained with Ste2p, all RGSs completely inhibited SST(5)-mediated signaling even at concentrations of agonist as high as 10(minus sign5) M. The ability of RGSs to inhibit SST(5) signaling was further assessed in cells expressing modified Gpa1 proteins. Even though SST(5)-mediated FUS1--LacZ activation was 5-fold more efficient with a Gpa1p/G(i3alpha) chimera, response to somatostatin was completely abolished by all four RGSs. Furthermore, we demonstrate that RGS1, RGS2 and RGS5 have reduced ability to inhibit SST(5)-mediated activation of the RGS-resistant Gpa1p(Gly302Ser) mutant suggesting that the ability to interact with the G(alpha)-protein is required for the inhibition of signaling. Taken together, our results indicate that RGSs serve as better GAPs for Gpa1p when activated by SST(5) than when this G-protein is activated by Ste2p.     

G protein-coupled receptor kinase 4gamma interacts with inactive Galpha(s) and Galpha13

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are regulated by multiple families of kinases including GPCR kinases (GRKs). GRK4 is constitutively active towards GPCRs, and polymorphisms of GRK4γ are linked to hypertension. We examined, through co-immunoprecipitation, the interactions between GRK4γ and the Gα and Gβ subunits of heterotrimeric G proteins. Because GRK4 has been shown to inhibit Gα_s-coupled GPCR signaling and lacks a PH domain, we hypothesized that GRK4γ would interact with active Gα_s, but not Gβ. Surprisingly, GRK4γ preferentially interacts with inactive Gα_s and Gβ to a greater extent than active Gα_s. GRK4γ also interacts with inactive Gα₁₃ and Gβ. Functional studies demonstrate that wild-type GRK4γ, but not kinase-dead GRK4γ, ablates isoproterenol-mediated cAMP production indicating that the kinase domain is responsible for GPCR regulation. This evidence suggests that binding to inactive Gα_s and Gβ may explain the constitutive activity of GRK4γ towards Gα_s-coupled receptors.     

Inverse Agonism of SQ 29,548 and Ramatroban on Thromboxane A2 Receptor

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) show some level of basal activity even in the absence of an agonist, a phenomenon referred to as constitutive activity. Such constitutive activity in GPCRs is known to have important pathophysiological roles in human disease. The thromboxane A2 receptor (TP) is a GPCR that promotes thrombosis in response to binding of the prostanoid, thromboxane A2. TP dysfunction is widely implicated in pathophysiological conditions such as bleeding disorders, hypertension and cardiovascular disease. Recently, we reported the characterization of a few constitutively active mutants (CAMs) in TP, including a genetic variant A160T. Using these CAMs as reporters, we now test the inverse agonist properties of known antagonists of TP, SQ 29,548, Ramatroban, L-670596 and Diclofenac, in HEK293T cells. Interestingly, SQ 29,548 reduced the basal activity of both, WT-TP and the CAMs while Ramatroban was able to reduce the basal activity of only the CAMs. Diclofenac and L-670596 showed no statistically significant reduction in basal activity of WT-TP or CAMs. To investigate the role of these compounds on human platelet function, we tested their effects on human megakaryocyte based system for platelet activation. Both SQ 29,548 and Ramatroban reduced the platelet hyperactivity of the A160T genetic variant. Taken together, our results suggest that SQ 29,548 and Ramatroban are inverse agonists for TP, whereas, L-670596 and Diclofenac are neutral antagonists. Our findings have important therapeutic applications in the treatment of TP mediated pathophysiological conditions.     

Direct assessment of CXCR4 mutant conformations reveals complex link between receptor structure and G(alpha)(i) activation

Ligand binding to G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) is thought to induce changes in receptor conformation that translate into activation of downstream effectors. The link between receptor conformation and activity is still insufficiently understood, as current models of GPCR activation fail to take an increasing amount of experimental data into account. To elucidate structure-function relationships in GPCR activation, we used bioluminescence resonance energy transfer to directly assess the conformation of mutants of the chemokine receptor CXCR4. We analyzed substitutions in the arginine cage DRY motif and in the conserved asparagine N(3.35)119, which are pivotal molecular switches for receptor conformation and activation. G(alpha)(i) activation of the mutants was either similar to wild-type CXCR4 (D133N, Y135A, and N119D) or resulted in loss of activity (R134A and N119K). Mutant N119S was constitutively active but further activated by agonist. Bioluminescence resonance energy transfer analysis suggested no simple correlation between conformational changes in response to ligand binding and activation of G(alpha)(i) by the mutants. Different conformations of active receptors were detected (for wild-type CXCR4, D133N, and N119S), suggesting that different receptor conformations are able to trigger G(alpha)(i) activity. Several conformations were also found for inactive mutants. These data provide biophysical evidence for different receptor conformations being active with respect to a single readout. They support models of GPCR structure-activity relationships that take this conformational flexibility of active receptors into account.     

The receptor-bound "empty pocket" state of the heterotrimeric G-protein alpha-subunit is conformationally dynamic

Heterotrimeric G-protein activation by a G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) requires the propagation of structural signals from the receptor-interacting surfaces to the guanine nucleotide-binding pocket. To probe conformational changes in the G-protein alpha-subunit (G(alpha)) associated with activated GPCR (R*) interactions and guanine nucleotide exchange, high-resolution solution NMR methods are being applied in studying signaling of the G-protein, transducin, by light-activated rhodopsin. Using these methods, we recently demonstrated that an isotope-labeled G(alpha) reconstituted heterotrimer forms functional complexes under NMR experimental conditions with light-activated, detergent-solubilized rhodopsin and a soluble mimic of R*, both of which trigger guanine nucleotide exchange [Ridge, K. D., et al. (2006) J. Biol. Chem. 281, 7635-7648]. Here, it is shown that both light-activated rhodopsin and the soluble mimic of R form trapped intermediate complexes with a GDP-released "empty pocket" state of the heterotrimer in the absence of GTP (or GTPgammaS). In contrast to guanine nucleotide-bound forms of G(alpha), the NMR spectra of the GDP-released, R-bound empty pocket state of G(alpha) display severe line broadening suggestive of a dynamic intermediate state. Interestingly, the conformation of a GDP-depleted, Mg(2+)-bound state of G(alpha) generated in a manner independent of R* does not exhibit a similar degree of line broadening but rather appears structurally similar to the GDP/Mg(2+)-bound form of the protein. Taken together, these results suggest that R*-mediated changes in the receptor-interacting regions of G(alpha), and not the absence of bound guanine nucleotide, are the predominant factors which dictate G(alpha) conformation and dynamics in this R*-bound state of the heterotrimer.     

Role of the extracellular amino terminus and first membrane-spanning helix of dopamine D1 and D5 receptors in shaping ligand selectivity and efficacy

Transmembrane (TM) helices of human D1-like dopaminergic receptors (hD1R and hD5R) harbor the same residues implicated in ligand binding and activation of catecholamine G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Yet, hD1R and hD5R naturally display the distinct functional properties shared by wild type and constitutively active mutant GPCRs, respectively. Interestingly, we show in the present study that a class of synthetic phenylbenzazepine agonists containing a methyl on the azepine ring exhibited lower affinity for the more constitutively activated hD5R. These results cannot be explained by the “allosteric ternary complex model” postulating a higher agonist affinity for constitutively active GPCRs. We have also explored the functional role of distinct extracellular amino terminus (NT) and TM1 regions of hD1R and hD5R using a chimerical approach. Of these two regions, our studies suggest that TM1 predominantly shapes D1-like ligand affinity and selectivity. Additionally, NT and TM1 of hD1R and hD5R play no role in receptor constitutive activity but differentially modulate dopamine-mediated responsiveness. The TM1 exchange mediated drastic changes in intrinsic efficacy and activity of phenylbenzazepine drugs displaying partial agonism at hD1R and hD5R. Phenylbenzazepines were converted into strong partial agonists or full agonists in cells expressing hD1R-TM1^D5 chimera while being switched from full agonists to partial agonists and partial agonists to antagonists in cells harboring hD5R-TM1^D1 chimera. TM1 exchange had no effect on antipsychotic-mediated inverse agonism. In summary, our study shows that NT and TM1 of D1-like receptors control ligand binding and agonist-induced activation, poising these regions as important structural determinants for catecholamine GPCR function.