The effects of charge-neutralizing mutation D6.30N on the functions of CB1 and CB2 cannabinoid receptors

Charge-neutralizing mutation D6.30N of the human cannabinoid receptor subtype 1 (CB1) and cannabinoid receptor subtype 2 (CB2) cannabinoid receptors was made to test two hypotheses: (1) D6.30 may be crucial for the functions of CB1 and CB2 receptors. (2) D6.30 may participate in an ionic lock with R3.50 that keeps the receptors in an inactive conformation. Specific ligand binding and ligand-induced inhibition of forskolin-stimulated cAMP accumulation were observed with human embryonic kidney epithelial cell line (HEK293) cells expressing wild-type CB1 and CB2, as well as CB1D6.30N and CB2D6.30N mutant receptors. There was however a decrease in maximum response of the mutant receptors compared to their wild-type counterparts, suggesting that D6.30 is essential for full activation of both CB1 and CB2 receptors. Both CB1D6.30N and CB2D6.30N demonstrated a level of constitutive activity no greater than that of their wild-type counterparts, indicating that either D6.30 does not participate in a salt bridge with R3.50, or the salt bridge is not critical for keeping cannabinoid receptors in the inactive conformation.     

Molecular basis for dramatic changes in cannabinoid CB1 G protein‐coupled receptor activation upon single and double point mutations

There is considerable interest in determining the activation mechanism of G protein‐coupled receptors (GPCRs), one of the most important types of proteins for intercellular signaling. Recently, it was demonstrated for the cannabinoid CB1 GPCR, that a single mutation T210A could make CB1 completely inactive whereas T210I makes it essentially constitutively active. To obtain an understanding of this dramatic dependence of activity on mutation, we used first‐principles‐based methods to predict the ensemble of low‐energy seven‐helix conformations for the wild‐type (WT) and mutants (T210A and T210I). We find that the transmembrane (TM) helix packings depend markedly on these mutations, leading for T210A to both TM3+TM6 and TM2+TM6 salt‐bridge couplings in the cytoplasmic face that explains the inactivity of this mutant. In contrast T210I has no such couplings across the receptor explaining the ease in activating this mutant. WT has just the TM3+TM6 coupling, known to be broken upon GPCR activation. To test this hypothesis on activity, we predicted double mutants that would convert the inactive mutant to normal activity and then confirmed this experimentally. This CB1 activation mechanism, or one similar to it, is expected to play a role in other constitutively active GPCRs as well.     

The activation mechanism of chemokine receptor CCR5 involves common structural changes but a different network of interhelical interactions relative to rhodopsin

In G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), the interaction between the cytosolic ends of transmembrane helix 3 (TM3) and TM6 was shown to play an important role in the transition from inactive to active states. According to the currently prevailing model, constructed for rhodopsin and structurally related receptors, the arginine of the conserved "DRY" motif located at the cytosolic end of TM3 (R3.50) would interact with acidic residues in TM3 (D/E3.49) and TM6 (D/E6.30) at the resting state and shift out of this polar pocket upon agonist stimulation. However, 30% of GPCRs, including all chemokine receptors, contain a positively charged residue at position 6.30 which does not support an interaction with R3.50. We have investigated the role of R6.30 in this receptor family by using CCR5 as a model. R6.30D and R6.30E substitutions, which allow an ionic interaction with R3.50, resulted in an almost silent receptor devoid of constitutive activity and strongly impaired in its ability to bind chemokines but still able to internalize. R6.30A and R6.30Q substitutions, allowing weaker interactions with R3.50, preserved chemokine binding but reduced the constitutive activity and the functional response to chemokines. These results indicate that the constitutive and ligand-promoted activity of CCR5 can be modified by modulating the interaction between the DRY motif in TM3 and residues in TM6 suggesting that the overall structure and activation mechanism are well conserved in GPCRs. However, the molecular interactions locking the inactive state must be different in receptors devoid of D/E6.30.     

The third intracellular loop stabilizes the inactive state of the neuropeptide Y1 receptor

Constitutively active G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) can signal even in the absence of ligand binding. Most Class I GPCRs are stabilized in the resting conformation by intramolecular interactions involving transmembrane domain (TM) 3 and TM6, particularly at loci 6.30 and 6.34 of TM6. Signaling by Gi/Go-coupled receptors such as the Neuropeptide Y1 receptor decreases already low basal metabolite levels. Thus, we examined constitutive activity using a biochemical assay mediated by a Gi/Gq chimeric protein and a more direct electrophysiological assay. Wild-type (WT-Y1) receptors express no measurable, agonist-independent activation, while mu-opioid receptors (MOR) and P2Y12 purinoceptors showed clear evidence of constitutive activation, especially in the electrophysiological assay. Neither point mutations at TM6 (T6.30A or N6.34A) nor substitution of the entire TM3 and TM6 regions from the MOR into the Y1 receptor increased basal WT-Y1 activation. By contrast, chimeric substitution of the third intracellular loop (ICL3) generated a constitutively active, Y1-ICL3-MOR chimera. Furthermore, the loss of stabilizing interactions from the native ICL3 enhanced the role of surrounding residues to permit basal receptor activation; because constitutive activity of the Y1-ICL3-MOR chimera was further increased by point mutation at locus 6.34, which did not alter WT-Y1 receptor activity. Our results indicate that the ICL3 stabilizes the Y1 receptor in the inactive state and confers structural properties critical for regulating Y receptor activation and signal transduction. These studies reveal the active participation of the ICL3 in the stabilization and activation of Class I GPCRs.     

Activation of the cannabinoid CB1 receptor may involve a W6 48/F3 36 rotamer toggle switch.

The cannabinoid CB1 receptor, a member of the Rhodopsin (Rho) family of G protein coupled receptors (GPCRs), exhibits high levels of constitutive activity. In contrast, Rho exhibits an exquisite lack of constitutive activity. In Rho, W6.48(265) on transmembrane helix 6 (TMH6) is flanked by aromatic residues at positions i-4 (F6.44) and i + 3 (Y6.51), while in CB1 the residues i-4 and i + 3 to W6.48 are leucines (L6.44 and L6.51). Based upon spectroscopic evidence, W6.48 has been proposed to undergo a rotamer switch (chi1 g+ -->trans) upon activation of Rho. In the work reported here, the biased Monte Carlo method, Conformational Memories (CM) was used to test the hypothesis that the high constitutive activity exhibited by CB1 may be due, in part, to the lack of aromatic residues i-4 and i + 3 from W6.48. In this work, the W6.48 rotamer shift (chi1 g+ -->trans) was used as the criterion for activation. Conformational Memories (CM) calculations on WT CB1 TMH6 and L6.44F and L6.51Y mutant TMH6s revealed that an aromatic residue at 6.44 tends to disfavor the W6.48 chi1 g+ -->trans transition and an aromatic residue at 6.51 would require a concomitant movement of the Y6.51 chi1 from trans-->g+ when the W6.48 chi1 undergoes a g+ -->trans shift. In contrast, CM calculations on WT CB1 TMH6 revealed that the presence of leucines at 6.44 and 6.51 provide W6.48 with greater conformational mobility, with a W6.48 transchi1 preferred. Conformational Memories calculations also revealed that the W6.48 chi1 g+ -->trans transition in WT CB1 TMH6 is correlated with the degree of kinking in TMH6. The average proline kink angles for TMH6 were higher for helices with a W6.48 g+ chi1 than for those with a W6.48 transchi1. These results are consistent with experimental evidence that TMH6 straightens during activation. Transmembrane helix (TMH) bundle models of the inactive (R) and active (R*) states of CB1 were then probed for interactions that may constrain W6.48 in the inactive state of CB1. These studies revealed that F3.36 (transchi1) helps to constrain W6.48 in a g+ chi1 in the inactive (R) state of CB1. In the R* state, these studies suggest that F3.36 must assume a g+ chi1 in order to allow W6.48 to shift to a transchi1. These results suggest that the W6.48/F3.36 interaction may act as the 'toggle switch' for CB1 activation, with W6.48 chi1 g+/F3.36 chi1 trans representing the inactive (R) and W6.48 chi1 trans/F3.36 chi1 g+ representing the active (R*) state of CB1.     

The local environment at the cytoplasmic end of TM6 of the mu opioid receptor differs from those of rhodopsin and monoamine receptors: introduction of an ionic lock between the cytoplasmic ends of helices 3 and 6 by a L6.30(275)E mutation inactivates the mu opioid receptor and reduces the constitutive activity of its T6.34(279)K mutant

Activation of rhodopsin and monoamine G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) has been proposed to involve in part the disruption of a conserved E6.30-R3.50 ionic interaction between transmembrane segments (TMs) 3 and 6. However, this interaction does not occur in the opioid receptors, which have L275 at 6.30. On the basis of our findings that mutations of T6.34(279) to K and D produced, respectively, a constitutively active and an inactive form of the mu opioid receptor, we previously suggested that the functional role of the 6.30(275) residue could be assumed by T6.34(279), but the interplay between residues at positions 6.30 and 6.34 remained unresolved. In this study, we examined the effects of introducing an E in position 6.30(275) of the wild type (WT) and of the T6.34(279) mutants of the mu opioid receptor to compare the participation of the 6.30 locus in molecular events during activation in this receptor with its role in other GPCRs. The L6.30(275)E and the L6.30(275)E/T6.34(279)D mutants displayed no constitutive activity and could not be activated by the agonist DAMGO or morphine. The L6.30(275)E/T6.34(279)K mutant had some constitutive activity, but much less than the T6.34(279)K mutant, and could be activated by both agonists. The rank order of affinity for the agonist DAMGO is as follows: T6.34(279)K > WT congruent with L6.30(275)E/T6.34(279)K > L6.30(275)E congruent with T6.34(279)D > L6.30(275)E/T6.34(279)D; however, all constructs have a similar affinity for the antagonist [(3)H]diprenorphine. These data are interpreted in the context of interactions with the conserved R3.50(165) in TM3. When L6.30(275) is mutated to E, the favorable E6.30(275)-R3.50(165) interaction stabilizes an inactive state, as in rhodopsin, and hence reduces the activities of T6.34(279) mutants. Thus, the mu opioid receptor is shown to be different from rhodopsin and monoamine GPCRs, of which the WTs with native E6.30 can be activated, and the 6.34D or 6.34K mutants display enhanced constitutive activities. Our molecular modeling results suggest that some specific differences in local geometry at the cytoplasmic ends of TM5 and TM6 may account in part for the observed differences in the molecular mechanisms of receptor activation.     

Mutations of CB1 T210 produce active and inactive receptor forms: correlations with ligand affinity, receptor stability, and cellular localization

Human cannabinoid receptor 1 (CB(1)) has attracted substantial interest as a potential therapeutic target for treating obesity and other obsessive disorders. An understanding of the mechanism governing the transition of the CB(1) receptor between its inactive and active states is critical for understanding how therapeutics can selectively regulate receptor activity. We have examined the importance of the Thr at position 210 in CB(1) in this transition, a residue predicted to be on the same face of the helix as the Arg of the DRY motif highly conserved in the G protein-coupled receptor superfamily. This Thr was substituted with Ile and Ala via mutagenesis, and the receptors, T210I and T210A, were expressed in HEK 293 cells. The T210I receptor exhibited enhanced agonist and diminished inverse agonist affinity relative to the wild type, consistent with a shift toward the active form. However, treatment with GTPgammaS to inhibit G protein coupling diminished the affinity change for the inverse agonist SR141716A. The decreased thermal stability of the T210I receptor and increased level of internalization of a T210I receptor-GFP chimera were also observed, consistent with constitutive activity. In contrast, the T210A receptor exhibited the opposite profile: diminished agonist and enhanced inverse agonist affinity. The T210A receptor was found to be more thermally stable than the wild type, and high levels of a T210A receptor-GFP chimera were localized to the cell surface as predicted for an inactive receptor form. These results suggest that T210 plays a key role in governing the transition between inactive and active CB(1) receptor states.     

Agonist‐Independent,High Constitutive Activity of the Human Melanocortin 1 Receptor

The melanocortins (α‐melanocyte‐stimulating hormone and adrenocorticotropin) act on epidermal melanocytes to increase melanogenesis, the eumelanin/pheomelanin ratio and dendricity. These actions are mediated by the heptahelical melanocortin 1 receptor (MC1R), positively coupled to adenylyl cyclase. Gain‐of‐function mouse Mc1r alleles are associated with a dark, eumelanic coat. Conversely, loss‐of‐function variants, or overexpression of agouti, a natural melanocortin antagonist, yield yellow, pheomelanic furs. In humans, loss‐of‐function MC1R variants are associated with fair skin, poor tanning, propensity to freckle and increased skin cancer risk. Therefore, MC1R is a key regulator of mammalian pigmentation. Several observations such as induction of constitutive pigmentation in amelanotic mouse melanoma cells following expression of MC1R indicate that the receptor might display agonist‐independent activity. We report a systematic and comparative study of MC1R and Mc1r constitutive activity. We show that expression of MC1R in heterologous systems leads to an agonist‐independent increase in cyclic adenosine monophophate (cAMP). Basal signalling is a function of receptor expression and is two to fourfold higher for MC1R than for Mc1r. Moreover, it is observed in human melanoma cells over‐expressing the MC1R. Constitutive signalling is abolished or reduced by point mutations of MC1R impairing the response to agonists, and is only doubled by the Lys94Glu mutation, mimicking the constitutively active mouse E^so‐3J allele. Stable or transient expression of wild‐type MC1R, but not of loss‐of‐function mutants, potently stimulates forskolin activation of adenylyl cyclase, a common feature of constitutively active Gs‐coupled receptors. Therefore, human MC1R displays a strong agonist‐independent constitutive activity.     

Opposing effects of phorbol-12-myristate-13-acetate, an activator of protein kinase C, on the signaling of structurally related human dopamine D1 and D5 receptors

The ‘cross‐talk’ between different types of neurotransmitters through second messenger pathways represents a major regulatory mechanism in neuronal function. We investigated the effects of activation of protein kinase C (PKC) on cAMP‐dependent signaling by structurally related human D1‐like dopaminergic receptors. Human embryonic kidney 293 (HEK293) cells expressing D1 or D5 receptors were pretreated with phorbol‐12‐myristate‐13‐acetate (PMA), a potent activator of PKC, followed by analysis of dopamine‐mediated receptor activation using whole cell cAMP assays. Unpredictably, PKC activation had completely opposite effects on D1 and D5 receptor signaling. PMA dramatically augmented agonist‐evoked D1 receptor signaling, whereas constitutive and dopamine‐mediated D5 receptor activation were rapidly blunted. RT–PCR and immunoblotting analyses showed that phorbol ester‐regulated PKC isozymes (conventional: α, βI, βII, γ; novel: δ, ?, η, θ) and protein kinase D (PKCµ) are expressed in HEK293 cells. PMA appears to mediate these contrasting effects through the activation of Ca²⁺‐independent novel PKC isoforms as revealed by specific inhibitors, bisindolylmaleimide I, Gö6976, and Gö6983. The finding that cross‐talk between PKC and cAMP pathways can produce such opposite outcomes following the activation of structurally similar D1‐like receptor subtypes is novel and further strengthens the view that D1 and D5 receptors serve distinct functions in the mammalian nervous and endocrine systems.     

Profiling two indole‐2‐carboxamides for allosteric modulation of the CB1 receptor

Allosteric modulation of G‐protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) represents a novel approach for fine‐tuning GPCR functions. The cannabinoid CB1 receptor, a GPCR associated with the CNS, has been implicated in the treatment of drug addiction, pain, and appetite disorders. We report here the synthesis and pharmacological characterization of two indole‐2‐carboxamides:5‐chloro‐3‐ethyl‐1‐methyl‐N‐(4‐(piperidin‐1‐yl)phenethyl)‐1H‐indole‐2‐carboxamide (ICAM‐a) and 5‐chloro‐3‐pentyl‐N‐(4‐(piperidin‐1‐yl)phenethyl)‐1H‐indole‐2‐carboxamide (ICAM‐b). Although both ICAM‐a and ICAM‐b enhanced CP55, 940 binding, ICAM‐b exhibited the strongest positive cooperativity thus far demonstrated for enhancing agonist binding to the CB1 receptor. Although it displayed negative modulatory effects on G‐protein coupling to CB1, ICAM‐b induced β‐arrestin‐mediated downstream activation of extracellular signal‐regulated kinase (ERK) signaling. These results indicate that this compound represents a novel class of CB1 ligands that produce biased signaling via CB1.     

Computational analysis of the CB1 carboxyl‐terminus in the receptor‐G protein complex

Despite the important role of the carboxyl‐terminus (Ct) of the activated brain cannabinoid receptor one (CB1) in the regulation of G protein signaling, a structural understanding of interactions with G proteins is lacking. This is largely due to the highly flexible nature of the CB1 Ct that dynamically adapts its conformation to the presence of G proteins. In the present study, we explored how the CB1 Ct can interact with the G protein by building on our prior modeling of the CB1‐Gi complex (Shim, Ahn, and Kendall, The Journal of Biological Chemistry 2013;288:32449–32465) to incorporate a complete CB1 Ct (Glu416^Ct–Leu472^Ct). Based on the structural constraints from NMR studies, we employed ROSETTA to predict tertiary folds, ZDOCK to predict docking orientation, and molecular dynamics (MD) simulations to obtain two distinct plausible models of CB1 Ct in the CB1‐Gi complex. The resulting models were consistent with the NMR‐determined helical structure (H9) in the middle region of the CB1 Ct. The CB1 Ct directly interacted with both Gα and Gβ and stabilized the receptor at the Gi interface. The results of site‐directed mutagenesis studies of Glu416^Ct, Asp423^Ct, Asp428^Ct, and Arg444^Ct of CB1 Ct suggested that the CB1 Ct can influence receptor‐G protein coupling by stabilizing the receptor at the Gi interface. This research provided, for the first time, models of the CB1 Ct in contact with the G protein. Proteins 2016; 84:532–543. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Structural model of ρ1 GABAC receptor based on evolutionary analysis: Testing of predicted protein–protein interactions involved in receptor assembly and function

The homopentameric ρ1 GABA_C receptor is a ligand‐gated ion channel with a binding pocket for γ‐aminobutyric acid (GABA) at the interfaces of N‐terminal extracellular domains. We combined evolutionary analysis, structural modeling, and experimental testing to study determinants of GABA_C receptor assembly and channel gating. We estimated the posterior probability of selection pressure at amino acid residue sites measured as ω‐values and built a comparative structural model, which identified several polar residues under strong selection pressure at the subunit interfaces that may form intersubunit hydrogen bonds or salt bridges. At three selected sites (R111, T151, and E55), mutations disrupting intersubunit interactions had strong effects on receptor folding, assembly, and function. We next examined the role of a predicted intersubunit salt bridge for residue pair R158–D204. The mutant R158D, where the positively charged residue is replaced by a negatively charged aspartate, yielded a partially degraded receptor and lacked membrane surface expression. The membrane surface expression was rescued by the double mutant R158D–D204R, where positive and negative charges are switched, although the mutant receptor was inactive. The single mutants R158A, D204R, and D204A exhibited diminished activities and altered kinetic profiles with fast recovery kinetics, suggesting that R158–D204 salt bridge perhaps stabilizes the open state of the GABA_C receptor. Our results emphasize the functional importance of highly conserved polar residues at the protein–protein interfaces in GABA_C ρ1 receptors and demonstrate how the integration of computational and experimental approaches can aid discovery of functionally important interactions.     

Inverse agonism and neutral antagonism at cannabinoid CB1 receptors

There are at least two types of cannabinoid receptor, CB1 and CB2, both G protein coupled. CB1 receptors are expressed predominantly at nerve terminals and mediate inhibition of transmitter release whereas CB2 receptors are found mainly on immune cells, one of their roles being to modulate cytokine release. Endogenous cannabinoid receptor agonists also exist and these "endocannabinoids" together with their receptors constitute the "endocannabinoid system". These discoveries were followed by the development of a number of CB1- and CB2-selective antagonists that in some CB1 or CB2 receptor-containing systems also produce "inverse cannabimimetic effects", effects opposite in direction from those produced by cannabinoid receptor agonists. This review focuses on the CB1-selective antagonists, SR141716A, AM251, AM281 and LY320135, and discusses possible mechanisms by which these ligands produce their inverse effects: (1) competitive surmountable antagonism at CB1 receptors of endogenously released endocannabinoids, (2) inverse agonism resulting from negative, possibly allosteric, modulation of the constitutive activity of CB1 receptors in which CB1 receptors are shifted from a constitutively active "on" state to one or more constitutively inactive "off" states and (3) CB1 receptor-independent mechanisms, for example antagonism of endogenously released adenosine at A1 receptors. Recently developed neutral competitive CB1 receptor antagonists, which are expected to produce inverse effects through antagonism of endogenously released endocannabinoids but not by modulating CB1 receptor constitutive activity, are also discussed. So too are possible clinical consequences of the production of inverse cannabimimetic effects, there being convincing evidence that released endocannabinoids can have "autoprotective" roles.     

Insights into congenital stationary night blindness based on the structure of G90D rhodopsin

We present active‐state structures of the G protein‐coupled receptor (GPCRs) rhodopsin carrying the disease‐causing mutation G90D. Mutations of G90 cause either retinitis pigmentosa (RP) or congenital stationary night blindness (CSNB), a milder, non‐progressive form of RP. Our analysis shows that the CSNB‐causing G90D mutation introduces a salt bridge with K296. The mutant thus interferes with the E113Q‐K296 activation switch and the covalent binding of the inverse agonist 11‐cis‐retinal, two interactions that are crucial for the deactivation of rhodopsin. Other mutations, including G90V causing RP, cannot promote similar interactions. We discuss our findings in context of a model in which CSNB is caused by constitutive activation of the visual signalling cascade.     

Structure‐based simulations reveal concerted dynamics of GPCR activation

G protein‐coupled receptors (GPCRs) are a vital class of proteins that transduce biological signals across the cell membrane. However, their allosteric activation mechanism is not fully understood; crystal structures of active and inactive receptors have been reported, but the functional pathway between these two states remains elusive. Here, we use structure‐based (Gō‐like) models to simulate activation of two GPCRs, rhodopsin and the β₂ adrenergic receptor (β₂AR). We used data‐derived reaction coordinates that capture the activation mechanism for both proteins, showing that activation proceeds through quantitatively different paths in the two systems. Both reaction coordinates are determined from the dominant concerted motions in the simulations so the technique is broadly applicable. There were two surprising results. First, the main structural changes in the simulations were distributed throughout the transmembrane bundle, and not localized to the obvious areas of interest, such as the intracellular portion of Helix 6. Second, the activation (and deactivation) paths were distinctly nonmonotonic, populating states that were not simply interpolations between the inactive and active structures. These transitions also suggest a functional explanation for β₂AR's basal activity: it can proceed through a more broadly defined path during the observed transitions. Proteins 2014; 82:2538–2551. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Conformational dynamics of the EGFR kinase domain reveals structural features involved in activation

The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) has been the focus of intensive studies because of its importance in cancer research. Thus, a broader understanding of the molecular mechanism of activation of the EGFR kinase will have profound significance for the development of novel therapeutics. Numerous crystal structures of EGFR kinase, including the structure of the activating‐kinase dimer, have provided snapshots of the specific pathway. Herein, we performed unrestrained‐, as well as targeted‐molecular dynamics simulations based on these data, to gain further insight into the conformational changes responsible for activation. Comparison of the monomer‐ versus activating‐EGFR‐dimer simulations indicates that the dimerization is stabilizing structural elements associated with the activated state and predicts new salt‐bridge interactions involving activation‐loop residues that may also be associated with that state. Targeted molecular dynamics simulations of the inactive‐to‐active EGFR transition, as well as the reverse pathway, confirm the formation of conserved structural features of functional importance for the activity or stabilization of either conformation. Interestingly, simulations of the L834R mutant, which is associated with cancer, suggest that the structural basis of the activation induced by that mutation might be the ability of the mutated R834 residue to consecutively form salt bridges with neighboring acidic residues and cause destabilization of a hydrophobic cluster in the inactive state. Proteins 2009. © 2008 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.     

Full and Partial Agonists of Thromboxane Prostanoid Receptor Unveil Fine Tuning of Receptor Superactive Conformation and G Protein Activation

The intrahelical salt bridge between E/D^3.49 and R^3.50 within the E/DRY motif on helix 3 (H3) and the interhelical hydrogen bonding between the E/DRY and residues on H6 are thought to be critical in stabilizing the class A G protein-coupled receptors in their inactive state. Removal of these interactions is expected to generate constitutively active receptors. This study examines how neutralization of E^3.49/6.30 in the thromboxane prostanoid (TP) receptor alters ligand binding, basal, and agonist-induced activity and investigates the molecular mechanisms of G protein activation. We demonstrate here that a panel of full and partial agonists showed an increase in affinity and potency for E129V and E240V mutants. Yet, even augmenting the sensitivity to detect constitutive activity (CA) with overexpression of the receptor or the G protein revealed resistance to an increase in basal activity, while retaining fully the ability to cause agonist-induced signaling. However, direct G protein activation measured through bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) indicates that these mutants more efficiently communicate and/or activate their cognate G proteins. These results suggest the existence of additional constrains governing the shift of TP receptor to its active state, together with an increase propensity of these mutants to agonist-induced signaling, corroborating their definition as superactive mutants. The particular nature of the TP receptor as somehow “resistant” to CA should be examined in the context of its pathophysiological role in the cardiovascular system. Evolutionary forces may have favored regulation mechanisms leading to low basal activity and selected against more highly active phenotypes.     

Allosteric modulator ORG27569 induces CB1 cannabinoid receptor high affinity agonist binding state, receptor internalization, and Gi protein-independent ERK1/2 kinase activation

The cannabinoid receptor 1 (CB1), a member of the class A G protein-coupled receptor family, is expressed in brain tissue where agonist stimulation primarily activates the pertussis toxin-sensitive inhibitory G protein (G(i)). Ligands such as CP55940 ((1R,3R,4R)-3-[2-hydroxy-4-(1,1-dimethylheptyl)phenyl]-4-(3- hydroxypropyl)cyclohexan-1-ol) and Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol are orthosteric agonists for the receptor, bind the conventional binding pocket, and trigger G(i)-mediated effects including inhibition of adenylate cyclase. ORG27569 (5-chloro-3-ethyl-1H-indole-2-carboxylic acid [2-(4-piperidin-1-yl-phenyl)ethyl]amide) has been identified as an allosteric modulator that displays positive cooperativity for CP55940 binding to CB1 yet acts as an antagonist of G protein coupling. To examine this apparent conundrum, we used the wild-type CB1 and two mutants, T210A and T210I (D'Antona, A. M., Ahn, K. H., and Kendall, D. A. (2006) Biochemistry 45, 5606-5617), which collectively cover a spectrum of receptor states from inactive to partially active to more fully constitutively active. Using these receptors, we demonstrated that ORG27569 induces a CB1 receptor state that is characterized by enhanced agonist affinity and decreased inverse agonist affinity consistent with an active conformation. Also consistent with this conformation, the impact of ORG27569 binding was most dramatic on the inactive T210A receptor and less pronounced on the already active T210I receptor. Although ORG27569 antagonized CP55940-induced guanosine 5'-3-O-(thio)triphosphate binding, which is indicative of G protein coupling inhibition in a concentration-dependent manner, the ORG27569-induced conformational change of the CB1 receptor led to cellular internalization and downstream activation of ERK signaling, providing the first case of allosteric ligand-biased signaling via CB1. ORG27569-induced ERK phosphorylation persisted even after pertussis toxin treatment to abrogate G(i) and occurs in HEK293 and neuronal cells.     

Plexin‐B1 is a GTPase activating protein for M‐Ras,remodelling dendrite morphology

Plexins are receptors for axonal guidance molecules known as semaphorins. We recently reported that the semaphorin 4D (Sema4D) receptor, Plexin‐B1, induces axonal growth cone collapse by functioning as an R‐Ras GTPase activating protein (GAP). Here, we report that Plexin‐B1 shows GAP activity for M‐Ras, another member of the Ras family of GTPases. In cortical neurons, the expression of M‐Ras was upregulated during dendritic development. Knockdown of endogenous M‐Ras—but not R‐Ras—reduced dendritic outgrowth and branching, whereas overexpression of constitutively active M‐Ras, M‐Ras(Q71L), enhanced dendritic outgrowth and branching. Sema4D suppressed M‐Ras activity and reduced dendritic outgrowth and branching, but this reduction was blocked by M‐Ras(Q71L). M‐Ras(Q71L) stimulated extracellular signal‐regulated kinase (ERK) activation, inducing dendrite growth, whereas Sema4D suppressed ERK activity and down‐regulation of ERK was required for a Sema4D‐induced reduction of dendrite growth. Thus, we conclude that Plexin‐B1 is a dual functional GAP for R‐Ras and M‐Ras, remodelling axon and dendrite morphology, respectively.