Molecular basis of inverse agonism in a G protein-coupled receptor

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) recognize a wide variety of extracellular ligands to control diverse physiological processes. Compounds that bind to such receptors can either stimulate, fully or partially (full or partial agonists), or reduce (inverse agonists) the receptors' basal activity and receptor-mediated signaling. Various studies have shown that the activation of receptors through binding of agonists proceeds by conformational changes as the receptor switches from a resting to an active state leading to G protein signaling. Yet the molecular basis for differences between agonists and inverse agonists is unclear. These different classes of compounds are assumed to switch the receptors' conformation in distinct ways. It is not known, however, whether such switching occurs along a linear 'on-off' scale or whether agonists and inverse agonists induce different switch mechanisms. Using a fluorescence-based approach to study the alpha2A-adrenergic receptor (alpha(2A)AR), we show that inverse agonists are differentiated from agonists in that they trigger a very distinct mode of a receptor's switch. This switch couples inverse agonist binding to the suppression of activity in the receptor.     

Differential conformational requirements for activation of G proteins and the regulatory proteins arrestin and G protein-coupled receptor kinase in the G protein-coupled receptor for parathyroid hormone (PTH)/PTH-related protein

After stimulation with agonist, G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) activate G proteins and become phosphorylated by G protein-coupled receptor kinases (GRKs), and most of them translocate cytosolic arrestin proteins to the cytoplasmic membrane. Agonist-activated GPCRs are specifically phosphorylated by GRKs and are targeted for endocytosis by arrestin proteins, suggesting a connection between GPCR conformational changes and interaction with GRKs and arrestins. Previously, we showed that by substitution of histidine for residues at the cytoplasmic side of helix 3 (H3) and helix 6 (H6) of the parathyroid hormone (PTH) receptor (PTHR), a zinc metal ion-binding site is engineered that prevents PTH-stimulated G(s) activation (Sheikh, S. P., Vilardaga, J.-P., Baranski, T. J., Lichtarge, O., Iiri, T., Meng, E. C., Nissenson, R. A., and Bourne, H. R. (1999) J. Biol. Chem. 274, 17033-17041). These data suggest that relative movements between H3 and H6 are critical for G(s) activation. Does this molecular event play a similar role in activation of GRK and arrestin and in PTHR-mediated G(q) activation? To answer this question, we utilized the two previously described mutant forms of PTHR, H401 and H402, which contain a naturally present histidine residue at position 301 in H3 and a second substituted histidine residue at positions 401 and 402 in H6, respectively. Both mutant receptors showed inhibition of PTH-stimulated inositol phosphate and cAMP generation in the presence of increasing concentrations of Zn(II). However, the mutants showed no Zn(II)-dependent impairment of phosphorylation by GRK-2. Likewise, the mutants were indistinguishable from wild-type PTHR in the ability to translocate beta-arrestins/green fluorescent protein to the cell membrane and were also not affected by sensitivity to Zn(II). These results suggest that agonist-mediated phosphorylation and internalization of PTHR require conformational switches of the receptor distinct from the cAMP and inositol phosphate signaling state. Furthermore, PTHR sequestration does not appear to require G protein activation.     

Mutagenesis and peptide analysis of the DRY motif in the alpha2A adrenergic receptor: evidence for alternate mechanisms in G protein-coupled receptors

In G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), a conserved aspartic acid in the DRY motif at the cytoplasmic end of helix 3 regulates the transition to the active state, while the adjacent arginine is crucial for G protein activation. To examine the functions of these two residues, we made D130I and R131Q mutations in the alpha2A adrenergic receptor (AR). We demonstrate that, unlike other GPCRs, the alpha2A AR is not constitutively activated by the D130I mutation, although the mutation increases agonist affinity. While the R131Q mutation severely disrupts function, it decreases rather than increasing agonist affinity as seen in other GPCRs. We then investigated the molecular effects of the same mutations in a peptide model and showed that Arg131 is not required for peptide-mediated G protein activation. These results indicate that the alpha2A AR does not follow the conventional GPCR mechanistic paradigm with respect to the function of the DRY motif.     

Formation of a Ternary Complex among NHERF1, β-Arrestin,and Parathyroid Hormone Receptor

β-Arrestins are crucial regulators of G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling, desensitization, and internalization. Despite the long-standing paradigm that agonist-promoted receptor phosphorylation is required for β-arrestin2 recruitment, emerging evidence suggests that phosphorylation-independent mechanisms play a role in β-arrestin2 recruitment by GPCRs. Several PDZ proteins are known to interact with GPCRs and serve as cytosolic adaptors to modulate receptor signaling and trafficking. Na⁺/H⁺ exchange regulatory factors (NHERFs) exert a major role in GPCR signaling. By combining imaging and biochemical and biophysical methods we investigated the interplay among NHERF1, β-arrestin2, and the parathyroid hormone receptor type 1 (PTHR). We show that NHERF1 and β-arrestin2 can independently bind to the PTHR and form a ternary complex in cultured human embryonic kidney cells and Chinese hamster ovary cells. Although NHERF1 interacts constitutively with the PTHR, β-arrestin2 binding is promoted by receptor activation. NHERF1 interacts directly with β-arrestin2 without using the PTHR as an interface. Fluorescence resonance energy transfer studies revealed that the kinetics of PTHR and β-arrestin2 interactions were modulated by NHERF1. These findings suggest a model in which NHERF1 may serve as an adaptor, bringing β-arrestin2 into close proximity to the PTHR, thereby facilitating β-arrestin2 recruitment after receptor activation.     

Activation kinetics of recombinant mouse nicotinic acetylcholine receptors: mutations of alpha-subunit tyrosine 190 affect both binding and gating.

Affinity labeling and mutagenesis studies have demonstrated that the conserved tyrosine Y190 of the acetylcholine receptor (AChR) alpha-subunit is a key determinant of the agonist binding site. Here we describe the binding and gating kinetics of embryonic mouse AChRs with mutations at Y190. In Y190F the dissociation constant for ACh binding to closed channels was reduced approximately 35-fold at the first binding site and only approximately 2-fold at the second site. At both binding sites the association and dissociation rate constants were decreased by the mutation. Compared with wildtype AChRs, doubly-liganded alpha Y190F receptors open 400 times more slowly but close only 2 times more rapidly. Considering the overall activation reaction (vacant-closed to fully occupied-open), there is an increase of approximately 6.4 kcal/mol caused by the Y-to-F mutation, of which at least 2.1 and 0.3 kcal/mol comes from altered agonist binding to the first and second binding sites, respectively. The closing rate constant of alpha Y190F receptors was the same with ACh, carbamoylcholine, or tetramethylammonium as the agonist. This rate constant was approximately 3 times faster in ACh-activated S, W, and T mutants. The equilibrium dissociation constant for channel block by ACh was approximately 2-fold lower in alpha Y190F receptors compared with in wildtype receptors, suggesting that there are changes in the pore region of the receptor as a consequence of the mutation. The activation reaction is discussed with regard to energy provided by agonist-receptor binding contacts, and by the intrinsic folding energy of the receptor.     

Retromer terminates the generation of cAMP by internalized PTH receptors

The generation of cAMP by G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and its termination are currently thought to occur exclusively at the plasma membrane of cells. Under existing models of receptor regulation, this signal is primarily restricted by desensitization of the receptors through their binding to β-arrestins. However, this paradigm is not consistent with recent observations that the parathyroid hormone receptor type 1 (PTHR) continues to stimulate cAMP production even after receptor internalization, as β-arrestins are known to rapidly bind and internalize activated PTHR. Here we show that binding to β-arrestin1 prolongs rather than terminates the generation of cAMP by PTHR, and that cAMP generation correlates with the persistence of arrestin-receptor complexes on endosomes. PTHR signaling is instead turned off by the retromer complex, which regulates the movement of internalized receptor from endosomes to the Golgi apparatus. Thus, binding by the retromer complex regulates the sustained generation of cAMP triggered by an internalized GPCR.     

A homogeneous enzyme fragment complementation-based beta-arrestin translocation assay for high-throughput screening of G-protein-coupled receptors

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) represent one of the largest gene families in the human genome and have long been regarded as valuable targets for small-molecule drugs. The authors describe a new functional assay that directly monitors GPCR activation. It is based on the interaction between beta-arrestin and ligand-activated GPCRs and uses enzyme fragment complementation technology. In this format, a GPCR of interest is fused to a small (approximately 4 kDa), optimized alpha fragment peptide (termed ProLink) derived from beta-galactosidase, and beta-arrestin is fused to an N-terminal deletion mutant of beta-galactosidase (termed the enzyme acceptor [EA]). Upon activation of the receptor, the beta-arrestin-EA fusion protein binds the activated GPCR. This interaction drives enzyme fragment complementation, resulting in an active beta-galactosidase enzyme, and thus GPCR activation can be determined by quantifying beta-galactosidase activity. In this report, the authors demonstrate the utility of this technology to monitor GPCR activation and validate the approach using a Galphai-coupled GPCR, somatostatin receptor 2. Potential application to high-throughput screens in both agonist and antagonist screening modes is exemplified.     

Ligand-stabilized conformational states of human beta(2) adrenergic receptor: insight into G-protein-coupled receptor activation

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are known to exist in dynamic equilibrium between inactive- and several active-state conformations, even in the absence of a ligand. Recent experimental studies on the β₂ adrenergic receptor (β₂AR) indicate that structurally different ligands with varying efficacies trigger distinct conformational changes and stabilize different receptor conformations. We have developed a computational method to study the ligand-induced rotational orientation changes in the transmembrane helices of GPCRs. This method involves a systematic spanning of the rotational orientation of the transmembrane helices (TMs) that are in the vicinity of the ligand for predicting the helical rotations that occur on ligand binding. The predicted ligand-stabilized receptor conformations are characterized by a simultaneous lowering of the ligand binding energy and a significant gain in interhelical and receptor-ligand hydrogen bonds. Using the β₂AR as a model, we show that the receptor conformational state depends on the structure and efficacy of the ligand for a given signaling pathway. We have studied the ligand-stabilized receptor conformations of five different ligands, a full agonist, norepinephrine; a partial agonist, salbutamol; a weak partial agonist, dopamine; a very weak agonist, catechol; and an inverse agonist, ICI-115881. The predicted ligand-stabilized receptor models correlate well with the experimentally observed conformational switches in β₂AR, namely, the breaking of the ionic lock between R131^3.50 at the intracellular end of TM3 (part of the DRY motif) and E268^6.30 on TM6, and the rotamer toggle switch on W286^6.48 on TM6. In agreement with trp-bimane quenching experiments, we found that norepinephrine and dopamine break the ionic lock and engage the rotamer toggle switch, whereas salbutamol, a noncatechol partial agonist only breaks the ionic lock, and the weak agonist catechol only engages the rotamer toggle switch. Norepinephrine and dopamine occupy the same binding region, between TM3, TM5, and TM6, whereas the binding site of salbutamol is shifted toward TM4. Catechol binds deeper into the protein cavity compared to the other ligands, making contact with TM5 and TM6. A part of the catechol binding site overlaps with those of dopamine and norepinephrine but not with that of salbutamol. Virtual ligand screening on 10,060 ligands on the norepinephrine-stabilized receptor conformation shows an enrichment of 38% compared to ligand unbound receptor conformation. These results show that ligand-induced conformational changes are important for developing functionally specific drugs that will stabilize a particular receptor conformation. These studies represent the first step toward a more universally applicable computational method for studying ligand efficacy and GPCR activation.     

Agonist-bound structures of G protein-coupled receptors

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) play a major role in intercellular communication by binding small diffusible ligands (agonists) at the extracellular surface. Agonist-binding induces a conformational change in the receptor, which results in the binding and activation of heterotrimeric G proteins within the cell. Ten agonist-bound structures of non-rhodopsin GPCRs published last year defined for the first time the molecular details of receptor activated states and how inverse agonists, partial agonists and full agonists bind to produce different effects on the receptor. In addition, the structure of the β(2)-adrenoceptor coupled to a heterotrimeric G protein showed how the opening of a cleft in the cytoplasmic face of the receptor as a consequence of agonist binding results in G protein coupling and activation of the G protein.     

Parathyroid hormone receptor recycling: role of receptor dephosphorylation and beta-arrestin

The recovery of PTH receptor (PTHR) function after acute homologous receptor desensitization and down-regulation in bone and kidney cells has been attributed to receptor recycling. To determine the role of receptor dephosphorylation in PTHR recycling, we performed morphological and functional assays on human embryonic kidney 293 cells stably expressing wild-type (wt) or mutant PTHRs. Confocal microscopy and ligand binding assays revealed that the wt PTHR is rapidly recycled back to the plasma membrane after removal of the agonist. Receptors that were engineered to either lack the sites of phosphorylation or to resemble constitutively phosphorylated receptors were able to recycle back to the plasma membrane with the same kinetics as the wt PTHR. The PTHR was found to be dephosphorylated by an enzyme apparently distinct from protein phosphatases 1 or 2A. The PTHR and beta-arrestin-2-green fluorescent protein (GFP) were found to stably colocalize during PTHR internalization, whereas after agonist removal and during receptor recycling, the colocalization slowly disappeared. Experiments using phosphorylation-deficient PTHRs and a dominant-negative form of beta-arrestin showed that beta-arrestin does not regulate the efficiency of PTHR recycling. These studies indicate that, unlike many G protein-coupled receptors, PTHR recycling does not require receptor dephosphorylation or its dissociation from beta-arrestin.     

PTH/PTH-related protein receptor interacts directly with Tctex-1 through its COOH terminus

COOH-terminal cytoplasmic domains of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) have been shown to carry determinants that control their cell surface localization, internalization, and recycling. In attempts to seek cellular proteins that mediate these processes of PTH/PTH-related protein receptor (PTHR), one of the class B GPCRs, we have found that Tctex-1, a 14kDa light chain of cytoplasmic dynein motor complex, interacts with the COOH-terminal tail of the receptor. A 34-amino-acid stretch of the receptor responsible for binding to Tctex-1 has a bipartite structure consisting of a motif previously implicated in binding of some proteins to Tctex-1 and a putative new consensus sequence. Site-directed mutations or a 20-amino-acid deletion in the bipartite consensus binding sequence abolished the association of the PTHR COOH terminus with Tctex-1 in vitro. A GFP-fused mutant PTHR impaired in binding to Tctex-1 expressed in MDCK cells showed a decreased rate of internalization in response to PTH compared to that of the wild type.     

Differential affinities of visual arrestin, beta arrestin1, and beta arrestin2 for G protein-coupled receptors delineate two major classes of receptors

Visual arrestin, betaarrestin1, and betaarrestin2 comprise a family of intracellular proteins that desensitize G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). In addition, betaarrestin1 and betaarrestin2 target desensitized receptors to clathrin-coated pits for endocytosis. Whether arrestins differ in their ability to interact with GPCRs in cells is not known. In this study, we visualize the interaction of arrestin family members with GPCRs in real time and in live cells using green fluorescent protein-tagged arrestins. In the absence of agonist, visual arrestin and betaarrestin1 were found in both the cytoplasm and nucleus of HEK-293 cells, whereas betaarrestin2 was found only in the cytoplasm. Analysis of agonist-mediated arrestin translocation to multiple GPCRs identified two major classes of receptors. Class A receptors (beta2 adrenergic receptor, mu opioid receptor, endothelin type A receptor, dopamine D1A receptor, and alpha1b adrenergic receptor) bound betaarrestin2 with higher affinity than betaarrestin1 and did not interact with visual arrestin. In contrast, class B receptors (angiotensin II type 1A receptor, neurotensin receptor 1, vasopressin V2 receptor, thyrotropin-releasing hormone receptor, and substance P receptor) bound both betaarrestin isoforms with similar high affinities and also interacted with visual arrestin. Switching the carboxyl-terminal tails of class A and class B receptors completely reversed the affinity of each receptor for the visual and non-visual arrestins. In addition, exchanging the betaarrestin1 and betaarrestin2 carboxyl termini reversed their extent of binding to class A receptors as well as their subcellular distribution. These results reveal for the first time marked differences in the ability of arrestin family members to bind GPCRs at the plasma membrane. Moreover, they show that visual arrestin can interact in cells with GPCRs other than rhodopsin. These findings suggest that GPCR signaling may be differentially regulated depending on the cellular complement of arrestin isoforms and the ability of arrestins to interact with other cellular proteins.     

Constitutive activation of angiotensin II type 1 receptor alters the orientation of transmembrane Helix-2

A key step in transmembrane (TM) signal transduction by G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) is the ligand-induced conformational change of the receptor, which triggers the activation of a guanine nucleotide-binding protein. GPCRs contain a seven-TM helical structure essential for signal transduction in response to a large variety of sensory and hormonal signals. Primary structure comparison of GPCRs has shown that the second TM helix contains a highly conserved Asp residue, which is critical for agonist activation in these receptors. How conformational changes in TM2 relate to signal transduction by a GPCR is not known, because activation-induced conformational changes in TM2 helix have not been measured. Here we use modification of reporter cysteines to measure water accessibility at specific residues in TM2 of the type 1 receptor for the octapeptide hormone angiotensin II. Activation-dependent changes in the accessibility of Cys76 on TM2 were measured in constitutively activated mutants. These changes were directly correlated with measurement of function, establishing the link between physical changes in TM2 and function. Accessibility changes were measured at several consecutive residues on TM2, which suggest that TM2 undergoes a transmembrane movement in response to activation. This is the first report of in situ measurement of TM2 movement in a GPCR.     

When a G protein-coupled receptor does not couple to a G protein

Classically, G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) relay signals by directly activating heterotrimeric guanine nucleotide-binding proteins (G proteins). Increasing evidence indicates that GPCRs may also signal through G protein-independent pathways. JAK/STATs, Src-family tyrosine kinases, GRKs/beta-arrestins, and PDZ domain-containing proteins have been suggested to directly relay signals from GPCRs independent of G proteins. In addition, our laboratory recently reported that the beta(2) adrenergic receptor (beta(2)AR) could switch from G protein-coupled to G protein-independent ERK (extracellular signal-regulated kinase) activation in an agonist dosage-dependent manner. This finding provides a novel mechanism for G protein-independent GPCR signaling. This review focuses on recent progress in understanding the mechanisms by which G protein-independent GPCR signaling occurs.     

Common structural requirements for heptahelical domain function in class A and class C G protein-coupled receptors

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are key players in cell communication. Several classes of such receptors have been identified. Although all GPCRs possess a heptahelical domain directly activating G proteins, important structural and sequence differences within receptors from different classes suggested distinct activation mechanisms. Here we show that highly conserved charged residues likely involved in an interaction network between transmembrane domains (TM) 3 and 6 at the cytoplasmic side of class C GPCRs are critical for activation of the gamma-aminobutyric acid type B receptor. Indeed, the loss of function resulting from the mutation of the conserved lysine residue into aspartate or glutamate in the TM3 of gamma-aminobutyric acid type B(2) can be partly rescued by mutating the conserved acidic residue of TM6 into either lysine or arginine. In addition, mutation of the conserved lysine into an acidic residue leads to a nonfunctional receptor that displays a high agonist affinity. This is reminiscent of a similar ionic network that constitutes a lock stabilizing the inactive state of many class A rhodopsin-like GPCRs. These data reveal that despite their original structure, class C GPCRs share with class A receptors at least some common structural feature controlling G protein activation.     

Investigation of mechanism of desmopressin binding in vasopressin V2 receptor versus vasopressin V1a and oxytocin receptors: molecular dynamics simulation of the agonist-bound state in the membrane-aqueous system

The vasopressin V2 receptor (V2R) belongs to the Class A G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). V2R is expressed in the renal collecting duct (CD), where it mediates the antidiuretic action of the neurohypophyseal hormone arginine vasopressin (CYFQNCPRG-NH2, AVP). Desmopressin ([1-deamino, 8-D]AVP, dDAVP) is strong selective V2R agonist with negligible pressor and uterotonic activity. In this paper, the interactions responsible for binding of dDAVP to vasopressin V2 receptor versus vasopressin V1a and oxytocin receptors has been examined. Three-dimensional activated models of the receptors were constructed using the multiple sequence alignment and the complex of activated rhodopsin with Gt(alpha) C-terminal peptide of transducin MII-Gt(alpha) (338-350) prototype (Slusarz, R.; Ciarkowski, J. Acta Biochim Pol 2004 51, 129-136) as a template. The 1-ns unconstrained molecular dynamics (MD) of receptor-dDAVP complexes immersed in the fully hydrated 1-palmitoyl-2-oleoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphatidylcholine (POPC) membrane model was conducted in an Amber 7.0 force field. Highly conserved transmembrane residues have been proposed as being responsible for V2R activation and G protein coupling. Molecular mechanism of the dDAVP binding has been suggested. The internal water molecules involved in an intricate network of the hydrogen bonds inside the receptor cavity have been identified and their role in the stabilization of the agonist-bound state proposed.     

Cell-based, high-content screen for receptor internalization, recycling and intracellular trafficking

A variety of physiologically important receptors are internalized and then recycled back to the plasma membrane by the endocytic recycling compartment. These include the transferrin receptor and many G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs). The internalization of GPCRs is a result of agonist stimulation. A cell-based fluorescent imaging assay is described that detects and quantifies the presence of fluorescently labeled receptors and macromolecules in the recycling compartment. This High Content Screening application is conducted on the ArrayScan II System that includes fluorescent reagents, imaging instrumentation and the informatics tools necessary to screen for compounds that affect receptor internalization, recycling and GPCR activation. We demonstrate the Receptor Internalization and Trafficking application by quantifying (i) the internalization and recycling of the transferrin receptor using a fluorescently labeled ligand and (ii) the internalization of a physiologically functional model GPCR, a GFP-parathyroid hormone receptor chimera. These assays give high signal-to-noise ratios, broad dynamic ranges between stimulated and unstimulated conditions and low variability across different screening runs. Thus, the Receptor Internalization and Trafficking application, in conjunction with the ArrayScan II System, forms the basis of a robust, information-rich and automated screen for GPCR activation.     

Multiplexing G protein-coupled receptors in microarrays: a radioligand-binding assay

Multiplexing of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) in microarrays promises to increase the efficiency, reduce the costs, and improve the quality of high-throughput assays. However, this technology is still nascent and has not yet achieved the status of "high throughput" or laid claim to handling a large set of receptors. In addition, the technology has been demonstrated only when using fluorescent ligands to detect binding, limiting its application to a subset of GPCRs. To expand the impact of multiplexing on this receptor class, we have developed a radiometric approach to the microarray assay. In these studies, we considered two receptors in the alpha-adrenergic receptor family, alpha2A and alpha2C, and the 125I-labeled agonist clonidine. We demonstrate that microarrays of these receptors can be readily detected (signal/noise ratio approximately 160) using a Typhoon 9210 PhosphorImager. In addition, biochemical characterization shows that ligand-binding profiles and selectivity are preserved with the selective antagonists BRL44408 and ARC239. Importantly, these microarrays use approximately 200- to 400-fold less membrane preparation required by conventional assay methods and allow two or more receptors to be assayed in an area equivalent to a standard well of a microtiter plate. The impact of this approach on screening in drug discovery is discussed.     

(+)- and (-)-cis-2-aminomethylcyclopropanecarboxylic acids show opposite pharmacology at recombinant rho(1) and rho(2) GABA(C) receptors

The effects of the enantiomers of (+/-)-CAMP and (+/-)-TAMP [(+/-)-cis- and (+/-)-trans-2-aminomethylcyclopropanecarboxylic acids, respectively], which are cyclopropane analogues of GABA, were tested on GABA(A) and GABA(C) receptors expressed in Xenopus laevis oocytes using two-electrode voltage clamp methods. (+)-CAMP was found to be a potent and full agonist at homooligomeric GABA(C) receptors (K:(D) approximately 40 microM: and I:(max) approximately 100% at rho(1); K:(D) approximately 17 microM: and I:(max) approximately 100% at rho(2)) but a very weak antagonist at alpha(1)beta(2)gamma(2L) GABA(A) receptors. In contrast, (-)-CAMP was a very weak antagonist at both alpha(1)beta(2)gamma(2L) GABA(A) receptors and homooligomeric GABA(C) receptors (IC(50) approximately 900 microM: at rho(1) and approximately 400 microM: at rho(2)). Furthermore, (+)-CAMP appears to be a superior agonist to the widely used GABA(C) receptor partial agonist cis-4-aminocrotonic acid (K:(D) approximately 74 microM: and I:(max) approximately 78% at rho(1); K:(D) approximately 70 microM: and I:(max) approximately 82% at rho(2)). (-)-TAMP was the most potent of the cyclopropane analogues on GABA(C) receptors (K:(D) approximately 9 microM: and I:(max) approximately 40% at rho(1); K:(D) approximately 3 microM: and I:(max) approximately 50-60% at rho(2)), but it was also a moderately potent GABA(A) receptor partial agonist (K:(D) approximately 50-60 microM: and I:(max) approximately 50% at alpha(1)beta(2)gamma(2L) GABA(A) receptors). (+)-TAMP was a less potent partial agonist at GABA(C) receptors (K:(D) approximately 60 microM: and I:(max) approximately 40% at rho(1); K:(D) approximately 30 microM: and I:(max) approximately 60% at rho(2)) and a weak partial agonist at alpha(1)beta(2)gamma(2L) GABA(A) receptors (K:(D) approximately 500 micro: and I:(max) approximately 50%). None of the isomers of (+/-)-CAMP and (+/-)-TAMP displayed any interaction with GABA transport at the concentrations tested. Molecular modeling based on the present results provided new insights into the chiral preferences for either agonism or antagonism at GABA(C) receptors.     

Molecular basis of partial agonism at the neurotransmitter alpha2A-adrenergic receptor and Gi-protein heterotrimer

To characterize the mechanism by which heterotrimeric G-proteins interpret the signals coming from various neurotransmitters of diverse efficacies (agonists and partial agonists) acting on alpha(2A)-adrenergic receptors, we used a fluorescent resonance energy transfer-based approach to study the effects of these partial agonists on the activation process of both the alpha(2A)-adrenergic receptor and its cognate G(i)-protein. We show that ligands of different efficacies switch the receptor into distinct conformational states, which in turn set the speed and extent of the G(i)-protein signaling. Thus, in cells the efficacy by which a receptor responds to diverse ligands is caused by the ability of the G-protein to differentiate between distinct receptor conformations. The data provide a new key characteristic underlying the mechanism of partial agonism at G-protein-coupled receptors.