Regulator of G protein signaling 2 is a functionally important negative regulator of angiotensin II-induced cardiac fibroblast responses

Cardiac fibroblasts play a key role in fibrosis development in response to stress and injury. Angiotensin II (ANG II) is a major profibrotic activator whose downstream effects (such as phospholipase Cβ activation, cell proliferation, and extracellular matrix secretion) are mainly mediated via G(q)-coupled AT(1) receptors. Regulators of G protein signaling (RGS), which accelerate termination of G protein signaling, are expressed in the myocardium. Among them, RGS2 has emerged as an important player in modulating G(q)-mediated hypertrophic remodeling in cardiac myocytes. To date, no information is available on RGS in cardiac fibroblasts. We tested the hypothesis that RGS2 is an important regulator of ANG II-induced signaling and function in ventricular fibroblasts. Using an in vitro model of fibroblast activation, we have demonstrated expression of several RGS isoforms, among which only RGS2 was transiently upregulated after short-term ANG II stimulation. Similar results were obtained in fibroblasts isolated from rat hearts after in vivo ANG II infusion via minipumps for 1 day. In contrast, prolonged ANG II stimulation (3-14 days) markedly downregulated RGS2 in vivo. To delineate the functional effects of RGS expression changes, we used gain- and loss-of-function approaches. Adenovirally infected RGS2 had a negative regulatory effect on ANG II-induced phospholipase Cβ activity, cell proliferation, and total collagen production, whereas RNA interference of endogenous RGS2 had opposite effects, despite the presence of several other RGS. Together, these data suggest that RGS2 is a functionally important negative regulator of ANG II-induced cardiac fibroblast responses that may play a role in ANG II-induced fibrosis development.     

C. elegans G protein regulator RGS-3 controls sensitivity to sensory stimuli

Signal transduction through heterotrimeric G proteins is critical for sensory response across species. Regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins are negative regulators of signal transduction. Herein we describe a role for C. elegans RGS-3 in the regulation of sensory behaviors. rgs-3 mutant animals fail to respond to intense sensory stimuli but respond normally to low concentrations of specific odorants. We find that loss of RGS-3 leads to aberrantly increased G protein-coupled calcium signaling but decreased synaptic output, ultimately leading to behavioral defects. Thus, rgs-3 responses are restored by decreasing G protein-coupled signal transduction, either genetically or by exogenous dopamine, by expressing a calcium-binding protein to buffer calcium levels in sensory neurons or by enhancing glutamatergic synaptic transmission from sensory neurons. Therefore, while RGS proteins generally act to downregulate signaling, loss of a specific RGS protein in sensory neurons can lead to defective responses to external stimuli.     

Modulation of receptor dynamics by the regulator of G protein signaling Sst2

G protein–coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling is fundamental to physiological processes such as vision, the immune response, and wound healing. In the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, GPCRs detect and respond to gradients of pheromone during mating. After pheromone stimulation, the GPCR Ste2 is removed from the cell membrane, and new receptors are delivered to the growing edge. The regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) protein Sst2 acts by accelerating GTP hydrolysis and facilitating pathway desensitization. Sst2 is also known to interact with the receptor Ste2. Here we show that Sst2 is required for proper receptor recovery at the growing edge of pheromone-stimulated cells. Mathematical modeling suggested pheromone-induced synthesis of Sst2 together with its interaction with the receptor function to reestablish a receptor pool at the site of polarized growth. To validate the model, we used targeted genetic perturbations to selectively disrupt key properties of Sst2 and its induction by pheromone. Together our results reveal that a regulator of G protein signaling can also regulate the G protein–coupled receptor. Whereas Sst2 negatively regulates G protein signaling, it acts in a positive manner to promote receptor retention at the growing edge.     

G protein selectivity is a determinant of RGS2 function

RGS (regulator of G protein signaling) proteins are GTPase-activating proteins that attenuate signaling by heterotrimeric G proteins. Whether the biological functions of RGS proteins are governed by quantitative differences in GTPase-activating protein activity toward various classes of Galpha subunits and how G protein selectivity is achieved by differences in RGS protein structure are largely unknown. Here we provide evidence indicating that the function of RGS2 is determined in part by differences in potency toward G(q) versus G(i) family members. RGS2 was 5-fold more potent than RGS4 as an inhibitor of G(q)-stimulated phosphoinositide hydrolysis in vivo. In contrast, RGS4 was 8-fold more potent than RGS2 as an inhibitor of G(i)-mediated signaling. RGS2 mutants were identified that display increased potency toward G(i) family members without affecting potency toward G(q). These mutations and the structure of RGS4-G(i)alpha(1) complexes suggest that RGS2-G(i)alpha interaction is unfavorable in part because of the geometry of the switch I binding pocket of RGS2 and a potential interaction between the alpha8-alpha9 loop of RGS2 and alphaA of G(i) class alpha subunits. The results suggest that the function of RGS2 relative to other RGS family members is governed in part by quantitative differences in activity toward different classes of Galpha subunits.     

Fluorescence-based assay probing regulator of G protein signaling partner proteins

The regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins are one of the essential modulators for the G protein system. Besides regulating G protein signaling by accelerating the GTPase activity of Gα subunits, RGS proteins are implicated in exerting other functions; they are also known to be involved in several diseases. Moreover, the existence of a single RGS protein in plants and its seven-transmembrane domain found in 2003 triggered efforts to unveil detailed structural and functional information of RGS proteins. We present a method for real-time examination of the protein-protein interactions between RGS and Gα subunits. AtRGS1 from plants and RGS4 from mammals were site-directedly labeled with the fluorescent probe Lucifer yellow on engineered cysteine residues and used to interact with different Gα subunits. The physical interactions can be revealed by monitoring the real-time fluorescence changes (8.6% fluorescence increase in mammals and 27.6% in plants); their correlations to functional exertion were shown with a GTPase accelerating activity assay and further confirmed by measurement of K(d). We validate the effectiveness of this method and suggest its application to the exploration of more RGS signaling partner proteins in physiological and pathological studies.     

Regulator of G protein signaling Z1 (RGSZ1) interacts with Galpha i subunits and regulates Galpha i-mediated cell signaling

Regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins constitute a family of over 20 proteins that negatively regulate heterotrimeric G protein-coupled receptor signaling pathways by enhancing endogenous GTPase activities of G protein alpha subunits. RGSZ1, one of the RGS proteins specifically localized to the brain, has been cloned previously and described as a selective GTPase accelerating protein for Galpha(z) subunit. Here, we employed several methods to provide new evidence that RGSZ1 interacts not only with Galpha(z,) but also with Galpha(i), as supported by in vitro binding assays and functional studies. Using glutathione S-transferase fusion protein pull-down assays, glutathione S-transferase-RGSZ1 protein was shown to bind (35)S-labeled Galpha(i1) protein in an AlF(4)(-)dependent manner. The interaction between RGSZ1 and Galpha(i) was confirmed further by co-immunoprecipitation studies and yeast two-hybrid experiments using a quantitative luciferase reporter gene. Extending these observations to functional studies, RGSZ1 accelerated endogenous GTPase activity of Galpha(i1) in single-turnover GTPase assays. Human RGSZ1 functionally regulated GPA1 (a yeast Galpha(i)-like protein)-mediated yeast pheromone response when expressed in a SST2 (yeast RGS protein) knockout strain. In PC12 cells, transfected RGSZ1 blocked mitogen-activated protein kinase activity induced by UK14304, an alpha(2)-adrenergic receptor agonist. Furthermore, RGSZ1 attenuated D2 dopamine receptor agonist-induced serum response element reporter gene activity in Chinese hamster ovary cells. In summary, these data suggest that RGSZ1 serves as a GTPase accelerating protein for Galpha(i) and regulates Galpha(i)-mediated signaling, thus expanding the potential role of RGSZ1 in G protein-mediated cellular activities.     

Regulators of G protein signaling: a bestiary of modular protein binding domains

Members of the newly discovered regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) families of proteins have a common RGS domain. This RGS domain is necessary for conferring upon RGS proteins the capacity to regulate negatively a variety of Galpha protein subunits. However, RGS proteins are more than simply negative regulators of signaling. RGS proteins can function as effector antagonists, and recent evidence suggests that RGS proteins can have positive effects on signaling as well. Many RGS proteins possess additional C- and N-terminal modular protein-binding domains and motifs. The presence of these additional modules within the RGS proteins provides for multiple novel regulatory interactions performed by these molecules. These regions are involved in conferring regulatory selectivity to specific Galpha-coupled signaling pathways, enhancing the efficacy of the RGS domain, and the translocation or targeting of RGS proteins to intracellular membranes. In other instances, these domains are involved in cross-talk between different Galpha-coupled signaling pathways and, in some cases, likely serve to integrate small GTPases with these G protein signaling pathways. This review discusses these C- and N-terminal domains and their roles in the biology of the brain-enriched RGS proteins. Methods that can be used to investigate the function of these domains are also discussed.     

Regulator of G protein signaling 8 (RGS8) requires its NH2 terminus for subcellular localization and acute desensitization of G protein-gated K+ channels

Functional roles of the NH(2)-terminal region of RGS (regulators of G protein signaling) 8 in G protein signaling were studied. The deletion of the NH(2)-terminal region of RGS8 (DeltaNRGS8) resulted in a partial loss of the inhibitory function in pheromone response of yeasts, although Galpha binding was not affected. To examine roles in subcellular distribution, we coexpressed two fusion proteins of RGS8-RFP and DeltaNRGS8-GFP in DDT1MF2 cells. RGS8-RFP was highly concentrated in nuclei of unstimulated cells. Coexpression of constitutively active Galpha(o) resulted in translocation of RGS8 protein to the plasma membrane. In contrast, DeltaNRGS8-GFP was distributed diffusely through the cytoplasm in the presence or absence of active Galpha(o). When coexpressed with G protein-gated inwardly rectifying K(+) channels, DeltaNRGS8 accelerated both turning on and off similar to RGS8. Acute desensitization of G protein-gated inwardly rectifying K(+) current observed in the presence of RGS8, however, was not induced by DeltaNRGS8. Thus, we, for the first time, showed that the NH(2) terminus of RGS8 contributes to the subcellular localization and to the desensitization of the G protein-coupled response.     

Type 5 G protein beta subunit (Gbeta5) controls the interaction of regulator of G protein signaling 9 (RGS9) with membrane anchors

The R7 family of regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins, comprising RGS6, RGS7, RGS9, and RGS11, regulate neuronal G protein signaling pathways. All members of the R7 RGS form trimeric complexes with the atypical G protein β subunit, Gβ5, and membrane anchor R7BP or R9AP. Association with Gβ5 and membrane anchors has been shown to be critical for maintaining proteolytic stability of the R7 RGS proteins. However, despite its functional importance, the mechanism of how R7 RGS forms complexes with Gβ5 and membrane anchors remains poorly understood. Here, we used protein-protein interaction, co-localization, and protein stability assays to show that association of RGS9 with membrane anchors requires Gβ5. We further establish that the recruitment of R7BP to the complex requires an intact interface between the N-terminal lobe of RGS9 and protein interaction surface of Gβ5. Site-directed mutational analysis reveals that distinct molecular determinants in the interface between Gβ5 and N-terminal Dishevelled, EGL-10, Pleckstrin/DEP Helical Extension (DEP/DHEY) domains are differentially involved in R7BP binding and proteolytic stabilization. On the basis of these findings, we conclude that Gβ5 contributes to the formation of the binding site to the membrane anchors and thus is playing a central role in the assembly of the proteolytically stable trimeric complex and its correct localization in the cell.     

A spatial focusing model for G protein signals. Regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) protien-mediated kinetic scaffolding

Regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) are GTPase-accelerating proteins (GAPs), which can inhibit heterotrimeric G protein pathways. In this study, we provide experimental and theoretical evidence that high concentrations of receptors (as at a synapse) can lead to saturation of GDP-GTP exchange making GTP hydrolysis rate-limiting. This results in local depletion of inactive heterotrimeric G-GDP, which is reversed by RGS GAP activity. Thus, RGS enhances receptor-mediated G protein activation even as it deactivates the G protein. Evidence supporting this model includes a GTP-dependent enhancement of guanosine 5'-3-O-(thio)triphosphate (GTPgammaS) binding to G(i) by RGS. The RGS domain of RGS4 is sufficient for this, not requiring the NH(2)- or COOH-terminal extensions. Furthermore, a kinetic model including only the GAP activity of RGS replicates the GTP-dependent enhancement of GTPgammaS binding observed experimentally. Finally in a Monte Carlo model, this mechanism results in a dramatic "spatial focusing" of active G protein. Near the receptor, G protein activity is maintained even with RGS due to the ability of RGS to reduce depletion of local Galpha-GDP levels permitting rapid recoupling to receptor and maintained G protein activation near the receptor. In contrast, distant signals are suppressed by the RGS, since Galpha-GDP is not depleted there. Thus, a novel RGS-mediated "kinetic scaffolding" mechanism is proposed which narrows the spatial range of active G protein around a cluster of receptors limiting the spill-over of G protein signals to more distant effector molecules, thus enhancing the specificity of G(i) protein signals.     

The alpha-helical domain of Galphat determines specific interaction with regulator of G protein signaling 9

RGS proteins (regulators of G protein signaling) are potent accelerators of the intrinsic GTPase activity of G protein alpha subunits (GAPs), thus controlling the response kinetics of a variety of cell signaling processes. Most RGS domains that have been studied have relatively little GTPase activating specificity especially for G proteins within the Gi subfamily. Retinal RGS9 is unique in its ability to act synergistically with a downstream effector cGMP phosphodiesterase to stimulate the GTPase activity of the alpha subunit of transducin, Galphat. Here we report another unique property of RGS9: high specificity for Galphat. The core (RGS) domain of RGS9 (RGS9) stimulates Galphat GTPase activity by 10-fold and Galphai1 GTPase activity by only 2-fold at a concentration of 10 microM. Using chimeric Galphat/Galphai1 subunits we demonstrated that the alpha-helical domain of Galphat imparts this specificity. The functional effects of RGS9 were well correlated with its affinity for activated Galpha subunits as measured by a change in fluorescence of a mutant Galphat (Chi6b) selectively labeled at Cys-210. Kd values for RGS9 complexes with Galphat and Galphai1 calculated from the direct binding and competition experiments were 185 nM and 2 microM, respectively. The gamma subunit of phosphodiesterase increases the GAP activity of RGS9. We demonstrate that this is because of the ability of Pgamma to increase the affinity of RGS9 for Galphat. A distinct, nonoverlapping pattern of RGS and Pgamma interaction with Galphat suggests a unique mechanism of effector-mediated GAP function of the RGS9.     

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

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

Binding of regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins to phospholipid bilayers. Contribution of location and/or orientation to Gtpase-activating protein activity

Regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins must bind membranes in an orientation that permits the protein-protein interactions necessary for regulatory activity. RGS4 binds to phospholipid surfaces in a slow, multistep process that leads to maximal GTPase-activating protein (GAP) activity. When RGS4 is added to phospholipid vesicles that contain m2 or m1 muscarinic receptor and G(i), G(z), or G(q), GAP activity increases approximately 3-fold over 4 h at 30 degrees C and more slowly at 20 degrees C. This increase in GAP activity is preceded by several other events that suggest that, after binding, optimal interaction with G protein and receptor requires reorientation of RGS4 on the membrane surface, a conformational change, or both. Binding of RGS4 is initially reversible but becomes irreversible within 5 min. Onset of irreversibility parallels initial quenching of tryptophan fluorescence (t(12) approximately 30 s). Further quenching occurs after binding has become irreversible (t(12) approximately 6 min) but is complete well before maximal GAP activity is attained. These processes all appear to be energetically driven by the amphipathic N-terminal domain of RGS4 and are accelerated by palmitoylation of cysteine residues in this region. The RGS4 N-terminal domain confers similar membrane binding behavior on the RGS domains of either RGS10 or RGSZ1.     

Polarity exchange at the interface of regulators of G protein signaling with G protein alpha-subunits

RGS proteins are GTPase-activating proteins (GAPs) for G protein alpha-subunits. This GAP activity is mediated by the interaction of conserved residues on regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins and Galpha-subunits. We mutated the important contact sites Glu-89, Asn-90, and Asn-130 in RGS16 to lysine, aspartate, and alanine, respectively. The interaction of RGS16 and its mutants with Galpha(t) and Galpha(i1) was studied. The GAP activities of RGS16N90D and RGS16N130A were strongly attenuated. RGS16E89K increased GTP hydrolysis of Galpha(i1) by a similar extent, but with an about 100-fold reduced affinity compared with non-mutated RGS16. As Glu-89 in RGS16 is interacting with Lys-210 in Galpha(i1), this lysine was changed to glutamate for compensation. Galpha(i1)K210E was insensitive to RGS16 but interacted with RGS16E89K. In rat uterine smooth muscle cells, wild type RGS16 abolished G(i)-mediated alpha(2)-adrenoreceptor signaling, whereas RGS16E89K was without effect. Both Galpha(i1) and Galpha(i1)K210E mimicked the effect of alpha(2)-adrenoreceptor stimulation. Galpha(i1)K210E was sensitive to RGS16E89K and 10-fold more potent than Galpha(i1). Analogous mutants of Galpha(q) (Galpha(q)K215E) and RGS4 (RGS4E87K) were created and studied in COS-7 cells. The activity of wild type Galpha(q) was counteracted by wild type RGS4 but not by RGS4E87K. The activity of Galpha(q)K215E was inhibited by RGS4E87K, whereas non-mutated RGS4 was ineffective. We conclude that mutation of a conserved lysine residue to glutamate in Galpha(i) and Galpha(q) family members renders these proteins insensitive to wild type RGS proteins. Nevertheless, they are sensitive to glutamate to lysine mutants of RGS proteins. Such mutant pairs will be helpful tools in analyzing Galpha-RGS specificities in living cells.     

Regulators of G protein signaling exhibit distinct patterns of gene expression and target G protein specificity in human lymphocytes

The newly recognized regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) attenuate heterotrimeric G protein signaling pathways. We have cloned an IL-2-induced gene from human T cells, cytokine-responsive gene 1, which encodes a member of the RGS family, RGS16. The RGS16 protein binds Gialpha and Gqalpha proteins present in T cells, and inhibits Gi- and Gq-mediated signaling pathways. By comparison, the mitogen-induced RGS2 inhibits Gq but not Gi signaling. Moreover, the two RGS genes exhibit marked differences in expression patterns. The IL-2-induced expression of the RGS16 gene in T cells is suppressed by elevated cAMP, whereas the RGS2 gene shows a reciprocal pattern of regulation by these stimuli. Because the mitogen and cytokine receptors that trigger expression of RGS2 and RGS16 in T cells do not activate heterotrimeric G proteins, these RGS proteins and the G proteins that they regulate may play a heretofore unrecognized role in T cell functional responses to Ag and cytokine activation.     

Interaction of 14-3-3 protein with regulator of G protein signaling 7 is dynamically regulated by tumor necrosis factor-alpha

Regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) constitute a family of proteins with a conserved RGS domain of approximately 120 amino acids that accelerate the intrinsic GTP hydrolysis of activated Galpha(i) and Galpha(q) subunits. The phosphorylation-dependent interaction of 14-3-3 proteins with a subset of RGS proteins inhibits their GTPase-accelerating activity in vitro. The inhibitory interaction between 14-3-3 and RGS7 requires phosphorylation of serine 434 of RGS7. We now show that phosphorylation of serine 434 is dynamically regulated by TNF-alpha. Cellular stimulation by TNF-alpha transiently decreased the phosphorylation of serine 434 of RGS7, abrogating the inhibitory interaction with 14-3-3. We examined the effect of 14-3-3 on RGS-mediated deactivation kinetics of G protein-coupled inwardly rectifying K(+) channels (GIRKs) in Xenopus oocytes. 14-3-3 inhibited the function of wild-type RGS7, but not that of either RSG7(P436R) or RGS4, two proteins that do not bind 14-3-3. Our findings are the first evidence that extracellular signals can modulate the activity of RGS proteins by regulating their interaction with 14-3-3.     

Phosphorylation and nuclear translocation of a regulator of G protein signaling (RGS10).

Heterotrimeric G proteins are involved in the transduction of hormonal and sensory signals across plasma membranes of eukaryotic cells. Hence, they are a critical point of control for a variety of agents that modulate cellular function. Activation of these proteins is dependent on GTP binding to their alpha (Galpha) subunits. Regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) bind specifically to activated Galpha proteins, potentiating the intrinsic GTPase activity of the Galpha proteins and thus expediting the termination of Galpha signaling. Although there are several points in most G protein controlled signaling pathways that are affected by reversible covalent modification, little evidence has been shown addressing whether or not the functions of RGS proteins are themselves regulated by such modifications. We report in this study the acute functional regulation of RGS10 thru the specific and inducible phosphorylation of RGS10 protein at serine 168 by cAMP-dependent kinase A. This phosphorylation nullifies the RGS10 activity at the plasma membrane, which controls the G protein-dependent activation of the inwardly rectifying potassium channel. Surprisingly, the phosphorylation-mediated attenuation of RGS10 activity was not manifested in an alteration of its ability to accelerate GTPase activity of Galpha. Rather, the phosphorylation event correlates with translocation of RGS10 from the plasma membrane and cytosol into the nucleus.