GPCR activation: protonation and membrane potential

GPCR proteins represent the largest family of signaling membrane proteins in eukaryotic cells. Their importance to basic cell biology, human diseases, and pharmaceutical interventions is well established. Many crystal structures of GPCR proteins have been reported in both active and inactive conformations. These data indicate that agonist binding alone is not suffi cient to trigger the conformational change of GPCRs necessary for binding of downstream G-proteins, yet other essential factors remain elusive. Based on analysis of available GPCR crystal structures, we identifi ed a potential conformational switch around the conserved Asp2.50, which consistently shows distinct conformations between inactive and active states. Combining the structural information with the current literature, we propose an energy-coupling mechanism, in which the interaction between a charge change of the GPCR protein and the membrane potential of the living cell plays a key role for GPCR activation.     

G protein-coupled receptors of class A harness the energy of membrane potential to increase their sensitivity and selectivity

The human genome contains about 700 genes of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) of class A; these seven-helical membrane proteins are the targets of almost half of all known drugs. In the middle of the helix bundle, crystal structures reveal a highly conserved sodium-binding site, which is connected with the extracellular side by a water-filled tunnel. This binding site contains a sodium ion in those GPCRs that are crystallized in their inactive conformations but does not in those GPCRs that are trapped in agonist-bound active conformations. The escape route of the sodium ion upon the inactive-to-active transition and its very direction have until now remained obscure. Here, by modeling the available experimental data, we show that the sodium gradient over the cell membrane increases the sensitivity of GPCRs if their activation is thermodynamically coupled to the sodium ion translocation into the cytoplasm but decreases it if the sodium ion retreats into the extracellular space upon receptor activation. The model quantitatively describes the available data on both activation and suppression of distinct GPCRs by membrane voltage. The model also predicts selective amplification of the signal from (endogenous) agonists if only they, but not their (partial) analogs, induce sodium translocation. Comparative structure and sequence analyses of sodium-binding GPCRs indicate a key role for the conserved leucine residue in the second transmembrane helix (Leu2.46) in coupling sodium translocation to receptor activation. Hence, class A GPCRs appear to harness the energy of the transmembrane sodium potential to increase their sensitivity and selectivity.     

G Protein-coupled Receptor Kinases of the GRK4 Protein Subfamily Phosphorylate Inactive G Protein-coupled Receptors (GPCRs)

G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) kinases (GRKs) play a key role in homologous desensitization of GPCRs. It is widely assumed that most GRKs selectively phosphorylate only active GPCRs. Here, we show that although this seems to be the case for the GRK2/3 subfamily, GRK5/6 effectively phosphorylate inactive forms of several GPCRs, including β2-adrenergic and M2 muscarinic receptors, which are commonly used as representative models for GPCRs. Agonist-independent GPCR phosphorylation cannot be explained by constitutive activity of the receptor or membrane association of the GRK, suggesting that it is an inherent ability of GRK5/6. Importantly, phosphorylation of the inactive β₂-adrenergic receptor enhanced its interactions with arrestins. Arrestin-3 was able to discriminate between phosphorylation of the same receptor by GRK2 and GRK5, demonstrating preference for the latter. Arrestin recruitment to inactive phosphorylated GPCRs suggests that not only agonist activation but also the complement of GRKs in the cell regulate formation of the arrestin-receptor complex and thereby G protein-independent signaling.     

Allosteric activation of metabotropic glutamate receptor 5

Abstract

Metabotropic glutamate receptor 5 (mGluR5) is a class C G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) with both an extracellular ligand binding site and an allosteric intrahelical chamber located similarly to the orthosteric ligand binding site of Class A GPCRs. Ligands binding to this ancestral site of mGluR5 can act as positive (PAM), negative (NAM) or silent (SAM) allosteric modulators, and their medicinal chemistry optimization is notoriously difficult, as subtle structural changes may cause significant variation in activity and switch in the functional response. Here we present all atom molecular dynamics simulations of NAM, SAM and PAM complexes formed by closely related ligands and analyse the structural differences of the complexes. Several residues involved in the activation are identified and the formation of a continuous water channel in the active complex but not in the inactive ones is recognized. Our results suggest that the mechanism of mGluR5 activation is similar to that of class A GPCRs.

Communicated by Ramaswamy H. Sarma     

Agonist dynamics and conformational selection during microsecond simulations of the A(2A) adenosine receptor

The G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are a ubiquitous family of signaling proteins of exceptional pharmacological importance. The recent publication of structures of several GPCRs cocrystallized with ligands of differing activity offers a unique opportunity to gain insight into their function. To that end, we performed microsecond-timescale simulations of the A(2A) adenosine receptor bound to either of two agonists, adenosine or UK432097. Our data suggest that adenosine is highly dynamic when bound to A(2A), in stark contrast to the case with UK432097. Remarkably, adenosine finds an alternate binding pose in which the ligand is inverted relative to the crystal structure, forming relatively stable interactions with helices I and II. Our observations suggest new experimental tests to validate our predictions and deepen our understanding of GPCR signaling. Overall, our data suggest an intriguing hypothesis: that the 100- to 1000-fold greater efficacy of UK432097 relative to adenosine arises because UK432097 stabilizes a much tighter neighborhood of active conformations, which manifests as a greater likelihood of G-protein activation per unit time.     

Comparative MD Simulations Indicate a Dual Role for Arg1323.50 in Dopamine-Dependent D2R Activation

Residue Arg^3.50 belongs to the highly conserved DRY-motif of class A GPCRs, which is located at the bottom of TM3. On the one hand, Arg^3.50 has been reported to help stabilize the inactive state of GPCRs, but on the other hand has also been shown to be crucial for stabilizing active receptor conformations and mediating receptor-G protein coupling. The combined results of these studies suggest that the exact function of Arg^3.50 is likely to be receptor-dependent and must be characterized independently for every GPCR. Consequently, we now present comparative molecular-dynamics simulations that use our recently described inactive-state and Gα-bound active-state homology models of the dopamine D2 receptor (D2R), which are either bound to dopamine or ligand-free, performed to identify the function of Arg132^3.50 in D2R. Our results are consistent with a dynamic model of D2R activation in which Arg132^3.50 adopts a dual role, both by stabilizing the inactive-state receptor conformation and enhancing dopamine-dependent D2R-G protein coupling.     

Structural Features of β2 Adrenergic Receptor: Crystal Structures and Beyond

The beta2-adrenergic receptor (β2AR) family, which is the largest family of cell surface receptors in humans. Extra attention has been focused on the human GPCRs because they have been studied as important protein targets for pharmaceutical drug development. In fact, approximately 40% of marketed drugs directly work on GPCRs. GPCRs respond to various extracellular stimuli, such as sensory signals, neurotransmitters, chemokines, and hormones, to induce structural changes at the cytoplasmic surface, activating downstream signaling pathways, primarily through interactions with heterotrimeric G proteins or through G-protein independent pathways, such as arrestin. Most GPCRs, except for rhodhopsin, which contains covalently linked 11 cis-retinal, bind to diffusible ligands, having various conformational states between inactive and active structures. The first human GPCR structure was determined using an inverse agonist bound β2AR in 2007 and since then, more than 20 distinct GPCR structures have been solved. However, most GPCR structures were solved as inactive forms, and an agonist bound fully active structure is still hard to obtain. In a structural point of view, β2AR is relatively well studied since its fully active structure as a complex with G protein as well as several inactive structures are available. The structural comparison of inactive and active states gives an important clue in understanding the activation mechanism of β2AR. In this review, structural features of inactive and active states of β2AR, the interaction of β2AR with heterotrimeric G protein, and the comparison with β1AR will be discussed.     

Identification of Receptor Binding-induced Conformational Changes in Non-visual Arrestins

The non-visual arrestins, arrestin-2 and arrestin-3, belong to a small family of multifunctional cytosolic proteins. Non-visual arrestins interact with hundreds of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and regulate GPCR desensitization by binding active phosphorylated GPCRs and uncoupling them from heterotrimeric G proteins. Recently, non-visual arrestins have been shown to mediate G protein-independent signaling by serving as adaptors and scaffolds that assemble multiprotein complexes. By recruiting various partners, including trafficking and signaling proteins, directly to GPCRs, non-visual arrestins connect activated receptors to diverse signaling pathways. To investigate arrestin-mediated signaling, a structural understanding of arrestin activation and interaction with GPCRs is essential. Here we identified global and local conformational changes in the non-visual arrestins upon binding to the model GPCR rhodopsin. To detect conformational changes, pairs of spin labels were introduced into arrestin-2 and arrestin-3, and the interspin distances in the absence and presence of the receptor were measured by double electron electron resonance spectroscopy. Our data indicate that both non-visual arrestins undergo several conformational changes similar to arrestin-1, including the finger loop moving toward the predicted location of the receptor in the complex as well as the C-tail release upon receptor binding. The arrestin-2 results also suggest that there is no clam shell-like closure of the N- and C-domains and that the loop containing residue 136 (homolog of 139 in arrestin-1) has high flexibility in both free and receptor-bound states.     

An optical dynamic mass redistribution assay reveals biased signaling of dualsteric GPCR activators

Increasing attention is paid in basic science and in drug discovery to pathway selective intracellular signaling as a novel approach to achieve precise control of cell function via G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). With respect to signaling, GPCRs are often promiscuous in that more than one intracellular biochemical pathway is activated upon receptor stimulation by the endogenous transmitter or by exogenous drugs. We studied signaling by a novel class of GPCR activators that were designed to bind simultaneously to the orthosteric transmitter-binding site and the allosteric site of muscarinic acetylcholine receptors. An optical biosensor technique was applied to measure activation-induced dynamic mass redistribution (DMR) in CHO cells stably expressing the muscarinic receptor subtype of interest. The use of tools to modulate signaling and measuring G protein activation directly proved that DMR is a valid and comfortable approach to gain real-time insight into intracellular signaling pathway activation and to identify signaling pathway-selective drugs.     

Both ligand- and cell-specific parameters control ligand agonism in a kinetic model of g protein-coupled receptor signaling

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) exist in multiple dynamic states (e.g., ligand-bound, inactive, G protein-coupled) that influence G protein activation and ultimately response generation. In quantitative models of GPCR signaling that incorporate these varied states, parameter values are often uncharacterized or varied over large ranges, making identification of important parameters and signaling outcomes difficult to intuit. Here we identify the ligand- and cell-specific parameters that are important determinants of cell-response behavior in a dynamic model of GPCR signaling using parameter variation and sensitivity analysis. The character of response (i.e., positive/neutral/inverse agonism) is, not surprisingly, significantly influenced by a ligand's ability to bias the receptor into an active conformation. We also find that several cell-specific parameters, including the ratio of active to inactive receptor species, the rate constant for G protein activation, and expression levels of receptors and G proteins also dramatically influence agonism. Expressing either receptor or G protein in numbers several fold above or below endogenous levels may result in system behavior inconsistent with that measured in endogenous systems. Finally, small variations in cell-specific parameters identified by sensitivity analysis as significant determinants of response behavior are found to change ligand-induced responses from positive to negative, a phenomenon termed protean agonism. Our findings offer an explanation for protean agonism reported in beta2--adrenergic and alpha2A-adrenergic receptor systems.     

Heterotrimeric G Proteins and the Single-Transmembrane Domain IGF-II/M6P Receptor: Functional Interaction and Relevance to Cell Signaling

The G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) family represents the largest and most versatile group of cell surface receptors. Classical GPCR signaling constitutes ligand binding to a seven-transmembrane domain receptor, receptor interaction with a heterotrimeric G protein, and the subsequent activation or inhibition of downstream intracellular effectors to mediate a cellular response. However, recent reports on direct, receptor-independent G protein activation, G protein-independent signaling by GPCRs, and signaling of nonheptahelical receptors via trimeric G proteins have highlighted the intrinsic complexities of G protein signaling mechanisms. The insulin-like growth factor-II/mannose-6 phosphate (IGF-II/M6P) receptor is a single-transmembrane glycoprotein whose principal function is the intracellular transport of lysosomal enzymes. In addition, the receptor also mediates some biological effects in response to IGF-II binding in both neuronal and nonneuronal systems. Multidisciplinary efforts to elucidate the intracellular signaling pathways that underlie these effects have generated data to suggest that the IGF-II/M6P receptor might mediate transmembrane signaling via a G protein-coupled mechanism. The purpose of this review is to outline the characteristics of traditional and nontraditional GPCRs, to relate the IGF-II/M6P receptor’s structure with its role in G protein-coupled signaling and to summarize evidence gathered over the years regarding the putative signaling of the IGF-II/M6P receptor mediated by a G protein.     

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.     

Differences in Allosteric Communication Pipelines in the Inactive and Active States of a GPCR

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are membrane proteins that allosterically transduce the signal of ligand binding in the extracellular (EC) domain to couple to proteins in the intracellular (IC) domain. However, the complete pathway of allosteric communication from the EC to the IC domain, including the role of individual amino acids in the pathway is not known. Using the correlation in torsion angle movements calculated from microseconds-long molecular-dynamics simulations, we elucidated the allosteric pathways in three different conformational states of β₂-adrenergic receptor (β₂AR): 1), the inverse-agonist-bound inactive state; 2), the agonist-bound intermediate state; and (3), the agonist- and G-protein-bound fully active state. The inactive state is less dynamic compared with the intermediate and active states, showing dense clusters of allosteric pathways (allosteric pipelines) connecting the EC with the IC domain. The allosteric pipelines from the EC domain to the IC domain are weakened in the intermediate state, thus decoupling the EC domain from the IC domain and making the receptor more dynamic compared with the other states. Also, the orthosteric ligand-binding site becomes the initiator region for allosteric communication in the intermediate state. This finding agrees with the paradigm that the nature of the agonist governs the specific signaling state of the receptor. These results provide an understanding of the mechanism of allosteric communication in class A GPCRs. In addition, our analysis shows that mutations that affect the ligand efficacy, but not the binding affinity, are located in the allosteric pipelines. This clarifies the role of such mutations, which has hitherto been unexplained.     

Differences in Allosteric Communication Pipelines in the Inactive and Active States of a GPCR

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are membrane proteins that allosterically transduce the signal of ligand binding in the extracellular (EC) domain to couple to proteins in the intracellular (IC) domain. However, the complete pathway of allosteric communication from the EC to the IC domain, including the role of individual amino acids in the pathway is not known. Using the correlation in torsion angle movements calculated from microseconds-long molecular-dynamics simulations, we elucidated the allosteric pathways in three different conformational states of β₂-adrenergic receptor (β₂AR): 1), the inverse-agonist-bound inactive state; 2), the agonist-bound intermediate state; and (3), the agonist- and G-protein-bound fully active state. The inactive state is less dynamic compared with the intermediate and active states, showing dense clusters of allosteric pathways (allosteric pipelines) connecting the EC with the IC domain. The allosteric pipelines from the EC domain to the IC domain are weakened in the intermediate state, thus decoupling the EC domain from the IC domain and making the receptor more dynamic compared with the other states. Also, the orthosteric ligand-binding site becomes the initiator region for allosteric communication in the intermediate state. This finding agrees with the paradigm that the nature of the agonist governs the specific signaling state of the receptor. These results provide an understanding of the mechanism of allosteric communication in class A GPCRs. In addition, our analysis shows that mutations that affect the ligand efficacy, but not the binding affinity, are located in the allosteric pipelines. This clarifies the role of such mutations, which has hitherto been unexplained.     

A Monod-Wyman-Changeux mechanism can explain G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) allosteric modulation

The Monod-Wyman-Changeux (MWC) model was initially proposed to describe the allosteric properties of regulatory enzymes and subsequently extended to receptors. Yet despite GPCRs representing the largest family of receptors and drug targets, no study has systematically evaluated the MWC mechanism as it applies to GPCR allosteric ligands. We reveal how the recently described allosteric modulator, benzyl quinolone carboxylic acid (BQCA), behaves according to a strict, two-state MWC mechanism at the M1 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor (mAChR). Despite having a low affinity for the M1 mAChR, BQCA demonstrated state dependence, exhibiting high positive cooperativity with orthosteric agonists in a manner that correlated with efficacy but negative cooperativity with inverse agonists. The activity of BQCA was significantly increased at a constitutively active M1 mAChR but abolished at an inactive mutant. Interestingly, BQCA possessed intrinsic signaling efficacy, ranging from near-quiescence to full agonism depending on the coupling efficiency of the chosen intracellular pathway. This latter cellular property also determined the difference in magnitude of positive cooperativity between BQCA and the orthosteric agonist, carbachol, across pathways. The lack of additional, pathway-biased, allosteric modulation by BQCA was confirmed in genetically engineered yeast strains expressing different chimeras between the endogenous yeast G(pa1) protein and human Gα subunits. These findings define a chemical biological framework that can be applied to the study and classification of allosteric modulators across different GPCR families.     

A beta-arrestin binding determinant common to the second intracellular loops of rhodopsin family G protein-coupled receptors

beta-Arrestins have been shown to inhibit competitively G protein-dependent signaling and to mediate endocytosis for many of the hundreds of nonvisual rhodopsin family G protein-coupled receptors (GPCR). An open question of fundamental importance concerning the regulation of signal transduction of several hundred rhodopsin-like GPCRs is how these receptors of limited sequence homology, when considered in toto, can all recruit and activate the two highly conserved beta-arrestin proteins as part of their signaling/desensitization process. Although the serine and threonine residues that form GPCR kinase phosphorylation sites are common beta-arrestin-associated receptor determinants regulating receptor desensitization and internalization, the agonist-activated conformation of a GPCR probably reveals the most fundamental determinant mediating the GPCR and arrestin interaction. Here we identified a beta-arrestin binding determinant common to the rhodopsin family GPCRs formed from the proximal 10 residues of the second intracellular loop. We demonstrated by both gain and loss of function studies for the serotonin 2C, beta2-adrenergic, alpha2a)adrenergic, and neuropeptide Y type 2 receptors that the highly conserved amino acids, proline and alanine, naturally occurring in rhodopsin family receptors six residues distal to the highly conserved second loop DRY motif regulate beta-arrestin binding and beta-arrestin-mediated internalization. In particular, as demonstrated for the beta2 AR, this occurs independently of changes in GPCR kinase phosphorylation. These results suggest that a GPCR conformation directed by the second intracellular loop, likely using the loop itself as a binding patch, may function as a switch for transitioning beta-arrestin from its inactive form to its active receptor-binding state.     

A Conserved Protonation-Induced Switch can Trigger “Ionic-Lock” Formation in Adrenergic Receptors

The mechanism of signal transduction in G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) is a crucial step in cell signaling. However, the molecular details of this process are still largely undetermined. Carrying out submicrosecond molecular dynamics simulations of β-adrenergic receptors, we found that cooperation between a number of highly conserved residues is crucial to alter the equilibrium between the active state and the inactive state of diffusible ligand GPCRs. In particular, “ionic-lock” formation in β-adrenergic receptors is directly correlated with the protonation state of a highly conserved aspartic acid residue [Asp(2.50)] even though the two sites are located more than 20 Å away from each other. Internal polar residues, acting as local microswitches, cooperate to propagate the signal from Asp(2.50) to the G-protein interaction site at the helix III-helix VI interface. Evolutionarily conserved differences between opsin and non-opsin GPCRs in the surrounding of Asp(2.50) influence the acidity of this residue and can thus help in rationalizing the differences in constitutive activity of class A GPCRs.     

A novel mechanism of G protein-coupled receptor functional selectivity. Muscarinic partial agonist McN-A-343 as a bitopic orthosteric/allosteric ligand

Many G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) possess allosteric binding sites distinct from the orthosteric site utilized by their cognate ligands, but most GPCR allosteric modulators reported to date lack signaling efficacy in their own right. McN-A-343 (4-(N-(3-chlorophenyl)carbamoyloxy)-2-butynyltrimethylammonium chloride) is a functionally selective muscarinic acetylcholine receptor (mAChR) partial agonist that can also interact allosterically at the M(2) mAChR. We hypothesized that this molecule simultaneously utilizes both an allosteric and the orthosteric site on the M(2) mAChR to mediate these effects. By synthesizing progressively truncated McN-A-343 derivatives, we identified two, which minimally contain 3-chlorophenylcarbamate, as pure allosteric modulators. These compounds were positive modulators of the orthosteric antagonist N-[(3)H]methylscopolamine, but in functional assays of M(2) mAChR-mediated ERK1/2 phosphorylation and guanosine 5'-3-O-([(35)S]thio)triphosphate binding, they were negative modulators of agonist efficacy. This negative allosteric effect was diminished upon mutation of Y177A in the second extracellular (E2) loop of the M(2) mAChR that is known to reduce prototypical allosteric modulator potency. Our results are consistent with McN-A-343 being a bitopic orthosteric/allosteric ligand with the allosteric moiety engendering partial agonism and functional selectivity. This finding suggests a novel and largely unappreciated mechanism of "directed efficacy" whereby functional selectivity may be engendered in a GPCR by utilizing an allosteric ligand to direct the signaling of an orthosteric ligand encoded within the same molecule.     

Communication over the Network of Binary Switches Regulates the Activation of A2A Adenosine Receptor

Dynamics and functions of G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) are accurately regulated by the type of ligands that bind to the orthosteric or allosteric binding sites. To glean the structural and dynamical origin of ligand-dependent modulation of GPCR activity, we performed total ~ 5 μsec molecular dynamics simulations of A_2A adenosine receptor (A_2AAR) in its apo, antagonist-bound, and agonist-bound forms in an explicit water and membrane environment, and examined the corresponding dynamics and correlation between the 10 key structural motifs that serve as the allosteric hotspots in intramolecular signaling network. We dubbed these 10 structural motifs “binary switches” as they display molecular interactions that switch between two distinct states. By projecting the receptor dynamics on these binary switches that yield 2¹⁰ microstates, we show that (i) the receptors in apo, antagonist-bound, and agonist-bound states explore vastly different conformational space; (ii) among the three receptor states the apo state explores the broadest range of microstates; (iii) in the presence of the agonist, the active conformation is maintained through coherent couplings among the binary switches; and (iv) to be most specific, our analysis shows that W246, located deep inside the binding cleft, can serve as both an agonist sensor and actuator of ensuing intramolecular signaling for the receptor activation. Finally, our analysis of multiple trajectories generated by inserting an agonist to the apo state underscores that the transition of the receptor from inactive to active form requires the disruption of ionic-lock in the DRY motif.     

Both Ligand- and Cell-Specific Parameters Control Ligand Agonism in a Kinetic Model of G Protein–Coupled Receptor Signaling

G protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs) exist in multiple dynamic states (e.g., ligand-bound, inactive, G protein–coupled) that influence G protein activation and ultimately response generation. In quantitative models of GPCR signaling that incorporate these varied states, parameter values are often uncharacterized or varied over large ranges, making identification of important parameters and signaling outcomes difficult to intuit. Here we identify the ligand- and cell-specific parameters that are important determinants of cell-response behavior in a dynamic model of GPCR signaling using parameter variation and sensitivity analysis. The character of response (i.e., positive/neutral/inverse agonism) is, not surprisingly, significantly influenced by a ligand's ability to bias the receptor into an active conformation. We also find that several cell-specific parameters, including the ratio of active to inactive receptor species, the rate constant for G protein activation, and expression levels of receptors and G proteins also dramatically influence agonism. Expressing either receptor or G protein in numbers several fold above or below endogenous levels may result in system behavior inconsistent with that measured in endogenous systems. Finally, small variations in cell-specific parameters identified by sensitivity analysis as significant determinants of response behavior are found to change ligand-induced responses from positive to negative, a phenomenon termed protean agonism. Our findings offer an explanation for protean agonism reported in β₂--adrenergic and α_2A-adrenergic receptor systems.