Endo‐lysosomal sorting of G‐protein‐coupled receptors by ubiquitin: Diverse pathways for G‐protein‐coupled receptor destruction and beyond

Ubiquitin is covalently attached to substrate proteins in the form of a single ubiquitin moiety or polyubiquitin chains and has been generally linked to protein degradation, however, distinct types of ubiquitin linkages are also used to control other critical cellular processes like cell signaling. Over forty mammalian G protein‐coupled receptors (GPCRs) have been reported to be ubiquitinated, but despite the diverse and rich complexity of GPCR signaling, ubiquitin has been largely ascribed to receptor degradation. Indeed, GPCR ubiquitination targets the receptors for degradation by lysosome, which is mediated by the Endosomal Sorting Complexes Required for Transport (ESCRT) machinery, and the proteasome. This has led to the view that ubiquitin and ESCRTs primarily function as the signal to target GPCRs for destruction. Contrary to this conventional view, studies indicate that ubiquitination of certain GPCRs and canonical ubiquitin‐binding ESCRTs are not required for receptor degradation and revealed that diverse and complex pathways exist to regulate endo‐lysosomal sorting of GPCRs. In other studies, GPCR ubiquitination has been shown to drive signaling and not receptor degradation and further revealed novel insight into the mechanisms by which GPCRs trigger the activity of the ubiquitination machinery. Here, we discuss the diverse pathways by which ubiquitin controls GPCR endo‐lysosomal sorting and beyond.      

Different combinations of atomic interactions predict protein‐small molecule and protein‐DNA/RNA affinities with similar accuracy

Interactions between proteins and other molecules play essential roles in all biological processes. Although it is widely held that a protein's ligand specificity is determined primarily by its three‐dimensional structure, the general principles by which structure determines ligand binding remain poorly understood. Here we use statistical analyses of a large number of protein?ligand complexes with associated binding‐affinity measurements to quantitatively characterize how combinations of atomic interactions contribute to ligand affinity. We find that there are significant differences in how atomic interactions determine ligand affinity for proteins that bind small chemical ligands, those that bind DNA/RNA and those that interact with other proteins. Although protein‐small molecule and protein‐DNA/RNA binding affinities can be accurately predicted from structural data, models predicting one type of interaction perform poorly on the others. Additionally, the particular combinations of atomic interactions required to predict binding affinity differed between small‐molecule and DNA/RNA data sets, consistent with the conclusion that the structural bases determining ligand affinity differ among interaction types. In contrast to what we observed for small‐molecule and DNA/RNA interactions, no statistical models were capable of predicting protein?protein affinity with >60% correlation. We demonstrate the potential usefulness of protein‐DNA/RNA binding prediction as a possible tool for high‐throughput virtual screening to guide laboratory investigations, suggesting that quantitative characterization of diverse molecular interactions may have practical applications as well as fundamentally advancing our understanding of how molecular structure translates into function. Proteins 2015; 83:2100–2114. © 2015 The Authors. Proteins: Structure, Function, and Bioinformatics Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Solvated protein–protein docking using Kyte‐Doolittle‐based water preferences

HADDOCK is one of the few docking programs that can explicitly account for water molecules in the docking process. Its solvated docking protocol starts from hydrated molecules and a fraction of the resulting interfacial waters is subsequently removed in a biased Monte Carlo procedure based on water‐mediated contact probabilities. The latter were derived from an analysis of water contact frequencies from high‐resolution crystal structures. Here, we introduce a simple water‐mediated amino acid–amino acid contact probability scale derived from the Kyte‐Doolittle hydrophobicity scale and assess its performance on the largest high‐resolution dataset developed to date for solvated docking. Both scales yield high‐quality docking results. The novel and simple hydrophobicity scale, which should reflect better the physicochemical principles underlying contact propensities, leads to a performance improvement of around 10% in ranking, cluster quality and water recovery at the interface compared with the statistics‐based original solvated docking protocol. Proteins 2013. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Kinetic optimization of a protein‐responsive aptamer beacon

Aptamers have been utilized as biosensors because they can be readily adapted to sensor platforms and signal transduction schemes through both rational design and selection. One highly generalizable scheme for the generation of the so‐called aptamer beacons involves denaturing the aptamer with antisense oligonucleotides. For example, rational design methods have been utilized to adapt anti‐thrombin aptamers to function as biosensors by hybridizing an antisense oligonucleotide containing a quencher to the aptamer containing a fluorescent label. In the presence of thrombin, the binding equilibrium is shifted, the antisense oligonucleotide dissociates, and the beacon lights up. By changing the affinity of the antisense oligonucleotide for the aptamer beacon, it has proven possible to change the extent of activation of the beacon. More importantly, modulating interactions between the antisense oligonucleotide and the aptamer strongly influences the kinetics of activation. Comparisons across multiple, designed aptamer beacons indicate that there is a strong inverse correlation between the thermodynamics of hybridization and the speed of activation, a finding that should prove to be generally useful in the design of future biosensors. By pre‐organizing the thrombin‐binding quadruplex within the aptamer the speed of response can be greatly increased. By integrating these various interactions, we were ultimately able to design aptamer beacons that were activated by threefold within 1 min of the addition of thrombin. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2009;103: 1049–1059. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

G protein‐coupled receptors: the inside story

Recent findings necessitate revision of the traditional view of G protein‐coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling and expand the diversity of mechanisms by which receptor signaling influences cell behavior in general. GPCRs elicit signals at the plasma membrane and are then rapidly removed from the cell surface by endocytosis. Internalization of GPCRs has long been thought to serve as a mechanism to terminate the production of second messengers such as cAMP. However, recent studies show that internalized GPCRs can continue to either stimulate or inhibit cAMP production in a sustained manner. They do so by remaining associated with their cognate G protein subunit and adenylyl cyclase at endosomal compartments. Once internalized, the GPCRs produce cellular responses distinct from those elicited at the cell surface.     

G‐protein‐coupled receptor structures were not built in a day

Among the most exciting recent developments in structural biology is the structure determination of G‐protein‐coupled receptors (GPCRs), which comprise the largest class of membrane proteins in mammalian cells and have enormous importance for disease and drug development. The GPCR structures are perhaps the most visible examples of a nascent revolution in membrane protein structure determination. Like other major milestones in science, however, such as the sequencing of the human genome, these achievements were built on a hidden foundation of technological developments. Here, we describe some of the methods that are fueling the membrane protein structure revolution and have enabled the determination of the current GPCR structures, along with new techniques that may lead to future structures.     

Protein side‐chain modeling with a protein‐dependent optimized rotamer library

Despite years of effort, the problem of predicting the conformations of protein side chains remains a subject of inquiry. This problem has three major issues, namely defining the conformations that a side chain may adopt within a protein, developing a sampling procedure for generating possible side‐chain packings, and defining a scoring function that can rank these possible packings. To solve the former of these issues, most procedures rely on a rotamer library derived from databases of known protein structures. We introduce an alternative method that is free of statistics. We begin with a rotamer library that is based only on stereochemical considerations; this rotamer library is then optimized independently for each protein under study. We show that this optimization step restores the diversity of conformations observed in native proteins. We combine this protein‐dependent rotamer library (PDRL) method with the self‐consistent mean field (SCMF) sampling approach and a physics‐based scoring function into a new side‐chain prediction method, SCMF–PDRL. Using two large test sets of 831 and 378 proteins, respectively, we show that this new method compares favorably with competing methods such as SCAP, OPUS‐Rota, and SCWRL4 for energy‐minimized structures. Proteins 2014; 82:2000–2017. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Production of G protein‐coupled receptors in an insect‐based cell‐free system

The biochemical analysis of human cell membrane proteins remains a challenging task due to the difficulties in producing sufficient quantities of functional protein. G protein‐coupled receptors (GPCRs) represent a main class of membrane proteins and drug targets, which are responsible for a huge number of signaling processes regulating various physiological functions in living cells. To circumvent the current bottlenecks in GPCR studies, we propose the synthesis of GPCRs in eukaryotic cell‐free systems based on extracts generated from insect (Sf21) cells. Insect cell lysates harbor the fully active translational and translocational machinery allowing posttranslational modifications, such as glycosylation and phosphorylation of de novo synthesized proteins. Here, we demonstrate the production of several GPCRs in a eukaryotic cell‐free system, performed within a short time and in a cost‐effective manner. We were able to synthesize a variety of GPCRs ranging from 40 to 133 kDa in an insect‐based cell‐free system. Moreover, we have chosen the μ opioid receptor (MOR) as a model protein to analyze the ligand binding affinities of cell‐free synthesized MOR in comparison to MOR expressed in a human cell line by “one‐point” radioligand binding experiments. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2017;114: 2328–2338. © 2017 The Authors. Biotechnology and Bioengineering Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Investigation of the pH‐dependence of dye‐doped protein–protein interactions

Proteins can dramatically change their conformation under environmental conditions such as temperature and pH. In this context, Glycoprotein's conformational determination is challenging. This is due to the variety of domains which contain rich chemical characters existing within this complex. Here we demonstrate a new, straightforward and efficient technique that uses the pH‐dependent properties of dyes‐doped Pig Gastric Mucin (PGM) for predicting and controlling protein–protein interaction and conformation. We utilize the PGM as natural host matrix which is capable of dynamically changing its conformational shape and adsorbing hydrophobic and hydrophilic dyes under different pH conditions and investigate and control the fluorescent properties of these composites in solution. It is shown at various pH conditions, a large variety of light emission from these complexes such as red, green and white is obtained. This phenomenon is explained by pH‐dependent protein folding and protein–protein interactions that induce different emission spectra which are mediated and controlled by means of dye–dye interactions and surrounding environment. This process is used to form the technologically challenging white light‐emitting liquid or solid coating for LED devices.     

A protein‐based approach to mark arthropods for mark‐capture type research

A series of studies was conducted to test methods for marking a wide variety of arthropods with inexpensive proteins for mark‐capture dispersal research. The markers tested included egg albumin protein in chicken egg whites and casein protein in bovine milk. The first study qualified the effectiveness of the two marks on more than 50 arthropod species inhabiting cotton via two application procedures. The application methods included: (1) a topical plus residue protein application, and (2) a residue‐only protein application. Both protein marks, regardless of the method of application, were readily retained on the arthropod assemblage over the duration of the study. The second study determined how rapidly insects acquire chicken egg albumin protein after contact exposure to cotton tissue sprayed with an egg whites solution. Under laboratory conditions, the vast majority of adult Hippodamia convergens Guérin‐Méneville (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) and Lygus hesperus Knight (Heteroptera: Miridae) acquired the mark after 5 min, and immature Trichoplusia ni (Hübner) (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae) acquired the marker after 40 min. The third study determined how rapidly H. convergens and L. hesperus acquire bovine casein protein after contact exposure to either alfalfa, Medicago sativa L. (Fabaceae), or lesquerella, Lesquerella fendleri (Watson) (Brassicaceae), plants sprayed with a bovine milk solution. These insects rapidly acquired the casein mark from the plant residue under field conditions. A final study determined how long H. convergens retain casein protein after 24‐h exposure to alfalfa and lesquerella plants containing a 7‐day‐old residue of bovine milk. Approximately 95% of the H. convergens maintained the casein mark for 2 days after removal from each type of plant.     

Dilution of protein‐surfactant complexes: A fluorescence study

Dilution of protein–surfactant complexes is an integrated step in microfluidic protein sizing, where the contribution of free micelles to the overall fluorescence is reduced by dilution. This process can be further improved by establishing an optimum surfactant concentration and quantifying the amount of protein based on the fluorescence intensity. To this end, we study the interaction of proteins with anionic sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) and cationic hexadecyl trimethyl ammonium bromide (CTAB) using a hydrophobic fluorescent dye (sypro orange). We analyze these interactions fluourometrically with bovine serum albumin, carbonic anhydrase, and beta‐galactosidase as model proteins. The fluorescent signature of protein–surfactant complexes at various dilution points shows three distinct regions, surfactant dominant, breakdown, and protein dominant region. Based on the dilution behavior of protein–surfactant complexes, we propose a fluorescence model to explain the contribution of free and bound micelles to the overall fluorescence. Our results show that protein peak is observed at 3 mM SDS as the optimum dilution concentration. Furthermore, we study the effect of protein concentration on fluorescence intensity. In a single protein model with a constant dye quantum yield, the peak height increases with protein concentration. Finally, addition of CTAB to the protein–SDS complex at mole fractions above 0.1 shifts the protein peak from 3 mM to 4 mM SDS. The knowledge of protein–surfactant interactions obtained from these studies provides significant insights for novel detection and quantification techniques in microfluidics.     

Cavities in protein–DNA and protein–RNA interfaces

An analysis of cavities present in protein–DNA and protein–RNA complexes is presented. In terms of the number of cavities and their total volume, the interfaces formed in these complexes are akin to those in transient protein–protein heterocomplexes. With homodimeric proteins protein–DNA interfaces may contain cavities involving both the protein subunits and DNA, and these are more than twice as large as cavities involving a single protein subunit and DNA. A parameter, cavity index, measuring the degree of surface complementarity, indicates that the packing of atoms in protein–protein/DNA/RNA is very similar, but it is about two times less efficient in the permanent interfaces formed between subunits in homodimers. As within the tertiary structure and protein–protein interfaces, protein–DNA interfaces have a higher inclination to be lined by β-sheet residues; from the DNA side, base atoms, in particular those in minor grooves, have a higher tendency to be located in cavities. The larger cavities tend to be less spherical and solvated. A small fraction of water molecules are found to mediate hydrogen-bond interactions with both the components, suggesting their primary role is to fill in the void left due to the local non-complementary nature of the surface patches.     

Structural biology of G protein‐coupled receptor signaling complexes

G protein‐coupled receptors (GPCRs) constitute the largest family of cell surface receptors that mediate numerous cell signaling pathways, and are targets of more than one‐third of clinical drugs. Thanks to the advancement of novel structural biology technologies, high‐resolution structures of GPCRs in complex with their signaling transducers, including G‐protein and arrestin, have been determined. These 3D complex structures have significantly improved our understanding of the molecular mechanism of GPCR signaling and provided a structural basis for signaling‐biased drug discovery targeting GPCRs. Here we summarize structural studies of GPCR signaling complexes with G protein and arrestin using rhodopsin as a model system, and highlight the key features of GPCR conformational states in biased signaling including the sequence motifs of receptor TM6 that determine selective coupling of G proteins, and the phosphorylation codes of GPCRs for arrestin recruitment. We envision the future of GPCR structural biology not only to solve more high‐resolution complex structures but also to show stepwise GPCR signaling complex assembly and disassembly and dynamic process of GPCR signal transduction.