Mammalian Target of Rapamycin Complex 1 (mTORC1) Plays a Role in Pasteurella multocida Toxin (PMT)-induced Protein Synthesis and Proliferation in Swiss 3T3 Cells

Pasteurella multocida toxin (PMT) is a potent mitogen known to activate several signaling pathways via deamidation of a conserved glutamine residue in the α subunit of heterotrimeric G-proteins. However, the detailed mechanism behind mitogenic properties of PMT is unknown. Herein, we show that PMT induces protein synthesis, cell migration, and proliferation in serum-starved Swiss 3T3 cells. Concomitantly PMT induces phosphorylation of ribosomal S6 kinase (S6K1) and its substrate, ribosomal S6 protein (rpS6), in quiescent 3T3 cells. The extent of the phosphorylation is time and PMT concentration dependent, and is inhibited by rapamycin and Torin1, the two specific inhibitors of the mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1 (mTORC1). Interestingly, PMT-mediated mTOR signaling activation was observed in MEF WT but not in Gα_q/11 knock-out cells. These observations are consistent with the data indicating that PMT-induced mTORC1 activation proceeds via the deamidation of Gα_q/11, which leads to the activation of PLCβ to generate diacylglycerol and inositol trisphosphate, two known activators of the PKC pathway. Exogenously added diacylglycerol or phorbol 12-myristate 13-acetate, known activators of PKC, leads to rpS6 phosphorylation in a rapamycin-dependent manner. Furthermore, PMT-induced rpS6 phosphorylation is inhibited by PKC inhibitor, Gö6976. Although PMT induces epidermal growth factor receptor activation, it exerts no effect on PMT-induced rpS6 phosphorylation. Together, our findings reveal for the first time that PMT activates mTORC1 through the Gα_q/11/PLCβ/PKC pathway. The fact that PMT-induced protein synthesis and cell migration is partially inhibited by rapamycin indicates that these processes are in part mediated by the mTORC1 pathway.     

Regulator of G Protein Signaling 2 (RGS2) and RGS4 Form Distinct G Protein-Dependent Complexes with Protease Activated-Receptor 1 (PAR1) in Live Cells

Protease-activated receptor 1 (PAR1) is a G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR) that is activated by natural proteases to regulate many physiological actions. We previously reported that PAR1 couples to G_i, G_q and G₁₂ to activate linked signaling pathways. Regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins serve as GTPase activating proteins to inhibit GPCR/G protein signaling. Some RGS proteins interact directly with certain GPCRs to modulate their signals, though cellular mechanisms dictating selective RGS/GPCR coupling are poorly understood. Here, using bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET), we tested whether RGS2 and RGS4 bind to PAR1 in live COS-7 cells to regulate PAR1/Gα-mediated signaling. We report that PAR1 selectively interacts with either RGS2 or RGS4 in a G protein-dependent manner. Very little BRET activity is observed between PAR1-Venus (PAR1-Ven) and either RGS2-Luciferase (RGS2-Luc) or RGS4-Luc in the absence of Gα. However, in the presence of specific Gα subunits, BRET activity was markedly enhanced between PAR1-RGS2 by Gα_q/11, and PAR1-RGS4 by Gα_o, but not by other Gα subunits. Gα_q/11-YFP/RGS2-Luc BRET activity is promoted by PAR1 and is markedly enhanced by agonist (TFLLR) stimulation. However, PAR1-Ven/RGS-Luc BRET activity was blocked by a PAR1 mutant (R205A) that eliminates PAR1-G_q/11 coupling. The purified intracellular third loop of PAR1 binds directly to purified His-RGS2 or His-RGS4. In cells, RGS2 and RGS4 inhibited PAR1/Gα-mediated calcium and MAPK/ERK signaling, respectively, but not RhoA signaling. Our findings indicate that RGS2 and RGS4 interact directly with PAR1 in Gα-dependent manner to modulate PAR1/Gα-mediated signaling, and highlight a cellular mechanism for selective GPCR/G protein/RGS coupling.     

Gαo/i-stimulated proteosomal degradation of RGS20: A mechanism for temporal integration of Gs and Gi pathways

The G_s and G_i pathways interact to control the levels of intracellular cAMP. Although coincident signaling through G_s and G_i-coupled receptors can attenuate G_s-stimulated cAMP levels, it is not known if prior activation of the G_i pathway can affect signaling by G_s-coupled receptors. We have found that activated Gα_o/i interact with RGS20, a GTPase activating protein for members of the Gα_ο/i family. Interaction between Gα_o/i and RGS20 results in decreased cellular levels of RGS20. This decrease was induced by activated Gα_o and Gα_i2 but not by Gα_q, Gα_i1 or Gα_i3. The Gα_o/i-induced decrease in RGS20 can be blocked by proteasomal inhibitors lactacystin or MG132. Activated Gα_o stimulates the ubiquitination of RGS20. The serotonin-1A receptor that couples to G_o/i reduces the levels of RGS20 and this effect is blocked by lactacystin, suggesting that G_o/i promotes the degradation of RGS20. Expression of RGS20 attenuates the inhibition of β-adrenergic receptor-induced cAMP levels mediated by the serotonin-1A receptor. Prior activation of the serotonin-1A receptor results in loss of the RGS20-mediated attenuation, and the loss of attenuation is blocked when lactacystin is included during the prior treatment. These observations suggest that G_o/i-coupled receptors, by stimulating the degradation of RGS20, can regulate how subsequent activation of the G_s and G_i pathways controls cellular cAMP levels, thus allowing for signal integration.     

Structure of the Regulator of G Protein Signaling 8 (RGS8)-Gαq Complex: MOLECULAR BASIS FOR Gα SELECTIVITY*

Regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins interact with activated Gα subunits via their RGS domains and accelerate the hydrolysis of GTP. Although the R4 subfamily of RGS proteins generally accepts both Gα_i/o and Gα_q/11 subunits as substrates, the R7 and R12 subfamilies select against Gα_q/11. In contrast, only one RGS protein, RGS2, is known to be selective for Gα_q/11. The molecular basis for this selectivity is not clear. Previously, the crystal structure of RGS2 in complex with Gα_q revealed a non-canonical interaction that could be due to interfacial differences imposed by RGS2, the Gα subunit, or both. To resolve this ambiguity, the 2.6 Å crystal structure of RGS8, an R4 subfamily member, was determined in complex with Gα_q. RGS8 adopts the same pose on Gα_q as it does when bound to Gα_i3, indicating that the non-canonical interaction of RGS2 with Gα_q is due to unique features of RGS2. Based on the RGS8-Gα_q structure, residues in RGS8 that contact a unique α-helical domain loop of Gα_q were converted to those typically found in R12 subfamily members, and the reverse substitutions were introduced into RGS10, an R12 subfamily member. Although these substitutions perturbed their ability to stimulate GTP hydrolysis, they did not reverse selectivity. Instead, selectivity for Gα_q seems more likely determined by whether strong contacts can be maintained between α6 of the RGS domain and Switch III of Gα_q, regions of high sequence and conformational diversity in both protein families.     

Na/H Exchanger Regulatory Factors Control Parathyroid Hormone Receptor Signaling by Facilitating Differential Activation of Gα Protein Subunits

The Na/H exchanger regulatory factors, NHERF1 and NHERF2, are adapter proteins involved in targeting and assembly of protein complexes. The parathyroid hormone receptor (PTHR) interacts with both NHERF1 and NHERF2. The NHERF proteins toggle PTHR signaling from predominantly activation of adenylyl cyclase in the absence of NHERF to principally stimulation of phospholipase C when the NHERF proteins are expressed. We hypothesized that this signaling switch occurs at the level of the G protein. We measured G protein activation by [³⁵S]GTPγS binding and Gα subtype-specific immunoprecipitation using three different cellular models of PTHR signaling. These studies revealed that PTHR interactions with NHERF1 enhance receptor-mediated stimulation of Gα_q but have no effect on stimulation of Gα_i or Gα_s. In contrast, PTHR associations with NHERF2 enhance receptor-mediated stimulation of both Gα_q and Gα_i but decrease stimulation of Gα_s. Consistent with these functional data, NHERF2 formed cellular complexes with both Gα_q and Gα_i, whereas NHERF1 was found to interact only with Gα_q. These findings demonstrate that NHERF interactions regulate PTHR signaling at the level of G proteins and that NHERF1 and NHERF2 exhibit isotype-specific effects on G protein activation.     

A New Generation of FRET Sensors for Robust Measurement of Gαi1, Gαi2 and Gαi3 Activation Kinetics in Single Cells

G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) can activate a heterotrimeric G-protein complex with subsecond kinetics. Genetically encoded biosensors based on Förster resonance energy transfer (FRET) are ideally suited for the study of such fast signaling events in single living cells. Here we report on the construction and characterization of three FRET biosensors for the measurement of Gα_i1, Gα_i2 and Gα_i3 activation. To enable quantitative long-term imaging of FRET biosensors with high dynamic range, fluorescent proteins with enhanced photophysical properties are required. Therefore, we use the currently brightest and most photostable CFP variant, mTurquoise2, as donor fused to Gα_i subunit, and cp173Venus fused to the Gγ₂ subunit as acceptor. The Gα_i FRET biosensors constructs are expressed together with Gβ₁ from a single plasmid, providing preferred relative expression levels with reduced variation in mammalian cells. The Gα_i FRET sensors showed a robust response to activation of endogenous or over-expressed alpha-2A-adrenergic receptors, which was inhibited by pertussis toxin. Moreover, we observed activation of the Gα_i FRET sensor in single cells upon stimulation of several GPCRs, including the LPA₂, M₃ and BK₂ receptor. Furthermore, we show that the sensors are well suited to extract kinetic parameters from fast measurements in the millisecond time range. This new generation of FRET biosensors for Gα_i1, Gα_i2 and Gα_i3 activation will be valuable for live-cell measurements that probe Gα_i activation.     

Modulation of distinct isoforms of L-type calcium channels by Gq-coupled receptors in Xenopus oocytes: Antagonistic effects of Gβγ and protein kinase C

L-type voltage dependent Ca²⁺ channels (L-VDCCs; Ca_v1.2) are crucial in cardiovascular physiology. In heart and smooth muscle, hormones and transmitters operating via G_q enhance L-VDCC currents via essential protein kinase C (PKC) involvement. Heterologous reconstitution studies in Xenopus oocytes suggested that PKC and G_q-coupled receptors increased L-VDCC currents only in cardiac long N-terminus (NT) isoforms of α_1C, whereas known smooth muscle short-NT isoforms were inhibited by PKC and G_q activators. We report a novel regulation of the long-NT α_1C isoform by Gβγ. Gβγ inhibited whereas a Gβγ scavenger protein augmented the G_q- but not phorbol ester-mediated enhancement of channel activity, suggesting that Gβγ acts upstream from PKC. In vitro binding experiments reveal binding of both Gβγ and PKC to α_1C-NT. However, PKC modulation was not altered by mutations of multiple potential phosphorylation sites in the NT, and was attenuated by a mutation of C-terminally located serine S1928. The insertion of exon 9a in intracellular loop 1 rendered the short-NT α_1C sensitive to PKC stimulation and to Gβγ scavenging. Our results suggest a complex antagonistic interplay between G_q-activated PKC and Gβγ in regulation of L-VDCC, in which multiple cytosolic segments of α_1C are involved.     

A Gs-RhoGEF interaction: An old G protein finds a new job

The heterotrimeric G proteins are known to have a variety of downstream effectors, but G_s was long thought to be specifically coupled to adenylyl cyclases. A new study indicates that activated G_s can also directly interact with a guanine nucleotide exchange factor for Rho family small GTPases, PDZ-RhoGEF. This novel interaction mediates activation of the small G protein Cdc42 by G_s-coupled GPCRs, inducing cytoskeletal rearrangements and formation of filopodia-like structures. Furthermore, overexpression of a minimal PDZ-RhoGEF fragment can down-regulate cAMP signaling, suggesting that this effector competes with canonical signaling. This first demonstration that the Gα_s subfamily regulates activity of Rho GTPases extends our understanding of Gα_s activity and establishes RhoGEF coupling as a universal Gα function.

The canonical G protein pathway consists of a cell surface receptor, a heterotrimeric G protein, and an effector protein that controls signaling within the cells. This fundamental paradigm, familiar to every biologist, is rooted in discoveries by the laboratories of Sutherland, Rodbell, and Gilman, which in the 1970s and 1980s dissected biochemical mechanisms of adenylyl cyclase activation by hormones. Their breakthrough came after experiments showing that the G protein G_s is essential to transfer agonist stimulation from the receptor to adenylyl cyclase (1). This G protein consists of the ∼42-kDa α subunit, which binds and hydrolyzes GTP, and the permanently associated dimer of 35-kDa β and ∼10-kDa γ subunits (Gβγ). Their findings helped establish a canonical model in which the agonist-bound receptor causes the G protein to release GDP, and the heterotrimer dissociates into Gα-GTP and free Gβγ; in this state, the G protein can activate its effector (i.e. Gα_s will activate adenylyl cyclase until GTP is hydrolyzed). Although the rod photoreceptor G protein, transducin, was discovered by that time (2), the ubiquitously expressed G_s can be considered the founding member of the G protein family.The subsequent cloning and identification of the other three families (G_i, G_q, and G₁₂) completed the rough map of G protein–mediated transduction. These initial studies suggested that the α subunits were responsible for activation of one type of effector (e.g. Gα_s for adenylyl cyclase and cAMP; Gα_q for phospholipase C, phosphoinositides, and Ca²⁺; and Gα_i for ion channels and inhibition of adenylyl cyclase), whereas the free Gβγ complexes interact with a remarkably large number of binding partners, including some effector enzymes and ion channels (3). Later, Gα₁₂ and Gα₁₃ were found to regulate a distinct type of effectors, the RhoGEFs (4, 5). These multidomain proteins contain pleckstrin homology (PH) domains, which facilitate their membrane localization, and Dbl homology (DH) domains, which catalyze GDP-for-GTP exchange (guanine nucleotide exchange factor; GEF) in the Rho family of small (∼20-kDa) G proteins. At the time, the G₁₂-RhoGEF pathway seemed odd as it contained two G proteins: the receptor-activated “large” G₁₂ class protein and the “small” Rho G protein, which is activated by RhoGEF. However, it was then discovered that Gα_q could activate a RhoGEF called Trio (6), and that Gβγ complexes activate other RhoGEFs, indicating that this pathway, if unusual, is at least popular. Gα_s, however, mostly appeared to be faithful to its originally determined role—to stimulate adenylyl cyclase(s)—possibly contributing to the enduring perception that regulation of a second messenger–generating enzyme is the “real” function of a heterotrimeric G protein.In the current issue of JBC, Castillo-Kauil et al. (7) force a reexamination of the existing canon, presenting data that show Gα_s can also interact with a specific RhoGEF, in this case PDZ-RhoGEF (PRG). The authors made this discovery as part of an examination of the regulation of cell shape by the Rho family. They began by expressing a series of short constructs of three RhoGEF proteins, p115RhoGEF, PRG, and LARG, all of which activated RhoA as expected, promoting cell contraction. However, they noticed that the DH/PH domain of PRG also activated Cdc42 and induced filopodia-like cell protrusions. To investigate which G protein is responsible for activation of this Cdc42-mediated pathway, they overexpressed constitutively active mutants of different Gα subunits. These mutants are stabilized in the active GTP-bound state due to substitution of the glutamine residue crucial for GTP hydrolysis. Surprisingly, the PRG-Cdc42 pathway was stimulated by Gα_sQ227L, the one Gα subtype not known for interaction with RhoGEFs. Furthermore, they showed that binding of PRG to Cdc42 was promoted only by G_s-coupled receptors, and not by G_q- or G_i-coupled GPCRs. The authors then investigated the PRG site responsible for the interaction with Gα_s, narrowing it down to the isolated PRG DH and PH domains and their linker region. A construct encompassing these domains was able to inhibit (i) GPCR-mediated activation of Cdc42, (ii) the Gα_sQ227L-promoted interaction of PRG with Cdc42, and (iii) some protein phosphorylation events downstream of the canonical cAMP pathway. Taken together, their work identifies PRG as a novel effector for G_s; the Gα_s-PRG interaction mediates activation of Rho family protein Cdc42, leading to cytoskeletal remodeling.The unexpected results of Castillo-Kauil et al. open up new opportunities to explore this mechanism at different levels of biology. The experiments described in the paper were performed in vitro using cultured cells, imaging, and pulldown of protein complexes containing the overexpressed Gα_s Q227L mutant. Considering the multitude of G_s-coupled receptors and RhoGEFs in the body (8, 9), it will be important to understand the physiological context where the new G_s-mediated pathway plays a significant role. This will require experimentation in vivo and possibly reevaluation of the phenotypes associated with known pathogenic mutations in Gα_s (GNAS) and other relevant genes. At the molecular level, it would be important to delineate the biochemical mechanisms of Gα_s interaction with PRG. For example, at what stage of the GTP/GDP cycle does Gα_s bind to PRG: in the GTP-bound state, which also activates adenylate cyclase, or in the transition state (i.e. just before the terminal phosphate of GTP is removed)? Indeed, there is precedent for proteins that bind preferentially with the transition state—specifically RGS proteins, which accelerate the GTPase reaction. Another possibility is that, by analogy with p115RhoGEF, which stimulates GTPase activity of Gα₁₂ and Gα₁₃, PRG (and other RhoGEFs with similar DH-PH sequences) can influence interaction of Gα_s with nucleotides, Gβγ, and other partners.Since defining the receptor, G protein, and effector as the three essential members of the G protein pathway, researchers have discovered many additional proteins that regulate the amplitude and duration of the stimulus and/or participate in cross-talk with other signaling circuits. These “new” proteins include arrestins, receptor kinases, nonreceptor exchange factors, GTPase-activating proteins, special chaperones, etc. Thus, in a way, discovering a novel binding partner for a signaling molecule is not as surprising as it would have been 20 years ago. However, the new partner identified by Castillo-Kauil et al. makes the result of extra significance; until now, we knew that three of four G protein subfamilies could regulate Rho GTPases by activating RhoGEFs: G₁₂ and G_q via their α subunits and G_i via the Gβγ subunits (10). The demonstration that the G_s subfamily is no exception shows that activation of RhoGEFs by heterotrimeric G proteins may be a truly universal mechanism (Fig. 1). The significance of this insight is that the multitude of biological processes regulated by Rho-GTPase networks can potentially respond to the entire repertoire of GPCR-mediated stimuli.Open in a separate windowFigure 1.Activation of the Rho family by heterotrimeric G proteins. The Rho family of small GTPases is activated by RhoGEF proteins, some of which can be stimulated by heterotrimeric G proteins. Of four families of heterotrimeric G proteins, three (G₁₂, G_q, and G_i, shown in shades of gray) were known to activate certain RhoGEFs. The new results (highlighted in orange) (7) show that G_s, the G protein known to stimulate production of cAMP, can also stimulate a particular RhoGEF; this suggests that the Rho GTPases can potentially be stimulated by the multitude of signals from the entire class of GPCRs, including those coupled to G_s. IP₃, inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate.

Funding and additional information—This work was supported in part by National Institutes of Health Grant R56DK119262 (to V. Z. S.). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.Conflict of interest—The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest with the contents of this article.

Abbreviations—The abbreviations used are:

PH

pleckstrin homology

DH

Dbl homology

GEF

guanine nucleotide exchange factor

PRG

PDZ-RhoGEF

GPCR

G protein–coupled receptor.

     

Integration of Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy,Fluorescence Spectroscopy,Steady-state Kinetics and Molecular Dynamics Simulations of Gαi1 Distinguishes between the GTP Hydrolysis and GDP Release Mechanism

Gα subunits are central molecular switches in cells. They are activated by G protein-coupled receptors that exchange GDP for GTP, similar to small GTPase activation mechanisms. Gα subunits are turned off by GTP hydrolysis. For the first time we employed time-resolved FTIR difference spectroscopy to investigate the molecular reaction mechanisms of Gα_i1. FTIR spectroscopy is a powerful tool that monitors reactions label free with high spatio-temporal resolution. In contrast to common multiple turnover assays, FTIR spectroscopy depicts the single turnover GTPase reaction without nucleotide exchange/Mg²⁺ binding bias. Global fit analysis resulted in one apparent rate constant of 0.02 s⁻¹ at 15 °C. Isotopic labeling was applied to assign the individual phosphate vibrations for α-, β-, and γ-GTP (1243, 1224, and 1156 cm⁻¹, respectively), α- and β-GDP (1214 and 1134/1103 cm⁻¹, respectively), and free phosphate (1078/991 cm⁻¹). In contrast to Ras·GAP catalysis, the bond breakage of the β-γ-phosphate but not the P_i release is rate-limiting in the GTPase reaction. Complementary common GTPase assays were used. Reversed phase HPLC provided multiple turnover rates and tryptophan fluorescence provided nucleotide exchange rates. Experiments were complemented by molecular dynamics simulations. This broad approach provided detailed insights at atomic resolution and allows now to identify key residues of Gα_i1 in GTP hydrolysis and nucleotide exchange. Mutants of the intrinsic arginine finger (Gα_i1-R178S) affected exclusively the hydrolysis reaction. The effect of nucleotide binding (Gα_i1-D272N) and Ras-like/all-α interface coordination (Gα_i1-D229N/Gα_i1-D231N) on the nucleotide exchange reaction was furthermore elucidated.     

Voltage-dependent regulation of CaV2.2 channels by Gq-coupled receptor is facilitated by membrane-localized β subunit

G protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs) signal through molecular messengers, such as Gβγ, Ca²⁺, and phosphatidylinositol 4,5-bisphosphate (PIP₂), to modulate N-type voltage-gated Ca²⁺ (Ca_V2.2) channels, playing a crucial role in regulating synaptic transmission. However, the cellular pathways through which G_qPCRs inhibit Ca_V2.2 channel current are not completely understood. Here, we report that the location of Ca_V β subunits is key to determining the voltage dependence of Ca_V2.2 channel modulation by G_qPCRs. Application of the muscarinic agonist oxotremorine-M to tsA-201 cells expressing M₁ receptors, together with Ca_V N-type α1B, α2δ1, and membrane-localized β2a subunits, shifted the current-voltage relationship for Ca_V2.2 activation 5 mV to the right and slowed current activation. Muscarinic suppression of Ca_V2.2 activity was relieved by strong depolarizing prepulses. Moreover, when the C terminus of β-adrenergic receptor kinase (which binds Gβγ) was coexpressed with N-type channels, inhibition of Ca_V2.2 current after M₁ receptor activation was markedly reduced and delayed, whereas the delay between PIP₂ hydrolysis and inhibition of Ca_V2.2 current was decreased. When the Gβγ-insensitive Ca_V2.2 α1C-1B chimera was expressed, voltage-dependent inhibition of calcium current was virtually abolished, suggesting that M₁ receptors act through Gβγ to inhibit Ca_V2.2 channels bearing membrane-localized Ca_V β2a subunits. Expression of cytosolic β subunits such as β2b and β3, as well as the palmitoylation-negative mutant β2a(C3,4S), reduced the voltage dependence of M₁ muscarinic inhibition of Ca_V2.2 channels, whereas it increased inhibition mediated by PIP₂ depletion. Together, our results indicate that, with membrane-localized Ca_V β subunits, Ca_V2.2 channels are subject to Gβγ-mediated voltage-dependent inhibition, whereas cytosol-localized β subunits confer more effective PIP₂-mediated voltage-independent regulation. Thus, the voltage dependence of G_qPCR regulation of calcium channels can be determined by the location of isotype-specific Ca_V β subunits.     

Designer proteins that competitively inhibit Gαq by targeting its effector site

During signal transduction, the G protein, Gα_q, binds and activates phospholipase C-β isozymes. Several diseases have been shown to manifest upon constitutively activating mutation of Gα_q, such as uveal melanoma. Therefore, methods are needed to directly inhibit Gα_q. Previously, we demonstrated that a peptide derived from a helix-turn-helix (HTH) region of PLC-β3 (residues 852–878) binds Gα_q with low micromolar affinity and inhibits Gα_q by competing with full-length PLC-β isozymes for binding. Since the HTH peptide is unstructured in the absence of Gα_q, we hypothesized that embedding the HTH in a folded protein might stabilize the binding-competent conformation and further improve the potency of inhibition. Using the molecular modeling software Rosetta, we searched the Protein Data Bank for proteins with similar HTH structures near their surface. The candidate proteins were computationally docked against Gα_q, and their surfaces were redesigned to stabilize this interaction. We then used yeast surface display to affinity mature the designs. The most potent design bound Gα_q/i with high affinity in vitro (K_D = 18 nM) and inhibited activation of PLC-β isozymes in HEK293 cells. We anticipate that our genetically encoded inhibitor will help interrogate the role of Gα_q in healthy and disease model systems. Our work demonstrates that grafting interaction motifs into folded proteins is a powerful approach for generating inhibitors of protein–protein interactions.     

Pivotal Role of Extended Linker 2 in the Activation of Gα by G Protein-coupled Receptor

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) relay extracellular signals mainly to heterotrimeric G-proteins (Gαβγ) and they are the most successful drug targets. The mechanisms of G-protein activation by GPCRs are not well understood. Previous studies have revealed a signal relay route from a GPCR via the C-terminal α5-helix of Gα to the guanine nucleotide-binding pocket. Recent structural and biophysical studies uncover a role for the opening or rotating of the α-helical domain of Gα during the activation of Gα by a GPCR. Here we show that β-adrenergic receptors activate eight Gα_s mutant proteins (from a screen of 66 Gα_s mutants) that are unable to bind Gβγ subunits in cells. Five of these eight mutants are in the αF/Linker 2/β2 hinge region (extended Linker 2) that connects the Ras-like GTPase domain and the α-helical domain of Gα_s. This extended Linker 2 is the target site of a natural product inhibitor of G_q. Our data show that the extended Linker 2 is critical for Gα activation by GPCRs. We propose that a GPCR via its intracellular loop 2 directly interacts with the β₂/β₃ loop of Gα to communicate to Linker 2, resulting in the opening and closing of the α-helical domain and the release of GDP during G-protein activation.     

Coordinated control of sensitivity by two splice variants of Gαo in retinal ON bipolar cells

The high sensitivity of scotopic vision depends on the efficient retinal processing of single photon responses generated by individual rod photoreceptors. At the first synapse in the mammalian retina, rod outputs are pooled by a rod “ON” bipolar cell, which uses a G-protein signaling cascade to enhance the fidelity of the single photon response under conditions where few rods absorb light. Here we show in mouse rod bipolar cells that both splice variants of the G_o α subunit, Gα_o1 and Gα_o2, mediate light responses under the control of mGluR6 receptors, and their coordinated action is critical for maximizing sensitivity. We found that the light response of rod bipolar cells was primarily mediated by Gα_o1, but the loss of Gα_o2 caused a reduction in the light sensitivity. This reduced sensitivity was not attributable to the reduction in the total number of G_o α subunits, or the altered balance of expression levels between the two splice variants. These results indicate that Gα_o1 and Gα_o2 both mediate a depolarizing light response in rod bipolar cells without occluding each other’s actions, suggesting they might act independently on a common effector. Thus, Gα_o2 plays a role in improving the sensitivity of rod bipolar cells through its action with Gα_o1. The coordinated action of two splice variants of a single Gα may represent a novel mechanism for the fine control of G-protein activity.     

Regulator of G protein signaling 2 inhibits Gαq-dependent uveal melanoma cell growth

Activating mutations in Gα_q/11 are a major driver of uveal melanoma (UM), the most common intraocular cancer in adults. While progress has recently been made in targeting Gα_q/11 for UM therapy, the crucial role for these proteins in normal physiology and their high structural similarity with many other important GTPase proteins renders this approach challenging. The aim of the current study was to validate whether a key regulator of Gq signaling, regulator of G protein signaling 2 (RGS2), can inhibit Gα_q-mediated UM cell growth. We used two UM cell lines, 92.1 and Mel-202, which both contain the most common activating mutation Gα_q^Q209L and developed stable cell lines with doxycycline-inducible RGS2 protein expression. Using cell viability assays, we showed that RGS2 could inhibit cell growth in both of these UM cell lines. We also found that this effect was independent of the canonical GTPase-activating protein activity of RGS2 but was dependent on the association between RGS2 and Gα_q. Furthermore, RGS2 induction resulted in only partial reduction in cell growth as compared to siRNA-mediated Gαq knockdown, perhaps because RGS2 was only able to reduce mitogen-activated protein kinase signaling downstream of phospholipase Cβ, while leaving activation of the Hippo signaling mediators yes-associated protein 1/TAZ, the other major pathway downstream of Gα_q, unaffected. Taken together, our data indicate that RGS2 can inhibit UM cancer cell growth by associating with Gα_q^Q209L as a partial effector antagonist.     

Crystal Structures of the Scaffolding Protein LGN Reveal the General Mechanism by Which GoLoco Binding Motifs Inhibit the Release of GDP from Gαi

GoLoco (GL) motif-containing proteins regulate G protein signaling by binding to Gα subunit and acting as guanine nucleotide dissociation inhibitors. GLs of LGN are also known to bind the GDP form of Gα_i/o during asymmetric cell division. Here, we show that the C-terminal GL domain of LGN binds four molecules of Gα_i·GDP. The crystal structures of Gα_i·GDP in complex with LGN GL3 and GL4, respectively, reveal distinct GL/Gα_i interaction features when compared with the only high resolution structure known with GL/Gα_i interaction between RGS14 and Gα_i1. Only a few residues C-terminal to the conserved GL sequence are required for LGN GLs to bind to Gα_i·GDP. A highly conserved “double Arg finger” sequence (RΨ(D/E)(D/E)QR) is responsible for LGN GL to bind to GDP bound to Gα_i. Together with the sequence alignment, we suggest that the LGN GL/Gα_i interaction represents a general binding mode between GL motifs and Gα_i. We also show that LGN GLs are potent guanine nucleotide dissociation inhibitors.     

Distinct Kinetic and Spatial Patterns of Protein Kinase C (PKC)- and Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR)-dependent Activation of Extracellular Signal-regulated Kinases 1 and 2 by Human Nicotinic Acid Receptor GPR109A

Nicotinic acid (niacin) has been widely used as a lipid-lowering drug for several decades, and recently, orphan G protein-coupled receptor GPR109A has been identified as a receptor for niacin. Mechanistic investigations have shown that, upon niacin activation, GPR109A couples to a G_i protein and inhibits adenylate cyclase activity, leading to inhibition of liberation of free fatty acid. However, the underlying molecular mechanisms for GPR109A signaling remain largely unknown. Using CHO-K1 cells stably expressing GPR109A and A431 cells, which are a human epidermoid cell line with high levels of endogenous expression of functional GPR109A receptors, we found that activation of extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1 and 2 (ERK1/2) by niacin was rapid, peaking at 5 min, and was significantly blocked by pertussis toxin. Furthermore, time course experiments with different kinase inhibitors demonstrated that GPR109A induced ERK1/2 activation via the matrix metalloproteinase/epidermal growth factor receptor transactivation pathway at both early and later time points (2–5 min); this pathway was distinct from the PKC pathway-mediated ERK1/2 phosphorylation that occurs at early time points (≤2 min) in response to niacin. Overexpression of Gβγ subunit scavengers βARK1-CT and the Gα subunit of transducin led to a significant reduction of ERK1/2 phosphorylation, suggesting a critical role for βγ subunits in GPR109A-activated ERK1/2 phosphorylation. Using arrestin-2/3-specific siRNA and an internalization-deficient GPR109A mutant, we found that arrestin-2 and arrestin-3 were not involved in GPR109A-mediated ERK1/2 activation. In conclusion, our findings demonstrate that upon binding to niacin GPR109A receptors initially activate G_i, leading to dissociation of the Gβγ subunit from activated G_i, and subsequently induce ERK1/2 activation via two distinct pathways, one PKC-dependent pathway occurring at a peak time of ≤2 min and the other matrix metalloproteinase-dependent growth factor receptor transactivation occurring at both early and later time points (2–5 min).