RGS6 interacts with SCG10 and promotes neuronal differentiation. Role of the G gamma subunit-like (GGL) domain of RGS6

RGS proteins comprise a large family of proteins named for their ability to negatively regulate heterotrimeric G protein signaling. RGS6 is a member of the R7 RGS protein subfamily endowed with DEP (disheveled, Egl-10, pleckstrin) and GGL (G protein gamma subunit-like) domains in addition to the RGS domain present in all RGS proteins. RGS6 exists in multiple splice variant forms with identical RGS domains but possessing complete or incomplete GGL domains and distinct N- and C-terminal domains. Here we report that RGS6 interacts with SCG10, a neuronal growth-associated protein. Using yeast two-hybrid analysis to map protein interaction domains, we identified the GGL domain of RGS6 as the SCG10-interacting region and the stathmin domain of SCG10 as the RGS6-interacting region. Pull-down studies in COS-7 cells expressing SCG10 and RGS6 splice variants revealed that SCG10 co-precipitated RGS6 proteins with complete GGL domains but not those with incomplete GGL domains, and vice versa. Expression of SCG10-interacting forms of RGS6 with SCG10 in PC12 or COS-7 cells resulted in co-localization of both proteins. RGS6 potentiated the ability of SCG10 to disrupt microtubule organization in PC12 and COS-7 cells. Furthermore, expression of SCG10 and RGS6 each enhanced NGF-induced PC12 cell differentiation, and co-expression of SCG10 with RGS6 produced synergistic effects on NGF-induced PC12 differentiation. These effects of RGS6 on microtubules and neuronal differentiation were observed only with RGS6 proteins with complete GGL domains. Mutation of a critical residue required for interaction of RGS proteins with G proteins did not affect the ability of RGS6 to induce neuronal differentiation. These findings identify SCG10 as a binding partner for the GGL domain of RGS6 and provide the first evidence for regulatory effects of an RGS protein on neuronal differentiation. Our results suggest that RGS6 induces neuronal differentiation by a novel mechanism involving interaction of SCG10 with its GGL domain and independent of RGS6 interactions with heterotrimeric G proteins.     

Co-expression of Gbeta5 enhances the function of two Ggamma subunit-like domain-containing regulators of G protein signaling proteins

Regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) stimulate the GTPase activity of G protein Galpha subunits and probably play additional roles. Some RGS proteins contain a Ggamma subunit-like (GGL) domain, which mediates a specific interaction with Gbeta5. The role of such interactions in RGS function is unclear. RGS proteins can accelerate the kinetics of coupling of G protein-coupled receptors to G-protein-gated inwardly rectifying K(+) (GIRK) channels. Therefore, we coupled m2-muscarinic acetylcholine receptors to GIRK channels in Xenopus oocytes to evaluate the effect of Gbeta5 on RGS function. Co-expression of either RGS7 or RGS9 modestly accelerated GIRK channel kinetics. When Gbeta5 was co-expressed with either RGS7 or RGS9, the acceleration of GIRK channel kinetics was strongly increased over that produced by RGS7 or RGS9 alone. RGS function was not enhanced by co-expression of Gbeta1, and co-expression of Gbeta5 alone had no effect on GIRK channel kinetics. Gbeta5 did not modulate the function either of RGS4, an RGS protein that lacks a GGL domain, or of a functional RGS7 construct in which the GGL domain was omitted. Enhancement of RGS7 function by Gbeta5 was not a consequence of an increase in the amount of plasma membrane or cytosolic RGS7 protein.     

Intramolecular interaction between the DEP domain of RGS7 and the Gbeta5 subunit

The R7 family of RGS proteins (RGS6, -7, -9, -11) is characterized by the presence of three domains: DEP, GGL, and RGS. The RGS domain interacts with Galpha subunits and exhibits GAP activity. The GGL domain permanently associates with Gbeta5. The DEP domain interacts with the membrane anchoring protein, R7BP. Here we provide evidence for a novel interaction within this complex: between the DEP domain and Gbeta5. GST fusion of the RGS7 DEP domain (GST-R7DEP) binds to both native and recombinant Gbeta5-RGS7, recombinant Gbetagamma complexes, and monomeric Gbeta5 and Gbeta1 subunits. Co-immunoprecipitation and FRET assays supported the GST pull-down experiments. GST-R7DEP reduced FRET between CFP-Gbeta5 and YFP-RGS7, indicating that the DEP-Gbeta5 interaction is dynamic. In transfected cells, R7BP had no effect on the Gbeta5/RGS7 pull down by GST-R7DEP. The DEP domain of RGS9 did not bind to Gbeta5. Substitution of RGS7 Glu-73 and Asp-74 for the corresponding Ser and Gly residues (ED/SG mutation) of RGS9 diminished the DEP-Gbeta5 interaction. In the absence of R7BP both the wild-type RGS7 and the ED/SG mutant attenuated muscarinic M3 receptor-mediated Ca2+ mobilization. In the presence of R7BP, wild-type RGS7 lost this inhibitory activity, whereas the ED/SG mutant remained active. Taken together, our results are consistent with the following model. The Gbeta5-RGS7 molecule can exist in two conformations: "closed" and "open", when the DEP domain and Gbeta5 subunit either do or do not interact. The closed conformation appears to be less active with respect to its effect on Gq-mediated signaling than the open conformation.     

Regulator of G-protein signaling 3 (RGS3) inhibits Gbeta1gamma 2-induced inositol phosphate production, mitogen-activated protein kinase activation, and Akt activation

Regulator of G-protein signaling 3 (RGS3) enhances the intrinsic rate at which Galpha(i) and Galpha(q) hydrolyze GTP to GDP, thereby limiting the duration in which GTP-Galpha(i) and GTP-Galpha(q) can activate effectors. Since GDP-Galpha subunits rapidly combine with free Gbetagamma subunits to reform inactive heterotrimeric G-proteins, RGS3 and other RGS proteins may also reduce the amount of Gbetagamma subunits available for effector interactions. Although RGS6, RGS7, and RGS11 bind Gbeta(5) in the absence of a Ggamma subunit, RGS proteins are not known to directly influence Gbetagamma signaling. Here we show that RGS3 binds Gbeta(1)gamma(2) subunits and limits their ability to trigger the production of inositol phosphates and the activation of Akt and mitogen-activated protein kinase. Co-expression of RGS3 with Gbeta(1)gamma(2) inhibits Gbeta(1)gamma(2)-induced inositol phosphate production and Akt activation in COS-7 cells and mitogen-activated protein kinase activation in HEK 293 cells. The inhibition of Gbeta(1)gamma(2) signaling does not require an intact RGS domain but depends upon two regions in RGS3 located between acids 313 and 390 and between 391 and 458. Several other RGS proteins do not affect Gbeta(1)gamma(2) signaling in these assays. Consistent with the in vivo results, RGS3 inhibits Gbetagamma-mediated activation of phospholipase Cbeta in vitro. Thus, RGS3 may limit Gbetagamma signaling not only by virtue of its GTPase-activating protein activity for Galpha subunits, but also by directly interfering with the activation of effectors.     

Enhancement of pheromone response by RGS9 and Gbeta5 in yeast

The G-protein gamma-subunit-like (GGL) domain present within a subfamily of RGS proteins binds specifically to Gbeta5. This interaction and resulting biological effect impacts the standard model of heterotrimeric G-protein signaling. It has been hypothesized that the RGS/Gbeta5 may potentially substitute for Gbetagamma in the heterotrimeric complex. Saccharomyces cerevisiae pheromone responsive mating signaling pathway is primarily driven by Gbetagamma. We evaluated GGL containing RGS9 and RGS7 for functional complementation in a RGS (sst2Delta) knockout yeast strain. The potential of Gbeta5 to augment the function of these RGS proteins was also evaluated. While Gbeta5 had no effect on RGS7, coexpression of Gbeta5 with RGS9 enhanced cell cycle arrest, suggesting that under certain conditions, RGS9 and Gbeta5 may possibly function as betagamma dimer. Furthermore, we demonstrate that Gbeta5 can complement a ste4Delta, the yeast beta-subunit, thus providing the first evidence of functional complementation of a mammalian Gbeta.     

Noncatalytic domains of RGS9-1.Gbeta 5L play a decisive role in establishing its substrate specificity

The complex between the photoreceptor-specific regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) protein, RGS9-1, and type 5 G protein beta-subunit, Gbeta5L, regulates the duration of the cellular response to light by stimulating the GTPase activity of G protein, transducin. An important property of RGS9-1.Gbeta5L is that it interacts specifically with transducin bound to its effector, cGMP phosphodiesterase, rather than with transducin alone. The minimal structure within the RGS9-1.Gbeta5L complex capable of activating transducin GTPase is the catalytic domain of RGS9. This domain itself is also able to discriminate between free and effector-bound transducin but to a lesser degree than RGS9-1.Gbeta5L. The goal of this study was to determine whether other, noncatalytic domains of RGS9-1.Gbeta5L enhance the intrinsic specificity of the catalytic domain or whether they set the specificity of RGS9-1.Gbeta5L regardless of the specificity of its catalytic domain. We found that a double L353E/R360P amino acid substitution reversed the specificity of the recombinant catalytic domain but did not reverse the specificity of RGS9-1.Gbeta5L. However, the degree of discrimination between free and effector-bound transducin was reduced. Therefore, noncatalytic domains of RGS9-1.Gbeta5L play a decisive role in establishing its substrate specificity, yet the high degree of this specificity observed under physiological conditions requires an additional contribution from the catalytic domain.     

RGS6, RGS7, RGS9, and RGS11 stimulate GTPase activity of Gi family G-proteins with differential selectivity and maximal activity

Regulator of G-protein signaling (RGS) proteins are GTPase activating proteins (GAPs) of heterotrimeric G-proteins that alter the amplitude and kinetics of receptor-promoted signaling. In this study we defined the G-protein alpha-subunit selectivity of purified Sf9 cell-derived R7 proteins, a subfamily of RGS proteins (RGS6, -7, -9, and -11) containing a Ggamma-like (GGL) domain that mediates dimeric interaction with Gbeta(5). Gbeta(5)/R7 dimers stimulated steady state GTPase activity of Galpha-subunits of the G(i) family, but not of Galpha(q) or Galpha(11), when added to proteoliposomes containing M2 or M1 muscarinic receptor-coupled G-protein heterotrimers. Concentration effect curves of the Gbeta(5)/R7 proteins revealed differences in potencies and efficacies toward Galpha-subunits of the G(i) family. Although all four Gbeta(5)/R7 proteins exhibited similar potencies toward Galpha(o), Gbeta(5)/RGS9 and Gbeta(5)/RGS11 were more potent GAPs of Galpha(i1), Galpha(i2), and Galpha(i3) than were Gbeta(5)/RGS6 and Gbeta(5)/RGS7. The maximal GAP activity exhibited by Gbeta(5)/RGS11 was 2- to 4-fold higher than that of Gbeta(5)/RGS7 and Gbeta(5)/RGS9, with Gbeta(5)/RGS6 exhibiting an intermediate maximal GAP activity. Moreover, the less efficacious Gbeta(5)/RGS7 and Gbeta(5)/RGS9 inhibited Gbeta(5)/RGS11-stimulated GTPase activity of Galpha(o). Therefore, R7 family RGS proteins are G(i) family-selective GAPs with potentially important differences in activities.     

An N-terminal region of Caenorhabditis elegans RGS proteins EGL-10 and EAT-16 directs inhibition of G(alpha)o versus G(alpha)q signaling

Regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins contain an RGS domain that inhibits G(alpha) signaling by activating G(alpha) GTPase activity. Certain RGS proteins also contain a Ggamma-like (GGL) domain and a poorly characterized but conserved N-terminal region. We assessed the functions of these subregions in the Caenorhabditis elegans RGS proteins EGL-10 and EAT-16, which selectively inhibit GOA-1 (G(alpha)(o)) and EGL-30 (G(alpha)(q)), respectively. Using transgenes in C. elegans, we expressed EGL-10, EAT-16, their subregions, or EGL-10/EAT-16 chimeras. The chimeras showed that the GGL/RGS region of either protein can act on either GOA-1 or EGL-30 and that a key factor determining G(alpha) target selectivity is the manner in which the N-terminal and GGL/RGS regions are linked. We also found that coexpressing N-terminal and GGL/RGS fragments of EGL-10 gave full EGL-10 activity, whereas either fragment alone gave little activity. Biochemical analysis showed that coexpressing the two fragments caused both to increase in abundance and also caused the GGL/RGS fragment to move to the membrane, where the N-terminal fragment is localized. By coimmunoprecipitation, we found that the N-terminal fragment complexes with the C-terminal fragment and its associated Gbeta subunit, GPB-2. We conclude that the N-terminal region directs inhibition of G(alpha) signaling by forming a complex with the GGL/RGS region and affecting its stability, membrane localization, and G(alpha) target specificity.     

Distinct roles of DMAP1 in mouse development

DMAP1 (DNMT1-associated protein 1) is a member of the TIP60-p400 complex that maintains embryonic stem (ES) cell pluripotency and a complex containing the somatic form of DNA methyltransferase 1 (DNMT1s). DMAP1 interacts with DNMT1s through a domain that is absent in Dnmt1(V)(/)(V) mice expressing just the oocyte form (DNMT1o). A Dmap1-null allele was generated to study the role of DMAP1 in development. Consistent with the phenotypes of loss of other members of the TIP60-p400 complex, Dmap1(-/-) mice died during preimplantation in both Dnmt1(+/+) and Dnmt1(V)(/)(V) backgrounds. Unexpectedly, in the Dnmt1(V)(/)(V) background, Dmap1(+/-) parents produced mainly Dmap1(+/-) mice. Most Dmap1(+/+) progeny died during midgestation, with loss of DNA methylation on imprinted genes, suggesting that DMAP1 influences maintenance methylation mediated by DNMT1o. In this regard, a DMAP1-DNMT1o complex was detected in ES cells when DNMT1o was stably expressed but not when transiently expressed, indicating a novel interaction between DMAP1 and DNMT1o. These results suggest that DMAP1-DNMT1s and DMAP1-DNMT1o interactions are essential for normal development and that DMAP1-DNMT1o complexes are not readily formed in the embryo. Therefore, DMAP1 mediates distinct preimplantation epigenetic reprogramming processes: TIP60-p400 nucleosome remodeling and DNMT1 maintenance methylation.     

Cytoplasmic, nuclear, and golgi localization of RGS proteins. Evidence for N-terminal and RGS domain sequences as intracellular targeting motifs

RGS proteins comprise a family of proteins named for their ability to negatively regulate heterotrimeric G protein signaling. Biochemical studies suggest that members of this protein family act as GTPase-activating proteins for certain Galpha subunits, thereby accelerating the turn-off mechanism of Galpha and terminating signaling by both Galpha and Gbetagamma subunits. In the present study, we used confocal microscopy to examine the intracellular distribution of several RGS proteins in COS-7 cells expressing RGS-green fluorescent protein (GFP) fusion proteins and in cells expressing RGS proteins endogenously. RGS2 and RGS10 accumulated in the nucleus of COS-7 cells transfected with GFP constructs of these proteins. In contrast, RGS4 and RGS16 accumulated in the cytoplasm of COS-7 transfectants. As observed in COS-7 cells, RGS4 exhibited cytoplasmic localization in mouse neuroblastoma cells, and RGS10 exhibited nuclear localization in human glioma cells. Deletion or alanine substitution of an N-terminal leucine repeat motif present in both RGS4 and RGS16, a domain identified as a nuclear export sequence in HIV Rev and other proteins, promoted nuclear localization of these proteins in COS-7 cells. In agreement with this observation, treatment of mouse neuroblastoma cells with leptomycin B to inhibit nuclear protein export by exportin1 resulted in accumulation of RGS4 in the nucleus of these cells. GFP fusions of RGS domains of RGS proteins localized in the nucleus, suggesting that nuclear localization of RGS proteins results from nuclear targeting via RGS domain sequences. RGSZ, which shares with RGS-GAIP a cysteine-rich string in its N-terminal region, localized to the Golgi complex in COS-7 cells. Deletion of the N-terminal domain of RGSZ that includes the cysteine motif promoted nuclear localization of RGSZ. None of the RGS proteins examined were localized at the plasma membrane. These results demonstrate that RGS proteins localize in the nucleus, the cytoplasm, or shuttle between the nucleus and cytoplasm as nucleo-cytoplasmic shuttle proteins. RGS proteins localize differentially within cells as a result of structural differences among these proteins that do not appear to be important determinants for their G protein-regulating activities. These findings suggest involvement of RGS proteins in more complex cellular functions than currently envisioned.     

Two RGS proteins that inhibit Galpha(o) and Galpha(q) signaling in C. elegans neurons require a Gbeta(5)-like subunit for function

BACKGROUND: Gbeta proteins have traditionally been thought to complex with Ggamma proteins to function as subunits of G protein heterotrimers. The divergent Gbeta(5) protein, however, can bind either Ggamma proteins or regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins that contain a G gamma-like (GGL) domain. RGS proteins inhibit G protein signaling by acting as Galpha GTPase activators. While Gbeta(5) appears to bind RGS proteins in vivo, its association with Ggamma proteins in vivo has not been clearly demonstrated. It is unclear how Gbeta(5) might influence RGS activity. In C. elegans there are exactly two GGL-containing RGS proteins, EGL-10 and EAT-16, and they inhibit Galpha(o) and Galpha(q) signaling, respectively. RESULTS: We knocked out the gene encoding the C. elegans Gbeta(5) ortholog, GPB-2, to determine its physiological roles in G protein signaling. The gpb-2 mutation reduces the functions of EGL-10 and EAT-16 to levels comparable to those found in egl-10 and eat-16 null mutants. gpb-2 knockout animals are viable, and exhibit no obvious defects beyond those that can be attributed to a reduction of EGL-10 or EAT-16 function. GPB-2 protein is nearly absent in eat-16; egl-10 double mutants, and EGL-10 protein is severely diminished in gpb-2 mutants. CONCLUSIONS: Gbeta(5) functions in vivo complexed with GGL-containing RGS proteins. In the absence of Gbeta(5), these RGS proteins have little or no function. The formation of RGS-Gbeta(5) complexes is required for the expression or stability of both the RGS and Gbeta(5) proteins. Appropriate RGS-Gbeta(5) complexes regulate both Galpha(o) and Galpha(q) proteins in vivo.     

Physiological actions of regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS) proteins

Regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS) proteins are a family of proteins, which accelerate GTPase-activity intrinsic to the alpha subunits of heterotrimeric G-proteins and play crucial roles in the physiological control of G-protein signaling. If RGS proteins were active unrestrictedly, they would completely suppress various G-protein-mediated cell signaling as has been shown in the over-expression experiments of various RGS proteins. Thus, physiologically the modes of RGS-action should be under some regulation. The regulation can be achieved through the control of either the protein function and/or the subcellular localization. Examples for the former are as follows: (i) Phosphatidylinositol 3,4,5-trisphosphate (PIP(3)) inhibits RGS-action, which can be recovered by Ca(2+)/calmodulin. This underlies a voltage-dependent "relaxation" behavior of G-protein-gated K(+) channels. (ii) A modulatory protein, 14-3-3, binds to the RGS proteins phosphorylated by PKA and inhibits their actions. For the latter mechanism, additional regulatory modules, such as PDZ, PX, and G-protein gamma subunit-like (GGL) domains, identified in several RGS proteins may be responsible: (i) PDZ domain of RGS12 interacts with a G-protein-coupled chemokine receptor, CXCR2, and thus facilitates its GAP action on CXCR2-mediated G-protein signals. (ii) RGS9 forms a complex with a type of G-protein beta-subunit (Gbeta5) via its GGL domain, which facilitates the GAP function of RGS9. Both types of regulations synergistically control the mode of action of RGS proteins in the physiological conditions, which contributes to fine tunings of G-protein signalings.     

Regulators of G protein signaling 6 and 7. Purification of complexes with gbeta5 and assessment of their effects on g protein-mediated signaling pathways.

Regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins that contain DEP (disheveled, EGL-10, pleckstrin) and GGL (G protein gamma subunit-like) domains form a subfamily that includes the mammalian RGS proteins RGS6, RGS7, RGS9, and RGS11. We describe the cloning of RGS6 cDNA, the specificity of interaction of RGS6 and RGS7 with G protein beta subunits, and certain biochemical properties of RGS6/beta5 and RGS7/beta5 complexes. After expression in Sf9 cells, complexes of both RGS6 and RGS7 with the Gbeta5 subunit (but not Gbetas 1-4) are found in the cytosol. When purified, these complexes are similar to RGS11/beta5 in that they act as GTPase-activating proteins specifically toward Galpha(o). Unlike conventional G(betagamma) complexes, RGS6/beta5 and RGS7/beta5 do not form heterotrimeric complexes with either Galpha(o)-GDP or Galpha(q)-GDP. Neither RGS6/beta5 nor RGS7/beta5 altered the activity of adenylyl cyclases types I, II, or V, nor were they able to activate either phospholipase C-beta1 or -beta2. However, the RGS/beta5 complexes inhibited beta(1)gamma(2)-mediated activation of phospholipase C-beta2. RGS/beta5 complexes may contribute to the selectivity of signal transduction initiated by receptors coupled to G(i) and G(o) by binding to phospholipase C and stimulating the GTPase activity of Galpha(o).     

Kinetic mechanism of RGS9-1 potentiation by R9AP

The duration of the photoreceptor's response to a light stimulus determines the speed at which an animal adjusts to ever-changing conditions of the visual environment. One critical component which regulates the photoresponse duration on the molecular level is the complex between the ninth member of the regulators of G protein signaling family (RGS9-1) and its partner, type 5 G protein beta-subunit (Gbeta5L). RGS9-1.Gbeta5L is responsible for the activation of the GTPase activity of the photoreceptor-specific G protein, transducin. Importantly, this function of RGS9-1.Gbeta5L is regulated by its membrane anchor, R9AP, which drastically potentiates the ability of RGS9-1.Gbeta5L to activate transducin GTPase. In this study, we address the kinetic mechanism of R9AP action and find that it consists primarily of a direct increase in the RGS9-1.Gbeta5L activity. We further showed that the binding site for RGS9-1.Gbeta5L is located within the N-terminal putative trihelical domain of R9AP, and even though this domain is sufficient for binding, it takes the entire R9AP molecule to potentiate the activity of RGS9-1.Gbeta5L. The mechanism revealed in this study is different from and complements another well-established mechanism of regulation of RGS9-1.Gbeta5L by the effector enzyme, cGMP phosphodiesterase, which is based entirely on the enhancement in the affinity between RGS9-1.Gbeta5L and transducin. Together, these mechanisms ensure timely transducin inactivation in the course of the photoresponse, a requisite for normal vision.     

Nuclear localization of G protein beta 5 and regulator of G protein signaling 7 in neurons and brain

The role that Gbeta(5) regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) complexes play in signal transduction in brain remains unknown. The subcellular localization of Gbeta(5) and RGS7 was examined in rat PC12 pheochromocytoma cells and mouse brain. Both nuclear and cytosolic localization of Gbeta(5) and RGS7 was evident in PC12 cells by immunocytochemical staining. Subcellular fractionation of PC12 cells demonstrated Gbeta(5) immunoreactivity in the membrane, cytosolic, and nuclear fractions. Analysis by limited proteolysis confirmed the identity of Gbeta(5) in the nuclear fraction. Subcellular fractionation of mouse brain demonstrated Gbeta(5) and RGS7 but not Ggamma(2/3) immunoreactivity in the nuclear fraction. RGS7 and Gbeta(5) were tightly complexed in the brain nuclear extract as evidenced by their coimmunoprecipitation with anti-RGS7 antibodies. Chimeric protein constructs containing green fluorescent protein fused to wild-type Gbeta(5) but not green fluorescent fusion proteins with Gbeta(1) or a mutant Gbeta(5) impaired in its ability to bind to RGS7 demonstrated nuclear localization in transfected PC12 cells. These findings suggest that Gbeta(5) undergoes nuclear translocation in neurons via an RGS-dependent mechanism. The novel intracellular distribution of Gbeta(5).RGS protein complexes suggests a potential role in neurons communicating between classical heterotrimeric G protein subunits and/or their effectors at the plasma membrane and the cell nucleus.     

eat-11 encodes GPB-2, a Gbeta(5) ortholog that interacts with G(o)alpha and G(q)alpha to regulate C. elegans behavior

In C. elegans, a G(o)/G(q) signaling network regulates locomotion and egg laying [1-8]. Genetic analysis shows that activated Ca(2+)/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase II (CaMKII) is suppressed by perturbations of this network, which include loss of the GOA-1 G(o)alpha, DGK-1 diacylglycerol kinase, EAT-16 G protein gamma subunit-like (GGL)-containing RGS protein, or an unidentified protein encoded by the gene eat-11 [9]. We cloned eat-11 and report that it encodes the Gbeta(5) ortholog GPB-2. Gbeta(5) binds specifically to GGL-containing RGS proteins, and the Gbeta(5)/RGS complex can promote the GTP-hydrolyzing activity of Galpha subunits [10, 11]. However, little is known about how this interaction affects G protein signaling in vivo. In addition to EAT-16, the GGL-containing RGS protein EGL-10 participates in G(o)/G(q) signaling; EGL-10 appears to act as an RGS for the GOA-1 G(o)alpha, while EAT-16 appears to act as an RGS for the EGL-30 G(q)alpha [4, 5]. We have combined behavioral, electrophysiological, and pharmacological approaches to show that GPB-2 is a central member of the G(o)/G(q) network and that GPB-2 may interact with both the EGL-10 and EAT-16 RGS proteins to mediate the opposing activities of G(o)alpha and G(q)alpha. These interactions provide a mechanism for the modulation of behavior by antagonistic G protein networks.