Oligomerization of the yeast alpha-factor receptor: implications for dominant negative effects of mutant receptors

Oligomerization of G protein-coupled receptors is commonly observed, but the functional significance of oligomerization for this diverse family of receptors remains poorly understood. We used bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) to examine oligomerization of Ste2p, a G protein-coupled receptor that serves as the receptor for the alpha-mating pheromone in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, under conditions where the functional effects of oligomerization could be examined. Consistent with previous results from fluorescence resonance energy transfer (Overton, M. C., and Blumer, K. J. (2000) Curr. Biol. 10, 341-344), we detected efficient energy transfer between Renilla luciferase and a modified green fluorescent protein individually fused to truncated alpha-factor receptors lacking the cytoplasmic C-terminal tail. In addition, the low background of the BRET system allowed detection of significant, but less efficient, energy transfer between full-length receptors. The reduced efficiency of energy transfer between full-length receptors does not appear to result from different levels of receptor expression. Instead, attachment of fluorescent reporter proteins to the full-length receptors appears to significantly increase the distance between reporters. Mutations that were previously reported to block dimerization of truncated alpha-factor receptors reduce but do not completely eliminate BRET transfer between receptors. Dominant negative effects of mutant alleles of alpha-factor receptors appear to be mediated by receptor oligomerization since these effects are abrogated by introduction of additional mutations that reduce oligomerization. We find that heterodimers of normal and dominant negative receptors are defective in their ability to signal. Thus, signal transduction by oligomeric receptors appears to be a cooperative process requiring an interaction between functional monomers.     

Dominant negative mutations in the alpha-factor receptor, a G protein-coupled receptor encoded by the STE2 gene of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae.

The α-mating pheromone receptor encoded by the STE2 gene of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae is a G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) that is homologous to the large family of GPCRs that mediate multiple types of signal transduction in mammals. We have screened libraries of mutant receptors to identify dominant negative alleles that are capable of interfering with the function of a co-expressed normal receptor. Two dominant negative alleles have been recovered in this manner. In addition, we find that previously isolated loss-of-function mutations in the α-factor receptor exhibit dominant negative effects. Detection of the dominant effects requires high-level expression of the mutant receptors but does not require a high ratio of mutant to normal receptors. Cellular levels of the normal receptors are not affected by co-expression of the dominant negative alleles. Expression of the mutant receptors does not interfere with constitutive signaling in a strain that lacks the G protein α subunit encoded by GPA1, indicating that interference with signaling occurs at the level of the receptor or the interacting G protein. Expression of increased levels of G protein subunits partially reverses the dominant negative effects. The dominant negative behavior of the mutant receptors is diminished by deletion of the SST2 gene, which encodes an RGS (Regulator of G protein Signaling) protein involved in desensitization of pheromone signaling. The most likely explanation for the dominant negative effects of the mutations appears to be the existence of an interaction between unactivated receptors and the trimeric G protein that titrates the G protein away from the normal receptors or renders the G protein insensitive to receptor activation. This interaction appears to be mediated by the SST2 gene product. Received: 15 January 1999 / Accepted: 25 March 1999     

Promiscuous Dimerization of the Growth Hormone Secretagogue Receptor (GHS-R1a) Attenuates Ghrelin-mediated Signaling

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), such as the ghrelin receptor (GHS-R1a), the melanocortin 3 receptor (MC₃), and the serotonin 2C receptor (5-HT_2C), are well known for their key role in the homeostatic control of food intake and energy balance. Ghrelin is the only known gut peptide exerting an orexigenic effect and has thus received much attention as an anti-obesity drug target. In addition, recent data have revealed a critical role for ghrelin in dopaminergic mesolimbic circuits involved in food reward signaling. This study investigates the downstream signaling consequences and ligand-mediated co-internalization following heterodimerization of the GHS-R1a receptor with the dopamine 1 receptor, as well as that of the GHS-R1a-MC₃ heterodimer. In addition, a novel heterodimer between the GHS-R1a receptor and the 5-HT_2C receptor was identified. Interestingly, dimerization of the GHS-R1a receptor with the unedited 5-HT_2C-INI receptor, but not with the partially edited 5-HT_2C-VSV isoform, significantly reduced GHS-R1a agonist-mediated calcium influx, which was completely restored following pharmacological blockade of the 5-HT_2C receptor. These results combined suggest a potential novel mechanism for fine-tuning GHS-R1a receptor-mediated activity via promiscuous dimerization of the GHS-R1a receptor with other G protein-coupled receptors involved in appetite regulation and food reward. These findings may uncover novel mechanisms of significant relevance for the future pharmacological targeting of the GHS-R1a receptor in the homeostatic regulation of energy balance and in hedonic appetite signaling, both of which play a significant role in the development of obesity.     

CXCR7/CXCR4 heterodimer constitutively recruits beta-arrestin to enhance cell migration

G protein-coupled receptor hetero-oligomerization is emerging as an important regulator of ligand-dependent transmembrane signaling, but precisely how receptor heteromers affect receptor pharmacology remains largely unknown. In this study, we have attempted to identify the functional significance of the heteromeric complex between CXCR4 and CXCR7 chemokine receptors. We demonstrate that co-expression of CXCR7 with CXCR4 results in constitutive recruitment of β-arrestin to the CXCR4·CXCR7 complex and simultaneous impairment of G(i)-mediated signaling. CXCR7/CXCR4 co-expression also results in potentiation of CXCL12 (SDF-1)-mediated downstream β-arrestin-dependent cell signaling pathways, including ERK1/2, p38 MAPK, and SAPK as judged from the results of experiments using siRNA knockdown to deplete β-arrestin. Interestingly, CXCR7/CXCR4 co-expression enhances cell migration in response to CXCL12 stimulation. Again, inhibition of β-arrestin using either siRNA knockdown or a dominant negative mutant abrogates the enhanced CXCL12-dependent migration of CXCR4/CXCR7-expressing cells. These results show how CXCR7, which cannot signal directly through G protein-linked pathways, can nevertheless affect cellular signaling networks by forming a heteromeric complex with CXCR4. The CXCR4·CXCR7 heterodimer complex recruits β-arrestin, resulting in preferential activation of β-arrestin-linked signaling pathways over canonical G protein pathways. CXCL12-dependent signaling of CXCR4 and its role in cellular physiology, including cancer metastasis, should be evaluated in the context of potential functional hetero-oligomerization with CXCR7.     

The N terminus of the adhesion G protein-coupled receptor GPR56 controls receptor signaling activity

GPR56 is an adhesion G protein-coupled receptor that plays a key role in cortical development. Mutations to GPR56 in humans cause malformations of the cerebral cortex, but little is known about the normal function of the receptor. We found that the large N terminus (NT) of GPR56 is cleaved from the rest of the receptor during processing but remains non-covalently associated with the seven-transmembrane region of the receptor, as indicated by coimmunoprecipitation of the two GPR56 fragments from both transfected cells and native tissue. We also found that truncation of the GPR56 NT results in constitutive activation of receptor signaling, as revealed by increased GPR56-stimulated signaling upon transfection of HEK-293 cells with truncated GPR56, greatly enhanced binding of β-arrestins by truncated GPR56 relative to the full-length receptor, extensive ubiquitination of truncated GPR56, and cytotoxicity induced by truncated GPR56 that could be rescued by cotransfection of cells with β-arrestin 2. Furthermore, we found that the GPR56 NT is capable of homophilic trans-trans interactions that enhance receptor signaling activity. On the basis of these findings, we suggest a model of receptor activation in which the large N terminus of GPR56 constrains receptor activity but N-terminal interactions (GPR56 NT with an extracellular ligand and/or GPR56 NT homophilic trans-trans associations) can remove this inhibitory influence of the N terminus to activate receptor signaling.     

Dominant negative mutations in the α-factor receptor, a G protein-coupled receptor encoded by the STE2 gene of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae

The α-mating pheromone receptor encoded by the STE2 gene of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae is a G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) that is homologous to the large family of GPCRs that mediate multiple types of signal transduction in mammals. We have screened libraries of mutant receptors to identify dominant negative alleles that are capable of interfering with the function of a co-expressed normal receptor. Two dominant negative alleles have been recovered in this manner. In addition, we find that previously isolated loss-of-function mutations in the α-factor receptor exhibit dominant negative effects. Detection of the dominant effects requires high-level expression of the mutant receptors but does not require a high ratio of mutant to normal receptors. Cellular levels of the normal receptors are not affected by co-expression of the dominant negative alleles. Expression of the mutant receptors does not interfere with constitutive signaling in a strain that lacks the G protein α subunit encoded by GPA1, indicating that interference with signaling occurs at the level of the receptor or the interacting G protein. Expression of increased levels of G protein subunits partially reverses the dominant negative effects. The dominant negative behavior of the mutant receptors is diminished by deletion of the SST2 gene, which encodes an RGS (Regulator of G protein Signaling) protein involved in desensitization of pheromone signaling. The most likely explanation for the dominant negative effects of the mutations appears to be the existence of an interaction between unactivated receptors and the trimeric G protein that titrates the G protein away from the normal receptors or renders the G protein insensitive to receptor activation. This interaction appears to be mediated by the SST2 gene product.     

Roles of phosphorylation-dependent and -independent mechanisms in the regulation of histamine H2 receptor by G protein-coupled receptor kinase 2

It is widely assumed that G protein-coupled receptor kinase 2 (GRK2)-mediated specific inhibition of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) response involves GRK-mediated receptor phosphorylation followed by β-arrestin binding and subsequent uncoupling from the heterotrimeric G protein. It has recently become evident that GRK2-mediated GPCRs regulation also involves phosphorylation-independent mechanisms. In the present study we investigated whether the histamine H2 receptor (H2R), a Gα(s)-coupled GPCR known to be desensitized by GRK2, needs to be phosphorylated for its desensitization and/or internalization and resensitization. For this purpose we evaluated the effect of the phosphorylating-deficient GRK2K220R mutant on H2R signaling in U937, COS7, and HEK293T cells. We found that although this mutant functioned as dominant negative concerning receptor internalization and resensitization, it desensitized H2R signaling in the same degree as the GRK2 wild type. To identify the domains responsible for the kinase-independent receptor desensitization, we co-transfected the receptor with constructions encoding the GRK2 RGS-homology domain (RH) and the RH or the kinase domain fused to the pleckstrin-homology domain. Results demonstrated that the RH domain of GRK2 was sufficient to desensitize the H2R. Moreover, disruption of RGS functions by the use of GRK2D110A/K220R double mutant, although coimmunoprecipitating with the H2R, reversed GRK2K220R-mediated H2R desensitization. Overall, these results indicate that GRK2 induces desensitization of H2R through a phosphorylation-independent and RGS-dependent mechanism and extends the GRK2 RH domain-mediated regulation of GPCRs beyond Gα(q)-coupled receptors. On the other hand, GRK2 kinase activity proved to be necessary for receptor internalization and the resulting resensitization.     

Macromolecular Composition Dictates Receptor and G Protein Selectivity of Regulator of G Protein Signaling (RGS) 7 and 9-2 Protein Complexes in Living Cells

Regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins play essential roles in the regulation of signaling via G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). With hundreds of GPCRs and dozens of G proteins, it is important to understand how RGS regulates selective GPCR-G protein signaling. In neurons of the striatum, two RGS proteins, RGS7 and RGS9-2, regulate signaling by μ-opioid receptor (MOR) and dopamine D2 receptor (D2R) and are implicated in drug addiction, movement disorders, and nociception. Both proteins form trimeric complexes with the atypical G protein β subunit Gβ5 and a membrane anchor, R7BP. In this study, we examined GTPase-accelerating protein (GAP) activity as well as Gα and GPCR selectivity of RGS7 and RGS9-2 complexes in live cells using a bioluminescence resonance energy transfer-based assay that monitors dissociation of G protein subunits. We showed that RGS9-2/Gβ5 regulated both Gi and Go with a bias toward Go, but RGS7/Gβ5 could serve as a GAP only for Go. Interestingly, R7BP enhanced GAP activity of RGS7 and RGS9-2 toward Go and Gi and enabled RGS7 to regulate Gi signaling. Neither RGS7 nor RGS9-2 had any activity toward Gz, Gs, or Gq in the absence or presence of R7BP. We also observed no effect of GPCRs (MOR and D2R) on the G protein bias of R7 RGS proteins. However, the GAP activity of RGS9-2 showed a strong receptor preference for D2R over MOR. Finally, RGS7 displayed an four times greater GAP activity relative to RGS9-2. These findings illustrate the principles involved in establishing G protein and GPCR selectivity of striatal RGS proteins.     

Biased Agonism as a Mechanism for Differential Signaling by Chemokine Receptors

Chemokines display considerable promiscuity with multiple ligands and receptors shared in common, a phenomenon that is thought to underlie their biochemical “redundancy.” Their receptors are part of a larger seven-transmembrane receptor superfamily, commonly referred to as G protein-coupled receptors, which have been demonstrated to be able to signal with different efficacies to their multiple downstream signaling pathways, a phenomenon referred to as biased agonism. Biased agonism has been primarily reported as a phenomenon of synthetic ligands, and the biologic prevalence and importance of such signaling are unclear. Here, to assess the presence of biased agonism that may underlie differential signaling by chemokines targeting the same receptor, we performed a detailed pharmacologic analysis of a set of chemokine receptors with multiple endogenous ligands using assays for G protein signaling, β-arrestin recruitment, and receptor internalization. We found that chemokines targeting the same receptor can display marked differences in their efficacies for G protein- or β-arrestin-mediated signaling or receptor internalization. This ligand bias correlates with changes in leukocyte migration, consistent with different mechanisms underlying the signaling downstream of these receptors induced by their ligands. These findings demonstrate that biased agonism is a common and likely evolutionarily conserved biological mechanism for generating qualitatively distinct patterns of signaling via the same receptor in response to different endogenous ligands.     

A Key Agonist-induced Conformational Change in the Cannabinoid Receptor CB1 Is Blocked by the Allosteric Ligand Org 27569

Allosteric ligands that modulate how G protein-coupled receptors respond to traditional orthosteric drugs are an exciting and rapidly expanding field of pharmacology. An allosteric ligand for the cannabinoid receptor CB1, Org 27569, exhibits an intriguing effect; it increases agonist binding, yet blocks agonist-induced CB1 signaling. Here we explored the mechanism behind this behavior, using a site-directed fluorescence labeling approach. Our results show that Org 27569 blocks conformational changes in CB1 that accompany G protein binding and/or activation, and thus inhibit formation of a fully active CB1 structure. The underlying mechanism behind this behavior is that simultaneous binding of Org 27569 produces a unique agonist-bound conformation, one that may resemble an intermediate structure formed on the pathway to full receptor activation.     

The neurokinin A receptor activates calcium and cAMP responses through distinct conformational states.

G protein-coupled receptors are thought to mediate agonist-evoked signal transduction by interconverting between discrete conformational states endowed with different pharmacological and functional properties. In order to address the question of multiple receptor states, we monitored rapid kinetics of fluorescent neurokinin A (NKA) binding to tachykinin NK2 receptors, in parallel with intracellular calcium, using rapid mixing equipment connected to real time fluorescence detection. Cyclic AMP accumulation responses were also monitored. The naturally truncated version of neurokinin A (NKA-(4-10)) binds to the receptor with a single rapid phase and evokes only calcium responses. In contrast, full-length NKA binding exhibits both a rapid phase that correlates with calcium responses and a slow phase that correlates with cAMP accumulation. Furthermore, activators (phorbol esters and forskolin) and inhibitors (Ro 31-8220 and H89) of protein kinase C or A, respectively, exhibit differential effects on NKA binding and associated responses; activated protein kinase C facilitates a switch between calcium and cAMP responses, whereas activation of protein kinase A diminishes cAMP responses. NK2 receptors thus adopt multiple activatable, active, and desensitized conformations with low, intermediate, or high affinities and with distinct signaling specificities.     

Regulation of Protease-activated Receptor 1 Signaling by the Adaptor Protein Complex 2 and R4 Subfamily of Regulator of G Protein Signaling Proteins

The G protein-coupled protease-activated receptor 1 (PAR1) is irreversibly proteolytically activated by thrombin. Hence, the precise regulation of PAR1 signaling is important for proper cellular responses. In addition to desensitization, internalization and lysosomal sorting of activated PAR1 are critical for the termination of signaling. Unlike most G protein-coupled receptors, PAR1 internalization is mediated by the clathrin adaptor protein complex 2 (AP-2) and epsin-1, rather than β-arrestins. However, the function of AP-2 and epsin-1 in the regulation of PAR1 signaling is not known. Here, we report that AP-2, and not epsin-1, regulates activated PAR1-stimulated phosphoinositide hydrolysis via two different mechanisms that involve, in part, a subset of R4 subfamily of “regulator of G protein signaling” (RGS) proteins. A significantly greater increase in activated PAR1 signaling was observed in cells depleted of AP-2 using siRNA or in cells expressing a PAR1 ⁴²⁰AKKAA⁴²⁴ mutant with defective AP-2 binding. This effect was attributed to AP-2 modulation of PAR1 surface expression and efficiency of G protein coupling. We further found that ectopic expression of R4 subfamily members RGS2, RGS3, RGS4, and RGS5 reduced activated PAR1 wild-type signaling, whereas signaling by the PAR1 AKKAA mutant was minimally affected. Intriguingly, siRNA-mediated depletion analysis revealed a function for RGS5 in the regulation of signaling by the PAR1 wild type but not the AKKAA mutant. Moreover, activation of the PAR1 wild type, and not the AKKAA mutant, induced Gα_q association with RGS3 via an AP-2-dependent mechanism. Thus, AP-2 regulates activated PAR1 signaling by altering receptor surface expression and through recruitment of RGS proteins.     

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.     

Regulation of β-adrenergic receptor function

G protein-coupled receptors are the largest family of cell surface receptors regulating multiple cellular processes. β-adrenergic receptor (βAR) is a prototypical member of GPCR family and has been one of the most well studied receptors in determining regulation of receptor function. Agonist activation of βAR leads to conformational change resulting in coupling to G protein generating cAMP as secondary messenger. The activated βAR is phosphorylated resulting in binding of β-arrestin that physically interdicts further G protein coupling leading to receptor desensitization. The phosphorylated βAR is internalized and undergoes resensitization by dephosphorylation mediated by protein phosphatase 2A in the early endosomes. Although desensitization and resensitization are two sides of the same coin maintaining the homeostatic functioning of the receptor, significant interest has revolved around understanding mechanisms of receptor desensitization while little is known about resensitization. In our current review we provide an overview on regulation of βAR function with a special emphasis on receptor resensitization and its functional relevance in the context of fine tuning receptor signaling.     

Over-expression of the truncated ghrelin receptor polypeptide attenuates the constitutive activation of phosphatidylinositol-specific phospholipase C by ghrelin receptors but has no effect on ghrelin-stimulated extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2 activity

In addition to regulating growth hormone release from the pituitary, ghrelin receptors also influence cell proliferation and apoptosis. By studying mitogen-activated protein kinase activity in human embryonic kidney 293 cells over-expressing ghrelin receptors, we aimed to identify the specific cell signalling pathways used by ghrelin receptors, and to determine if the truncated ghrelin receptor polypeptide had any influence on the functional activity of ghrelin receptors. We found that ghrelin activated extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1/2 with an EC50 value of 10 nM, and that this response was inhibited by the ghrelin receptor antagonists D-Lys3-GHRP-6 and [D-Arg1,D-Phe5,D-Trp(7,9),Leu11]-substance P. Ghrelin had little or no effect on the activity of c-Jun N-terminal kinase, p38 kinase or Akt. Ghrelin appeared to activate extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1/2 through a calcium-independent novel protein kinase C isoform which may utilize diacylglycerol derived from hydrolysis of phosphatidylcholine rather than from phosphatidylinositol. Ghrelin-stimulated extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1/2 activity was independent of transactivation of epidermal growth factor receptors, and even when ghrelin receptor internalization was blocked by concanavalin A or a beta-arrestin mutant, there was no decrease in phosphorylated extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1/2, suggesting this is a G protein-dependent process. The truncated ghrelin receptor polypeptide had no effect on ghrelin receptor signalling to extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1/2, but decreased the constitutive activation of phosphatidylinositol-specific phospholipase C by ghrelin receptors. In conclusion, our results suggest that any up-regulation of the truncated ghrelin receptor polypeptide might preferentially attenuate functional activity dependent on the constitutive activation of ghrelin receptors, while leaving ghrelin-dependent signalling unaffected.     

High constitutive activity is an intrinsic feature of ghrelin receptor protein: a study with a functional monomeric GHS-R1a receptor reconstituted in lipid discs

Despite its central role in signaling and the potential therapeutic applications of inverse agonists, the molecular mechanisms underlying G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) constitutive activity remain largely to be explored. In this context, ghrelin receptor GHS-R1a is a peculiar receptor in the sense that it displays a strikingly high, physiologically relevant, constitutive activity. To identify the molecular mechanisms responsible for this high constitutive activity, we have reconstituted a purified GHS-R1a monomer in a lipid disc. Using this reconstituted system, we show that the isolated ghrelin receptor per se activates G(q) in the absence of agonist, as assessed through guanosine 5'-O-(thiotriphosphate) binding experiments. The measured constitutive activity is similar in its extent to that observed in heterologous systems and in vivo. This is the first direct evidence for the high constitutive activity of the ghrelin receptor being an intrinsic property of the protein rather than the result of influence of its cellular environment. Moreover, we show that the isolated receptor in lipid discs recruits arrestin-2 in an agonist-dependent manner, whereas it interacts with μ-AP2 in the absence of ligand or in the presence of ghrelin. Of importance, these differences are linked to ligand-specific GHS-R1a conformations, as assessed by intrinsic fluorescence measurements. The distinct ligand requirements for the interaction of purified GHS-R1a with arrestin and AP2 provide a new rationale to the differences in basal and agonist-induced internalization observed in cells.     

G Protein and β-Arrestin Signaling Bias at the Ghrelin Receptor

The G protein-coupled ghrelin receptor GHSR1a is a potential pharmacological target for treating obesity and addiction because of the critical role ghrelin plays in energy homeostasis and dopamine-dependent reward. GHSR1a enhances growth hormone release, appetite, and dopamine signaling through G_q/11, G_i/o, and G_12/13 as well as β-arrestin-based scaffolds. However, the contribution of individual G protein and β-arrestin pathways to the diverse physiological responses mediated by ghrelin remains unknown. To characterize whether a signaling bias occurs for GHSR1a, we investigated ghrelin signaling in a number of cell-based assays, including Ca²⁺ mobilization, serum response factor response element, stress fiber formation, ERK1/2 phosphorylation, and β-arrestin translocation, utilizing intracellular second loop and C-tail mutants of GHSR1a. We observed that GHSR1a and β-arrestin rapidly form metastable plasma membrane complexes following exposure to an agonist, but replacement of the GHSR1a C-tail by the tail of the vasopressin 2 receptor greatly stabilizes them, producing complexes observable on the plasma membrane and also in endocytic vesicles. Mutations of the contiguous conserved amino acids Pro-148 and Leu-149 in the GHSR1a intracellular second loop generate receptors with a strong bias to G protein and β-arrestin, respectively, supporting a role for conformation-dependent signaling bias in the wild-type receptor. Our results demonstrate more balance in GHSR1a-mediated ERK signaling from G proteins and β-arrestin but uncover an important role for β-arrestin in RhoA activation and stress fiber formation. These findings suggest an avenue for modulating drug abuse-associated changes in synaptic plasticity via GHSR1a and indicate the development of GHSR1a-biased ligands as a promising strategy for selectively targeting downstream signaling events.     

Biased signaling: A viable strategy to drug ghrelin receptors for the treatment of obesity

Obesity is a global burden and a chronic ailment with damaging overall health effects. Ghrelin, an octanoylated 28 amino acid peptide hormone, is secreted from the oxyntic mucosa of the stomach. Ghrelin acts on regions of the hypothalamus to regulate feeding behavior and glucose homeostasis through its G protein-coupled receptor. Recently, several central pathways modulating the metabolic actions of ghrelin have been reported. While these signaling pathways can be inhibited or activated by antagonists or agonists, they can also be discriminatingly activated in a “biased” response to impart different degrees of activation in distinct pathways downstream of the receptor. Here, we review recent ghrelin biased signaling findings as well as characteristics of ghrelin hormone and its receptors pertinent for biased signaling. We then evaluate the feasibility for ghrelin receptor biased signaling as a strategy for the development of effective pharmacotherapy in obesity treatment.     

Functional reconstitution of an atypical G protein heterotrimer and regulator of G protein signaling protein (RGS1) from Arabidopsis thaliana

It has long been known that animal heterotrimeric Gαβγ proteins are activated by cell-surface receptors that promote GTP binding to the Gα subunit and dissociation of the heterotrimer. In contrast, the Gα protein from Arabidopsis thaliana (AtGPA1) can activate itself without a receptor or other exchange factor. It is unknown how AtGPA1 is regulated by Gβγ and the RGS (regulator of G protein signaling) protein AtRGS1, which is comprised of an RGS domain fused to a receptor-like domain. To better understand the cycle of G protein activation and inactivation in plants, we purified and reconstituted AtGPA1, full-length AtRGS1, and two putative Gβγ dimers. We show that the Arabidopsis Gα protein binds to its cognate Gβγ dimer directly and in a nucleotide-dependent manner. Although animal Gβγ dimers inhibit GTP binding to the Gα subunit, AtGPA1 retains fast activation in the presence of its cognate Gβγ dimer. We show further that the full-length AtRGS1 protein accelerates GTP hydrolysis and thereby counteracts the fast nucleotide exchange rate of AtGPA1. Finally, we show that AtGPA1 is less stable in complex with GDP than in complex with GTP or the Gβγ dimer. Molecular dynamics simulations and biophysical studies reveal that altered stability is likely due to increased dynamic motion in the N-terminal α-helix and Switch II of AtGPA1. Thus, despite profound differences in the mechanisms of activation, the Arabidopsis G protein is readily inactivated by its cognate RGS protein and forms a stable, GDP-bound, heterotrimeric complex similar to that found in animals.