DOCSLIB.ORG

Mediating Intracellular Communication Being Able to Respond to the G-Protein Because of Its Requirement for Environment Is Vital for All GTP

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mediating Intracellular Communication Being Able to Respond to the G-Protein Because of Its Requirement for Environment Is Vital for All GTP © 1994 Nature Publishing Group http://www.nature.com/nsmb • editorial Mediating intracellular communication Being able to respond to the G-protein because of its requirement for environment is vital for all GTP. Indeed, the nature of the interaction cells, be they free-living uni­ between the rod-cell G-protein transducin cellular organisms or the and its cytoplasmic effector is explored in constituents of tissues that a paper from Margolskee and colleagues in make up multicellular plants and animals. this issue 1• Indeed, there are suggestions that the 2.5 billion years it took for multicellular organ­ G-proteins isms to appear may have been related to the There are three characterized classes of cell­ need to develop the complex signalling surface receptor proteins: those linked to mechanisms that allowed intercellular com­ ion channels, enzymes and G-proteins. The munication and the coordination of cellu­ last group of receptors, which typically have lar behaviour. A mere twenty years ago the a seven-helix transmembrane structure, is nature of these cellular information high­ by far the largest, its members being num­ ways was, for the most part, a black box. bered in the hundreds. Cellular responses Since then a vast effort has been directed to an extensive range of stimuli - light, towards shedding light on this area of bi­ smell, taste, hormones, pheromones, neu­ ology. The importance of the endeavour has rotransmitters and the like - are all medi­ now been recognized by the award of the ated through G-protein-coupled receptors. 1994 Nobel Prize for Medicine to the dis­ G-proteins are heterotrimers, made coverers of G-protein-mediated signal from a, ~ and y subunits (G ); each transduction; Martin Rodbell, recently re­ heterotrimer is coupled to a speci!lc recep­ tired from the National Institute of Envi­ tor, relaying the signals from the activated ronmental Health Sciences, North Carolina, receptor to effectors (enzymes or ion chan­ and Alfred G. Gilman, of the University of nels) that then generate one or more intra­ Texas Southwestern. cellular second messengers, such as cyclic Before the discovery of G-proteins it had nucleotide, Ca2+, inositol phosphates or been assumed that when a signal, such as a diacylglycerol. The specificity is clearly hormone, was bound by its cell-surface re­ important in maintaining the fidelity of the ceptor, the activated receptor signalled di­ signal transduction process. The a -subunit rectly to the effector in the cytoplasm. This determines the specificity of the G-protein/ view was dramatically revised in the early receptor interaction whereas interaction 1970s when Rodbell, then working at the with downstream effectors may be specified National Institute of Health in Bethesda, by G and/ or G subunits2• The various com­ demonstrated that a third component, a binations of a~yheterotrimer subunits allow transducer, passed the incoming signal for both subtle regulation and complex feed­ from receptor to effector. But it was not back control of receptors and effectors. until 1980 that Gilman and colleagues, then Cloning, expression and mutational at the University of Virginia in analysis of a number of G-proteins has ad­ Charlottesville (and independently, Tho­ vanced understanding of the intricacies of mas Pfeufer, University of Wurzburg, Ger­ the interactions between G-proteins and re­ many) managed to isolate and characterize ceptors, G-proteins and effectors, the the transducer, christening the molecule a mechanism and regulation of GTP hydroly- structural biology volume 1 number 11 november 1994 747 © 1994 Nature Publishing Group http://www.nature.com/nsmb editorial • sis, the regulation of the membrane attach­ amino acid residues are particularly impor­ ment of G-protein components, and so on tant for PDE ac;:tivation. Three of these resi­ (for example, ref. 3 and references therein). dues are within helix a4 of the transducin Nonetheless, the problem of how this class of a-subunit and all have their side chains ex­ proteins function is far from solved. What, posed on the same, solvent exposed, face for example, is the molecular basis of the of the transducin molecule suggesting that specificity of the G-proteins? The carboxyter­ this helix defines the primary site of inter­ minus of the a-subunit of the G-protein is action between a ,-rod and PDEy. That result one of the major determinants of receptor is at odds with previous suggestions that the recognition, while the cytoplasmic loops that adjacent a4/~6 loop is the site of interac­ link the helices of the seven transmembrane tion3·5. There are potential problems associ­ receptors are the main determinants of G­ ated with using peptides to mimic the activ­ protein interaction. Sequences adjacent to the ity of much larger proteins, as discussed by C-terminus of the a-subunit have been im­ Artemyve and Hamm\ nonetheless the sol­ plicated in effector interactions. vent-exposed location of all five residues and In rod receptor cells of the vertebrate eye modelling of the various substitutions of the light responsive receptor, rhodopsin, is these residues argue against such artifacts. coupled to its effector, the enzyme cGMP­ While the authors have focused on one specific phosphodiesterase (PDE), by the particular region involved in the interac­ heterotrimeric G-protein transducin tion between G-protein and effector, the (G "). Inactive G "•GDP binds to the fact that this region is not seen to undergo ta1.,y tapy photoactivated rhoctopsin and releases a conformational change on exchange in GDP. GTP then binds to the a-subunit of the crystal structures of Gia·GTPyS (ref. 5) the receptor-bound transducin causing and G,a·GDP (ref. 6) suggests that there Gw.·GTP to separate from both the recep­ must be other sites of interaction between tor and the ~y heterodimer. The G1a·GTP the two proteins. Clearly, the structure of complex then activates PDE by binding to the complex between Gta·GTP and PDEy that protein's inhibitoryy-subunit. Activation would help resolve this question. But the of the phosphodiesterase lowers the concen­ demands of cell biologists do not stop there: tration of cGMP, which closes cGMP-gated what of the interactions between Ga and cation channels and hyperpolarizes the reti­ G~y? how does Ga interact with receptor? nal rod cell, thereby generating the nerve im­ what are the parameters determining GTP pulse. The intrinsic GTPase activity of the a­ hydrolysis (see, for example, refs 3,5-7)? subunit hydrolyses the bound GTP to GDP, and so on. Certainly, there are no shortage inactivating Gta' releasing the inhibitory of challenges for structural biologists with PDEy-subunit which in turn switches off an interest in G-protein-mediated signal the phosphodiesterase. transduction. What is the structural basis of the Gia specificity for the PDEy subunit? I. Spickofsky, N. et al. Nature struct. Margolskee and colleagues have addressed Biol. 1, 771-780 (1994). 2. Clapham , D.E. & Neer, E.J. Nature this question by using varients of a syn­ 365, 403-406 (1993). thetic peptide from a region of G,a which 3. Conklin, B.R. & Bourne, H.R. Cell on its own is able to interact with and in­ 73, 631- 641 (1993). 4. Artemyve, N .0 . & Hamm, H.E. hibit the PDEy-subunit. By mutating indi­ Nature struct. Biol. 1, 752- 754 (1994). vidual residues in a short region of the Gia, 5. Noel, J.P., Hamm, H.E. & Sigler, and by using peptides from similar regions P.B. Nature 366, 654- 662 ( 1993). 6. Lambright, D.G., Noel, J.P., of other closely related G-protein a-sub­ Hamm, H .E. & Sigler, P.B. Nature unit, the authors are able to show that five 369, 621-628 (1994). 748 structural biology volume 1 number 11 november 1994 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Identification of Residues of the H-Ras Protein Critical for Functional Interaction with Guanine Nucleotide Exchange Factors RAYMOND D
    MOLECULAR AND CELLULAR BIOLOGY, Feb. 1994, p. 1104-1112 Vol. 14, No. 2 0270-7306/94/$04.00+0 Copyright © 1994, American Society for Microbiology Identification of Residues of the H-Ras Protein Critical for Functional Interaction with Guanine Nucleotide Exchange Factors RAYMOND D. MOSTELLER, JAEWON HAN, AND DANIEL BROEK* Department ofBiochemistry and Molecular Biology, Kenneth Norris Jr. Cancer Hospital and Research Center, University of Southern California School ofMedicine, Los Angeles, California 90033 Received 10 September 1993/Returned for modification 21 October 1993/Accepted 29 October 1993 Ras proteins are activated in vivo by guanine nucleotide exchange factors encoded by genes homologous to the CDC25 gene ofSaccharomyces cerevisiae. We have taken a combined genetic and biochemical approach to probe the sites on Ras proteins important for interaction with such exchange factors and to further probe the mechanism ofCDC25-catalyzed GDP-GTP exchange. Random mutagenesis coupled with genetic selection in S. cerevisiae was used to generate second-site mutations within human H-ras-alalS which could suppress the ability of the Ala-15 substitution to block CDC25 function. We transferred these second-site suppressor mutations to normal H-ras and oncogenic H-rasva1l2 to test whether they induced a general loss of function or whether they selectively affected CDC25 interaction. Four highly selective mutations were discovered, and they affected the surface-located amino acid residues 62, 63, 67, and 69. Two lines of evidence suggested that these residues may be involved in binding to CDC25: (i) using the yeast two-hybrid system, we demonstrated that these mutants cannot bind CDC25 under conditions where the wild-type H-Ras protein can; (ii) we demonstrated that the binding to H-Ras of monoclonal antibody Y13-259, whose epitope has been mapped to residues 63, 65, 66, 67, 70, and 73, is blocked by the mouse sosl and yeast CDC25 gene products.
    [Show full text]
  • Predicting Coupling Probabilities of G-Protein Coupled Receptors Gurdeep Singh1,2,†, Asuka Inoue3,*,†, J
    Published online 30 May 2019 Nucleic Acids Research, 2019, Vol. 47, Web Server issue W395–W401 doi: 10.1093/nar/gkz392 PRECOG: PREdicting COupling probabilities of G-protein coupled receptors Gurdeep Singh1,2,†, Asuka Inoue3,*,†, J. Silvio Gutkind4, Robert B. Russell1,2,* and Francesco Raimondi1,2,* 1CellNetworks, Bioquant, Heidelberg University, Im Neuenheimer Feld 267, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany, 2Biochemie Zentrum Heidelberg (BZH), Heidelberg University, Im Neuenheimer Feld 328, 69120 Heidelberg, Germany, 3Graduate School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Tohoku University, Sendai, Miyagi 980-8578, Japan and 4Department of Pharmacology and Moores Cancer Center, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093, USA Received February 10, 2019; Revised April 13, 2019; Editorial Decision April 24, 2019; Accepted May 01, 2019 ABSTRACT great use in tinkering with signalling pathways in living sys- tems (5). G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) control multi- Ligand binding to GPCRs induces conformational ple physiological states by transducing a multitude changes that lead to binding and activation of G-proteins of extracellular stimuli into the cell via coupling to situated on the inner cell membrane. Most of mammalian intra-cellular heterotrimeric G-proteins. Deciphering GPCRs couple with more than one G-protein giving each which G-proteins couple to each of the hundreds receptor a distinct coupling profile (6) and thus specific of GPCRs present in a typical eukaryotic organism downstream cellular responses. Determining these coupling is therefore critical to understand signalling. Here, profiles is critical to understand GPCR biology and phar- we present PRECOG (precog.russelllab.org): a web- macology. Despite decades of research and hundreds of ob- server for predicting GPCR coupling, which allows served interactions, coupling information is still missing for users to: (i) predict coupling probabilities for GPCRs many receptors and sequence determinants of coupling- specificity are still largely unknown.
    [Show full text]
  • G-Protein ␤␥-Complex Is Crucial for Efficient Signal Amplification in Vision
    The Journal of Neuroscience, June 1, 2011 • 31(22):8067–8077 • 8067 Cellular/Molecular G-Protein ␤␥-Complex Is Crucial for Efficient Signal Amplification in Vision Alexander V. Kolesnikov,1 Loryn Rikimaru,2 Anne K. Hennig,1 Peter D. Lukasiewicz,1 Steven J. Fliesler,4,5,6,7 Victor I. Govardovskii,8 Vladimir J. Kefalov,1 and Oleg G. Kisselev2,3 1Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri 63110, Departments of 2Ophthalmology and 3Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Saint Louis University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, Missouri 63104, 4Research Service, Veterans Administration Western New York Healthcare System, and Departments of 5Ophthalmology (Ross Eye Institute) and 6Biochemistry, University at Buffalo/The State University of New York (SUNY), and 7SUNY Eye Institute, Buffalo, New York 14215, and 8Sechenov Institute for Evolutionary Physiology and Biochemistry, Russian Academy of Sciences, Saint Petersburg 194223, Russia A fundamental question of cell signaling biology is how faint external signals produce robust physiological responses. One universal mechanism relies on signal amplification via intracellular cascades mediated by heterotrimeric G-proteins. This high amplification system allows retinal rod photoreceptors to detect single photons of light. Although much is now known about the role of the ␣-subunit of the rod-specific G-protein transducin in phototransduction, the physiological function of the auxiliary ␤␥-complex in this process remains a mystery. Here, we show that elimination of the transducin ␥-subunit drastically reduces signal amplification in intact mouse rods. The consequence is a striking decline in rod visual sensitivity and severe impairment of nocturnal vision. Our findings demonstrate that transducin ␤␥-complex controls signal amplification of the rod phototransduction cascade and is critical for the ability of rod photoreceptors to function in low light conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Transducin ␤-Subunit Can Interact with Multiple G-Protein ␥-Subunits to Enable Light Detection by Rod Photoreceptors
    New Research Sensory and Motor Systems Transducin ␤-Subunit Can Interact with Multiple G-Protein ␥-Subunits to Enable Light Detection by Rod Photoreceptors Paige M. Dexter,1 Ekaterina S. Lobanova,2 Stella Finkelstein,2 William J. Spencer,1 Nikolai P. Skiba,2 and Vadim Y. Arshavsky1,2 DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1523/ENEURO.0144-18.2018 1Department of Pharmacology and Cancer Biology, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, North Carolina 27710 and 2Albert Eye Research Institute, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina 27710 Visual Overview The heterotrimeric G-protein transducin mediates visual signaling in vertebrate photoreceptor cells. Many aspects of the function of transducin were learned from knock-out mice lacking its individual subunits. Of particular interest is ␥ ␥ the knockout of its rod-specific -subunit (G 1). Two stud- ies using independently generated mice documented that this knockout results in a considerable Ͼ60-fold reduction in the light sensitivity of affected rods, but provided dif- ␣ ␣ ferent interpretations of how the remaining -subunit (G t) ␤ ␥ mediates phototransduction without its cognate G 1 1- subunit partner. One study found that the light sensitivity ␣ reduction matched a corresponding reduction in G t con- tent in the light-sensing rod outer segments and proposed ␣ ␤ that G t activation is supported by remaining G 1 asso- ciating with other G␥ subunits naturally expressed in pho- toreceptors. In contrast, the second study reported the same light sensitivity loss but a much lower, only approx- ␣ imately sixfold, reduction of G t and proposed that the light responses of these rods do not require G␤␥ at all. To resolve this controversy and elucidate the mechanism ␥ driving visual signaling in G 1 knock-out rods, we analyzed both mouse lines side by side.
    [Show full text]
  • Constitutively Active Mutant of Rod A-Transducin in Autosomal Dominant
    HUMAN MUTATION Mutation in Brief #970 (2007) Online MUTATION IN BRIEF p.Gln200Glu, a Putative Constitutively Active Mutant of Rod α-Transducin (GNAT1) in Autosomal Dominant Congenital Stationary Night Blindness Viktoria Szabo1,2†, Hans-Jürgen Kreienkamp1†, Thomas Rosenberg3, and Andreas Gal1* 1Institut für Humangenetik, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany; 3Gordon Norrie Centre for Genetic Eye Diseases, The National Eye Clinic for the Visually Impaired, Hellerup, Denmark; 2Permanent address: Department of Ophthalmology, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary *Correspondence to: A. Gal, Institut für Humangenetik, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52, 20246 Hamburg, Germany; Tel.: 49-40-42803-2120; Fax: 49-40-42803-5138; E-mail: [email protected] Grant sponsor: Recognition Award of the Alcon Research Institute (Fort Worth, TX, to A.G.) and the German Academic Exchange Service (to V.S.). †Viktoria Szabo and Hans-Jürgen Kreienkamp contributed equally to this work. Communicated by Mark H. Paalman Congenital stationary night blindness (CSNB) is a non-progressive Mendelian condition resulting from a functional defect in rod photoreceptors. A small number of unique missense mutations in the genes encoding various members of the rod phototransduction cascade, e.g. rhodopsin (RHO), cGMP phosphodiesterase β-subunit (PDE6B), and transducin α-subunit (GNAT1) have been reported to cause autosomal dominant (ad) CSNB. While the RHO and PDE6B mutations result in constitutively active proteins, the only known adCSNB-associa- ted GNAT1 change (p.Gly38Asp) produces an α-transducin that is unable to activate its downstream effector molecule in vitro. In a multigeneration Danish family with adCSNB, we identified a novel heterozygous C to G transversion (c.598C>G) in exon 6 of GNAT1 that should result in a p.Gln200Glu substitution in the evolutionarily highly conserved Switch 2 region of α-transducin, a domain that has an important role in binding and hydrolyzing GTP.
    [Show full text]
  • Multi-Functionality of Proteins Involved in GPCR and G Protein Signaling: Making Sense of Structure–Function Continuum with In
    Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences (2019) 76:4461–4492 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00018-019-03276-1 Cellular andMolecular Life Sciences REVIEW Multi‑functionality of proteins involved in GPCR and G protein signaling: making sense of structure–function continuum with intrinsic disorder‑based proteoforms Alexander V. Fonin1 · April L. Darling2 · Irina M. Kuznetsova1 · Konstantin K. Turoverov1,3 · Vladimir N. Uversky2,4 Received: 5 August 2019 / Revised: 5 August 2019 / Accepted: 12 August 2019 / Published online: 19 August 2019 © Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 Abstract GPCR–G protein signaling system recognizes a multitude of extracellular ligands and triggers a variety of intracellular signal- ing cascades in response. In humans, this system includes more than 800 various GPCRs and a large set of heterotrimeric G proteins. Complexity of this system goes far beyond a multitude of pair-wise ligand–GPCR and GPCR–G protein interactions. In fact, one GPCR can recognize more than one extracellular signal and interact with more than one G protein. Furthermore, one ligand can activate more than one GPCR, and multiple GPCRs can couple to the same G protein. This defnes an intricate multifunctionality of this important signaling system. Here, we show that the multifunctionality of GPCR–G protein system represents an illustrative example of the protein structure–function continuum, where structures of the involved proteins represent a complex mosaic of diferently folded regions (foldons, non-foldons, unfoldons, semi-foldons, and inducible foldons). The functionality of resulting highly dynamic conformational ensembles is fne-tuned by various post-translational modifcations and alternative splicing, and such ensembles can undergo dramatic changes at interaction with their specifc partners.
    [Show full text]
  • Interaction of a G Protein with an Activated Receptor Opens the Interdomain Interface in the Alpha Subunit
    Interaction of a G protein with an activated receptor opens the interdomain interface in the alpha subunit Ned Van Epsa,1, Anita M. Preiningerb,1, Nathan Alexanderc,1, Ali I. Kayab, Scott Meierb, Jens Meilerc,2, Heidi E. Hammb,2, and Wayne L. Hubbella,2 aJules Stein Eye Institute and Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095-7008; bDepartment of Pharmacology, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN 37232-6600; and cDepartment of Chemistry, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN 37232-6600 Contributed by Wayne L. Hubbell, April 14, 2011 (sent for review March 12, 2011) In G-protein signaling, an activated receptor catalyzes GDP/GTP exchange on the Gα subunit of a heterotrimeric G protein. In an initial step, receptor interaction with Gα acts to allosterically trigger GDP release from a binding site located between the nucleotide binding domain and a helical domain, but the molecular mechan- ism is unknown. In this study, site-directed spin labeling and double electron–electron resonance spectroscopy are employed to reveal a large-scale separation of the domains that provides a direct pathway for nucleotide escape. Cross-linking studies show that the domain separation is required for receptor enhancement of nucleotide exchange rates. The interdomain opening is coupled to receptor binding via the C-terminal helix of Gα, the extension of which is a high-affinity receptor binding element. signal transduction ∣ structural polymorphism he α-subunit (Gα) of heterotrimeric G proteins (Gαβγ) med- Tiates signal transduction in a variety of cell signaling pathways Fig. 1. Receptor activation of G proteins leads to a separation between (1).
    [Show full text]
  • GTP-Binding Proteins • Heterotrimeric G Proteins
    GTP-binding proteins • Heterotrimeric G proteins • Small GTPases • Large GTP-binding proteins (e.g. dynamin, guanylate binding proteins, SRP- receptor) GTP-binding proteins Heterotrimeric G proteins Subfamily Members Prototypical effect Gs Gs, Golf cAMP Gi/o Gi, Go, Gz cAMP , K+-current Gq Gq, G11, G14, Inositol trisphosphate, G15/16 diacylglycerol G12/13 G12, G13 Cytoskeleton Transducin Gt, Gustducin cGMP - phosphodiesterase Offermanns 2001, Oncogene GTP-binding proteins Small GTPases Family Members Prototypical effect Ras Ras, Rap, Ral Cell proliferation; Cell adhesion Rho Rho, Rac, CDC42 Cell shape change & motility Arf/Sar Arf, Sar, Arl Vesicles: fission and fusion Rab Rab (1-33) Membrane trafficking between organelles Ran Ran Nuclear membrane plasticity Nuclear import/export The RAB activation-inactivation cycle REP Rab escort protein GGT geranylgeranyl-transferase GDI GDP-dissociation inhibitor GDF GDI displacementfactor Lipid e.g. RAS e.g. ARF1 modification RAB, Gi/o of GTP-binding proteins Lipid modification Enzyme Reaction Myristoylation N-myristoyl-transferase myristoylates N-terminal glycin Farnesylation Farnesyl-transferase, Transfers prenyl from prenyl-PPi Geranylgeranylation geranylgeranyltransferase to C-terminal CAAX motif Palmitoylation DHHC protein Cysteine-S-acylation General scheme of coated vesicle formation T. J. Pucadyil et al., Science 325, 1217-1220 (2009) Published by AAAS General model for scission of coated buds T. J. Pucadyil et al., Science 325, 1217-1220 (2009) Published by AAAS Conformational change in Arf1 and Sar1 GTPases, regulators of coated vesicular transport This happens if protein is trapped in the active conformation Membrane tubules formed by GTP- bound Arf1 Membrane tubules formed by GTP-bound Sar1 Published by AAAS T.
    [Show full text]
  • How Activated Receptors Couple to G Proteins
    Commentary How activated receptors couple to G proteins Heidi E. Hamm* Department of Pharmacology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN 37232-6600 protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) vide several new approaches to these ques- Gare involved in the control of every tions and important new information aspect of our behavior and physiology. about the active conformation of rhodop- This is the largest class of receptors, with sin and how it contacts the G protein several hundred GPCRs identified thus (13–15, 35). far. Examples are receptors for hormones Rhodopsin signal transduction in rods such as calcitonin and luteinizing hor- and cones underlies our ability to see both mone or neurotransmitters such as sero- in dim light (rod vision) and in color (cone tonin and dopamine. G protein-coupled vision). Different rhodopsins absorb light receptors can be involved in pathological maximally at different light wavelengths, processes as well and are linked to numer- and on activation they activate rod or cone ous diseases, including cardiovascular and transducins. Transducins activate rod and mental disorders, retinal degeneration, cone cGMP phosphodiesterases, causing cancer, and AIDS. More than half of all rapid light-activated cGMP breakdown, drugs target GPCRs and either activate or resultant closure of cGMP-sensitive chan- inactivate them. Binding of specific li- nels, and photoreceptor cell hyperpolar- gands, such as hormones, neurotransmit- ization and inhibition of photoreceptor ters, chemokines, lipids, and glycopro- neurotransmitter release. The study of teins, activates GPCRs by inducing or visual signal transduction has provided stabilizing a new conformation in the recep- many firsts. The major breakthroughs in tor (1, 2).
    [Show full text]
  • Gi- and Gs-Coupled Gpcrs Show Different Modes of G-Protein Binding
    Gi- and Gs-coupled GPCRs show different modes of G-protein binding Ned Van Epsa, Christian Altenbachb,c, Lydia N. Caroa,1, Naomi R. Latorracad,e,f,g, Scott A. Hollingsworthd,e,f,g, Ron O. Drord,e,f,g, Oliver P. Ernsta,h,2, and Wayne L. Hubbellb,c,2 aDepartment of Biochemistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 1A8, Canada; bStein Eye Institute, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095; cDepartment of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095; dDepartment of Computer Science, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305; eDepartment of Structural Biology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305; fDepartment of Molecular and Cellular Physiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305; gInstitute for Computational and Mathematical Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305; and hDepartment of Molecular Genetics, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5S 1A8, Canada Contributed by Wayne L. Hubbell, January 17, 2018 (sent for review December 20, 2017; reviewed by David S. Cafiso and Thomas P. Sakmar) More than two decades ago, the activation mechanism for the differing only by specific side-chain interactions, or is there a membrane-bound photoreceptor and prototypical G protein-coupled specificity code in the receptor involving the allowed magnitude of receptor (GPCR) rhodopsin was uncovered. Upon light-induced changes displacement of particular helices? Of considerable interest are in ligand–receptor interaction, movement of specific transmembrane GPCRs which couple to multiple G-protein subtypes and can helices within the receptor opens a crevice at the cytoplasmic surface, sample diverse conformational landscapes. allowing for coupling of heterotrimeric guanine nucleotide-binding In the present study, SDSL and double electron–electron reso- proteins (G proteins).
    [Show full text]
  • Small G-Protein They Bind GTP, and “OFF” After the GTP Has Been Hydrolyzed to GDP (Which in Turn Remains Bound)
    MONOMERIC G-PROTEINS (GTPases) In addition to heterotrimeric G-proteins, there is a superfamily of small monomeric G-proteins. Their size is around 21 kDa, approximately one half of the average size of the subunits of heterotrimeric proteins. These small proteins also operate as switches, which are “ON” when Small G-protein they bind GTP, and “OFF” after the GTP has been hydrolyzed to GDP (which in turn remains bound). There is a larger family of small GTP-binding switch proteins, related to G Monomeric G-proteins are activated by proteins which induce a conformational change resulting in reduced affinity to GDP, and thus in G-protein : heterotrimeric G proteins GDP release. The general term for such proteins is GEF (guanine nucleotide exchange factor). The GEFs of the small G-proteins are not the activated receptors, but rather proteins downstream the signaling cascade. GEFs vary with regard to their mode of activation and their selectivity for specific monomeric G-proteins. Small GTP-binding proteins include (roles indicated): initiation & elongation factors (protein synthesis). Compared to the subunit of heterotrimeric G-proteins, GTPase activity Ras (growth factor signal cascades). of the monomeric G-proteins is very low in the absence of interference. Rab (vesicle targeting and fusion). However, association with a protein of the GAP (GTPase-activating ARF (forming vesicle coatomer coats). protein) type results in very rapid GTP hydrolysis. Ran (transport of proteins into & out of the nucleus). As in the case of GEFs, the activation state of GAPs can be regulated, and Rho (regulation of actin cytoskeleton) GAPs are selective with regard to the small G-proteins they affect.
    [Show full text]
  • GNAT1 Gene G Protein Subunit Alpha Transducin 1
    GNAT1 gene G protein subunit alpha transducin 1 Normal Function The GNAT1 gene provides instructions for making a protein called alpha (a )-transducin. This protein is one part (the alpha subunit) of a protein complex called transducin. There are several versions of transducin made up of different subunits. Each version is found in a particular cell type in the light-sensitive tissue at the back of the eye (the retina), where it plays a role in transmitting visual signals from the eye to the brain. The transducin complex that contains a -transducin is found only in specialized light receptor cells in the retina called rods. Rods are responsible for vision in low-light conditions. When light enters the eye, a rod cell protein called rhodopsin is turned on ( activated), which then activates a -transducin. Once activated, a -transducin breaks away from the transducin complex in order to activate another protein called cGMP-PDE, which triggers a series of chemical reactions that create electrical signals. These signals are transmitted from rod cells to the brain, where they are interpreted as vision. Health Conditions Related to Genetic Changes Autosomal dominant congenital stationary night blindness At least two mutations in the GNAT1 gene have been found to cause autosomal dominant congenital stationary night blindness, which is characterized by the inability to see in low light. One of these mutations impairs the protein's ability to activate cGMP-PDE; the other mutation results in a protein that is constantly turned on (constitutively activated). Both of these mutations disrupt the pathway that creates visual signals to be sent from rod cells to the brain.
    [Show full text]