DOCSLIB.ORG

How Activated Receptors Couple to G Proteins

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read 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). Activated receptors (R*) can then receptor structure, including the primary activate heterotrimeric G proteins (com- sequence (9, 10), the tertiary structure (8), posed of ␣.GDP, ␤, and ␥ subunits) on the and the conformational changes required inner surface of the cell membrane (3–5). for activation (11), all have first come COMMENTARY GPCRs have a common body plan with from studies of rhodopsin and then have Fig. 1. Orientation of rhodopsin, transducin, and seven transmembrane helices. The intra- been verified to varying degrees in other G the membrane. Refined rhodopsin structure is cellular loops that connect these helices protein-coupled receptors. The visual G from ref. 36, and Gt is from ref. 23. Models are form the G protein-binding domain re- protein transducin was, in addition, the based on the crystal structures and are to scale. The viewed by refs. 5–7. How do GPCRs ac- first heterotrimeric G protein whose struc- carboxyl-terminal residues after S316 are not tivate G proteins and cause such specific ture was solved (12). shown. The orientation of Gt with respect to rho- responses in cells? What are the triggering Khorana’s group, in collaboration with dopsin and the membrane is based on the charge and hydrophobicity of the surface, the known rho- changes in GPCRs on agonist binding? Wayne Hubbell’s laboratory, has pio- dopsin-binding sites on Gt, and the sites of lipida- How do they fold, and what causes mis- neered the use of site-directed Cys mu- tion of G␣ and G␤␥ (23). folding in so many genetic diseases? All of tagenesis to place reporters (13) and these unanswered questions in the field crosslinkers (14, 15) in specific sites for depend on detailed structural informa- more detailed structural understanding of environment, which can complement crys- tion. Recently, the first high-resolution rhodopsin. Loewen et al. (13) use 19F- tallographic findings. In addition, they structure of a GPCR, rhodopsin, the vi- trifluoroethylthio groups to derivatize demonstrate a new method for examining sual light receptor, was solved by the several sets of cysteines at particular sites tertiary contacts in proteins by using so- groups of Palczewski, Okada, Stenkamp, in rhodopsin’s first, second, and third cy- lution NMR, which is applicable to mem- ␣ and Miyano (8). This structure reveals a toplasmic loops and helix 8 (previously brane proteins. This method will be wealth of information about how retinal is designated intracellular loop 4 before the particularly powerful in examining light- bound and how the rhodopsin ground crystal structure showed its helical na- induced conformational changes in the 19 state is stabilized. It also shows that crit- ture). They then use F nuclear Over- cytoplasmic surface, which almost cer- ical residues for G protein activation hauser effects between the fluorine labels tainly underlie G protein activation. Ex- (E134, R135) are buried and inaccessible to analyze distances between them. All of tensive mutagenesis and biochemical ex- to the rod photoreceptor G protein, trans- the 19F labels on single cysteines have periments in rhodopsin as well as a variety ducin (Gt). However, this does not resolve distinct chemical shifts, but when pairs of of other G protein-coupled receptors sug- the question of how an activated receptor cysteines are labeled, there are upfield or gest that receptor activation by ligand activates a G protein, because the struc- downfield shifts, suggesting proximity be- binding causes changes in the relative ori- ture of the inactive receptor was solved, tween residues 139 and 251 on rhodopsin’s entations of transmembrane helices 3 and leaving open the question of the activation second and third loops and between res- mechanism and the structure of the active idues 65 and 316 on the first loop and ␣ receptor. Thus, new structural approaches helix 8. These measures of distances pro- See companion articles on pages 4872, 4877, 4883, and are needed to address these questions. vide information on the structure of rho- 4888. Four papers from Khorana’s group pro- dopsin’s cytoplasmic face in the native *E-mail: [email protected]. www.pnas.org͞cgi͞doi͞10.1073͞pnas.011099798 PNAS ͉ April 24, 2001 ͉ vol. 98 ͉ no. 9 ͉ 4819–4821 Downloaded by guest on September 26, 2021 6 (11, 16–18, 31). These changes are then thought to affect the conformation of G protein-interacting intracellular loops of the receptor and thus uncover previously masked G protein-binding sites on the second, third, and fourth cytoplasmic loops (19–21). Fig. 1 shows a view of the receptor–G protein complex. The activated receptor causes hetero- trimeric G protein activation (Fig. 1) by causing GDP release from its binding site on the G␣ subunit. GTP binds to G␣, and G␣-GTP has reduced affinity for G␤␥ and receptor; both G␣-GTP and G␤␥ are then Fig. 2. GRASP (http:͞͞trantor.bioc.columbia.edu͞grasp) views of the interacting surfaces between free to activate downstream effectors. G rhodopsin’s cytoplasmic face and Gt’s rhodopsin-interacting surface. Imaginary folding on the dotted line protein activation leads to activation of will dock the two molecules in the ‘‘best guess’’ complementary surface. The cytoplasmic face of rhodopsin is relatively small and has a distinct orientation, because rhodopsin is a transmembrane protein. Coordi- various second messenger systems and nates from the refined rhodopsin structure [Protein Data Bank (PDB) no. 1HZX (37)] and Gt [PDB entry intracellular responses, leading to physio- 1GOT (23)] were used in GRASP to examine complementary surfaces of the two molecules. The extreme logical responses of tissues and organisms. carboxyl-terminal residues of rhodopsin after S316 are not involved in G protein binding and occlude the In the inactive heterotrimeric state, GDP intracellular loops. These residues were removed from the GRASP view for clarity. This is the ground state is bound to the G␣ subunit. The three- of rhodopsin, and critical activating residues such as the ERY sequence are buried in the structure. The dimensional structures of the heterotri- loops making up the cytoplasmic face are somewhat disordered in the crystal structure. Still, there is an meric G proteins Gt and Gi (22, 23) show overall complementarity of shape between the sites of interaction that might already be used to guide the overall shape of the GDP-bound het- mutagenesis on G␣. Notice the overall charge complementarity and the more explicit charge comple- ␣ erotrimer and the residues on the surface mentarity between residues K341, K248, K141, and R147 on rhodopsin and D311 and E212 on G at the bottom of both molecules. Also notice that the deep pockets made up of the interhelical space in that can interact with other proteins. The ␣ ␤␥ ␣ rhodopsin (where the flexible carboxyl-terminal residues from G could bind?) and the cleft (where CIII amino terminal region of the subunit residues could fit?) may be complementary. and the carboxyl-terminal region of the ␥ subunit, which are both sites of lipid mod- ification, are relatively close together, sug- gions on G␣ are very close together in the alternative possibility is that the functional gesting a site of membrane attachment receptor-bound Gt. In the ground state of unit activating a G protein is a receptor (Fig. 1). Gt (1GOT), the closest approach is be- dimer. There is convincing evidence that a How does light-activated rhodopsin in- tween the side chains of Leu-32, Val-30, number of GPCRs do homo- and het- teract with transducin? Cai et al. (15) and and Ile-339 (Ͻ4 Å). This pocket of hydro- erodimerize (32). It is clear, therefore, Itoh et al. (14) used particular cysteines on phobic interactions couples the amino and that there is a compelling need for de- rhodopsin’s cytoplasmic face to crosslink carboxyl-terminal regions of G␣. Another tailed structural studies of the sort pio- transducin by using two different hetero- point of great interest is that with neered by Khorana’s group (13), as well as bifunctional crosslinking reagents, one crosslinkers on Cys-240 of the third intra- the studies using site-directed spin label- photoactivatable and one chemically pre- cellular loop, not much crosslinking was ing done in collaboration with Hubbell’s activated.
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]
  • 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]
  • The Functional Significance of G Protein -Coupled Receptor Dimerization
    THE FUNCTIONAL SIGNIFICANCE OF G PROTEIN-COUPLED RECEPTOR DIMERIZATION by Matthew R. Whorton A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Pharmacology) in The University of Michigan 2008 Doctoral Committee: Assistant Professor Roger K. Sunahara, Chair Assistant Professor Jorge A. Iñiguez-Lluhí Professor Jennifer J. Linderman Professor Richard R. Neubig Professor William B. Pratt Associate Professor John J. G. Tesmer To my parents and Jen for their love, support, and encouragement. ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my advisor Roger Sunahara for his guidance and support. I would also like to extend my gratitude to other members of the Sunahara lab, both past and present, as well as members of the Neubig and Tesmer labs for thoughtful discussions and comments during lab meetings. I would also like to extend a great deal of gratitude to several collaborators who have provided their expertise to various aspects of my research. At Stanford University, Mike Bokoch and Soren Rasmussen in Brian Kobilka’s lab and Bo Huang in Richard Zare’s lab were instrumental in fluorescently labeling β2AR and then imaging it with their powerful TIRF single molecule setup. Beata Jastrzebska and Paul Park in Krzysztof Palczewski’s lab at Case Western University were also invaluable in providing purified rhodopsin as well as performing transducin activation assays. And finally, I would like to thank Dimitrios Fotiadis in Andrea Engel’s lab for using their various microscopy techniques to image rhodopsin-HDL complexes. I would also like to thank my friends and roommates through out the years who have helped to enrich the graduate school experience.
    [Show full text]