β-Arrestins: Structure, Function, Physiology, and Pharmacological Perspectives

The two β-arrestins, β-arrestin-1 and -2 (systematic names: arrestin-2 and -3, respectively), are multifunctional intracellular proteins that regulate the activity of a very large number of cellular signaling pathways and physiologic functions. The two proteins were discovered for their ability to disrupt signaling via G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) via binding to the activated receptors. However, it is now well recognized that both β-arrestins can also act as direct modulators of numerous cellular processes via either GPCR-dependent or -independent mechanisms. Recent structural, biophysical, and biochemical studies have provided novel insights into how β-arrestins bind to activated GPCRs and downstream effector proteins. Studies with β-arrestin mutant mice have identified numerous physiologic and pathophysiological processes regulated by β-arrestin-1 and/or -2. Following a short summary of recent structural studies, this review primarily focuses on β-arrestin-regulated physiologic functions, with particular focus on the central nervous system and the roles of β-arrestins in carcinogenesis and key metabolic processes including the maintenance of glucose and energy homeostasis. This review also highlights potential therapeutic implications of these studies and discusses strategies that could prove useful for targeting specific β-arrestin-regulated signaling pathways for therapeutic purposes. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: The two β-arrestins, structurally closely related intracellular proteins that are evolutionarily highly conserved, have emerged as multifunctional proteins able to regulate a vast array of cellular and physiological functions. The outcome of studies with β-arrestin mutant mice and cultured cells, complemented by novel insights into β-arrestin structure and function, should pave the way for the development of novel classes of therapeutically useful drugs capable of regulating specific β-arrestin functions.

GPCR Binding and JNK3 Activation by Arrestin-3 Have Different Structural Requirements

Arrestins bind active phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Among the four mammalian subtypes, only arrestin-3 facilitates the activation of JNK3 in cells. In available structures, Lys-295 in the lariat loop of arrestin-3 and its homologue Lys-294 in arrestin-2 directly interact with the activator-attached phosphates. We compared the roles of arrestin-3 conformational equilibrium and Lys-295 in GPCR binding and JNK3 activation. Several mutants with enhanced ability to bind GPCRs showed much lower activity towards JNK3, whereas a mutant that does not bind GPCRs was more active. The subcellular distribution of mutants did not correlate with GPCR recruitment or JNK3 activation. Charge neutralization and reversal mutations of Lys-295 differentially affected receptor binding on different backgrounds but had virtually no effect on JNK3 activation. Thus, GPCR binding and arrestin-3-assisted JNK3 activation have distinct structural requirements, suggesting that facilitation of JNK3 activation is the function of arrestin-3 that is not bound to a GPCR.

Functional Role of Arrestin-1 Residues Interacting with Unphosphorylated Rhodopsin Elements

Arrestin-1, or visual arrestin, exhibits an exquisite selectivity for light-activated phosphorylated rhodopsin (P-Rh*) over its other functional forms. That selectivity is believed to be mediated by two well-established structural elements in the arrestin-1 molecule, the activation sensor detecting the active conformation of rhodopsin and the phosphorylation sensor responsive to the rhodopsin phosphorylation, which only active phosphorylated rhodopsin can engage simultaneously. However, in the crystal structure of the arrestin-1-rhodopsin complex there are arrestin-1 residues located close to rhodopsin, which do not belong to either sensor. Here we tested by site-directed mutagenesis the functional role of these residues in wild type arrestin-1 using a direct binding assay to P-Rh* and light-activated unphosphorylated rhodopsin (Rh*). We found that many mutations either enhanced the binding only to Rh* or increased the binding to Rh* much more than to P-Rh*. The data suggest that the native residues in these positions act as binding suppressors, specifically inhibiting the arrestin-1 binding to Rh* and thereby increasing arrestin-1 selectivity for P-Rh*. This calls for the modification of a widely accepted model of the arrestin-receptor interactions.

The Role of Arrestin-1 Middle Loop in Rhodopsin Binding

Arrestins preferentially bind active phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). The middle loop, highly conserved in all arrestin subtypes, is localized in the central crest on the GPCR-binding side. Upon receptor binding, it directly interacts with bound GPCR and demonstrates the largest movement of any arrestin element in the structures of the complexes. Comprehensive mutagenesis of the middle loop of rhodopsin-specific arrestin-1 suggests that it primarily serves as a suppressor of binding to non-preferred forms of the receptor. Several mutations in the middle loop increase the binding to unphosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin severalfold, which makes them candidates for improving enhanced phosphorylation-independent arrestins. The data also suggest that enhanced forms of arrestin do not bind GPCRs exactly like the wild-type protein. Thus, the structures of the arrestin-receptor complexes, in all of which different enhanced arrestin mutants and reengineered receptors were used, must be interpreted with caution.

Short Arrestin-3-Derived Peptides Activate JNK3 in Cells

Arrestins were first discovered as suppressors of G protein-mediated signaling by G protein-coupled receptors. It was later demonstrated that arrestins also initiate several signaling branches, including mitogen-activated protein kinase cascades. Arrestin-3-dependent activation of the JNK family can be recapitulated with peptide fragments, which are monofunctional elements distilled from this multi-functional arrestin protein. Here, we use maltose-binding protein fusions of arrestin-3-derived peptides to identify arrestin elements that bind kinases of the ASK1-MKK4/7-JNK3 cascade and the shortest peptide facilitating JNK signaling. We identified a 16-residue arrestin-3-derived peptide expressed as a Venus fusion that leads to activation of JNK3α2 in cells. The strength of the binding to the kinases does not correlate with peptide activity. The ASK1-MKK4/7-JNK3 cascade has been implicated in neuronal apoptosis. While inhibitors of MAP kinases exist, short peptides are the first small molecule tools that can activate MAP kinases.

Solo vs. Chorus: Monomers and Oligomers of Arrestin Proteins

Three out of four subtypes of arrestin proteins expressed in mammals self-associate, each forming oligomers of a distinct kind. Monomers and oligomers have different subcellular localization and distinct biological functions. Here we summarize existing evidence regarding arrestin oligomerization and discuss specific functions of monomeric and oligomeric forms, although too few of the latter are known. The data on arrestins highlight biological importance of oligomerization of signaling proteins. Distinct modes of oligomerization might be an important contributing factor to the functional differences among highly homologous members of the arrestin protein family.

Structural basis of GPCR coupling to distinct signal transducers: implications for biased signaling

Three classes of G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) partners - G proteins, GPCR kinases, and arrestins - preferentially bind active GPCRs. Our analysis suggests that the structures of GPCRs bound to these interaction partners available today do not reveal a clear conformational basis for signaling bias, which would have enabled the rational design of biased GRCR ligands. In view of this, three possibilities are conceivable: (i) there are no generalizable GPCR conformations conducive to binding a particular type of partner; (ii) subtle differences in the orientation of individual residues and/or their interactions not easily detectable in the receptor-transducer structures determine partner preference; or (iii) the dynamics of GPCR binding to different types of partners rather than the structures of the final complexes might underlie transducer bias.

The two non-visual arrestins engage ERK2 differently

Arrestin binding to active phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors terminates G protein coupling and initiates another wave of signaling. Among the effectors that bind directly to receptor-associated arrestins are extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1/2 (ERK1/2), which promote cellular proliferation and survival. Arrestins may also engage ERK1/2 in isolation in a pre- or post-signaling complex that is likely in equilibrium with the full signal initiation complex. Molecular details of these binary complexes remain unknown. Here, we investigate the molecular mechanisms whereby arrestin-2 and arrestin-3 (a.k.a. β-arrestin1 and β-arrestin2, respectively) engage ERK1/2 in pairwise interactions. We find that purified arrestin-3 binds ERK2 more avidly than arrestin-2. A combination of biophysical techniques and peptide array analysis demonstrates that the molecular basis in this difference of binding strength is that the two non-visual arrestins bind ERK2 via different parts of the molecule. We propose a structural model of the ERK2-arrestin-3 complex in solution using size-exclusion chromatography coupled to small angle X-ray scattering (SEC-SAXS). This binary complex exhibits conformational heterogeneity. We speculate that this drives the equilibrium either toward the full signaling complex with receptor-bound arrestin at the membrane or toward full dissociation in the cytoplasm. As ERK1/2 regulates cell migration, proliferation, and survival, understanding complexes that relate to its activation could be exploited to control cell fate.

Structural Basis of Arrestin Selectivity for Active Phosphorylated G Protein-Coupled Receptors

Arrestins are a small family of proteins that bind G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Arrestin binds to active phosphorylated GPCRs with higher affinity than to all other functional forms of the receptor, including inactive phosphorylated and active unphosphorylated. The selectivity of arrestins suggests that they must have two sensors, which detect receptor-attached phosphates and the active receptor conformation independently. Simultaneous engagement of both sensors enables arrestin transition into a high-affinity receptor-binding state. This transition involves a global conformational rearrangement that brings additional elements of the arrestin molecule, including the middle loop, in contact with a GPCR, thereby stabilizing the complex. Here, we review structural and mutagenesis data that identify these two sensors and additional receptor-binding elements within the arrestin molecule. While most data were obtained with the arrestin-1-rhodopsin pair, the evidence suggests that all arrestins use similar mechanisms to achieve preferential binding to active phosphorylated GPCRs.

Receptor-Arrestin Interactions: The GPCR Perspective

Arrestins are a small family of four proteins in most vertebrates that bind hundreds of different G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Arrestin binding to a GPCR has at least three functions: precluding further receptor coupling to G proteins, facilitating receptor internalization, and initiating distinct arrestin-mediated signaling. The molecular mechanism of arrestin–GPCR interactions has been extensively studied and discussed from the “arrestin perspective”, focusing on the roles of arrestin elements in receptor binding. Here, we discuss this phenomenon from the “receptor perspective”, focusing on the receptor elements involved in arrestin binding and emphasizing existing gaps in our knowledge that need to be filled. It is vitally important to understand the role of receptor elements in arrestin activation and how the interaction of each of these elements with arrestin contributes to the latter’s transition to the high-affinity binding state. A more precise knowledge of the molecular mechanisms of arrestin activation is needed to enable the construction of arrestin mutants with desired functional characteristics.

An Eight Amino Acid Segment Controls Oligomerization and Preferred Conformation of the two Non-visual Arrestins

G protein coupled receptors signal through G proteins or arrestins. A long-standing mystery in the field is why vertebrates have two non-visual arrestins, arrestin-2 and arrestin-3. These isoforms are ~75% identical and 85% similar; each binds numerous receptors, and appear to have many redundant functions, as demonstrated by studies of knockout mice. We previously showed that arrestin-3 can be activated by inositol-hexakisphosphate (IP₆). IP₆ interacts with the receptor-binding surface of arrestin-3, induces arrestin-3 oligomerization, and this oligomer stabilizes the active conformation of arrestin-3. Here, we compared the impact of IP₆ on oligomerization and conformational equilibrium of the highly homologous arrestin-2 and arrestin-3 and found that these two isoforms are regulated differently. In the presence of IP₆, arrestin-2 forms "infinite" chains, where each promoter remains in the basal conformation. In contrast, full length and truncated arrestin-3 form trimers and higher-order oligomers in the presence of IP₆; we showed previously that trimeric state induces arrestin-3 activation (Chen et al., 2017). Thus, in response to IP₆, the two non-visual arrestins oligomerize in different ways in distinct conformations. We identified an insertion of eight residues that is conserved across arrestin-2 homologs, but absent in arrestin-3 that likely accounts for the differences in the IP₆ effect. Because IP₆ is ubiquitously present in cells, this suggests physiological consequences, including differences in arrestin-2/3 trafficking and JNK3 activation. The functional differences between two non-visual arrestins are in part determined by distinct modes of their oligomerization. The mode of oligomerization might regulate the function of other signaling proteins.

Phosphorylation barcode-dependent signal bias of the dopamine D1 receptor

Agonist-activated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) must correctly select from hundreds of potential downstream signaling cascades and effectors. To accomplish this, GPCRs first bind to an intermediary signaling protein, such as G protein or arrestin. These intermediaries initiate signaling cascades that promote the activity of different effectors, including several protein kinases. The relative roles of G proteins versus arrestins in initiating and directing signaling is hotly debated, and it remains unclear how the correct final signaling pathway is chosen given the ready availability of protein partners. Here, we begin to deconvolute the process of signal bias from the dopamine D1 receptor (D1R) by exploring factors that promote the activation of ERK1/2 or Src, the kinases that lead to cell growth and proliferation. We found that ERK1/2 activation involves both arrestin and Gαs, while Src activation depends solely on arrestin. Interestingly, we found that the phosphorylation pattern influences both arrestin and Gαs coupling, suggesting an additional way the cells regulate G protein signaling. The phosphorylation sites in the D1R intracellular loop 3 are particularly important for directing the binding of G protein versus arrestin and for selecting between the activation of ERK1/2 and Src. Collectively, these studies correlate functional outcomes with a physical basis for signaling bias and provide fundamental information on how GPCR signaling is directed.

Targeting arrestin interactions with its partners for therapeutic purposes

Most vertebrates express four arrestin subtypes: two visual ones in photoreceptor cells and two non-visuals expressed ubiquitously. The latter two interact with hundreds of G protein-coupled receptors, certain receptors of other types, and numerous non-receptor partners. Arrestins have no enzymatic activity and work by interacting with other proteins, often assembling multi-protein signaling complexes. Arrestin binding to every partner affects cell signaling, including pathways regulating cell survival, proliferation, and death. Thus, targeting individual arrestin interactions has therapeutic potential. This requires precise identification of protein-protein interaction sites of both participants and the choice of the side of each interaction which would be most advantageous to target. The interfaces involved in each interaction can be disrupted by small molecule therapeutics, as well as by carefully selected peptides of the other partner that do not participate in the interactions that should not be targeted.

The structural basis of the arrestin binding to GPCRs

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the largest family of signaling proteins targeted by more clinically used drugs than any other protein family. GPCR signaling via G proteins is quenched (desensitized) by the phosphorylation of the active receptor by specific GPCR kinases (GRKs) followed by tight binding of arrestins to active phosphorylated receptors. Thus, arrestins engage two types of receptor elements: those that contain GRK-added phosphates and those that change conformation upon activation. GRKs attach phosphates to serines and threonines in the GPCR C-terminus or any one of the cytoplasmic loops. In addition to these phosphates, arrestins engage the cavity that appears between trans-membrane helices upon receptor activation and several other non-phosphorylated elements. The residues that bind GPCRs are localized on the concave side of both arrestin domains. Arrestins undergo a global conformational change upon receptor binding (become activated). Arrestins serve as important hubs of cellular signaling, emanating from activated GPCRs and receptor-independent.

Critical role of the finger loop in arrestin binding to the receptors

We tested the interactions with four different G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) of arrestin-3 mutants with substitutions in the four loops, three of which contact the receptor in the structure of the arrestin-1-rhodopsin complex. Point mutations in the loop at the distal tip of the N-domain (Glu157Ala), in the C-loop (Phe255Ala), back loop (Lys313Ala), and one of the mutations in the finger loop (Gly65Pro) had mild variable effects on receptor binding. In contrast, the deletion of Gly65 at the beginning of the finger loop reduced the binding to all GPCRs tested, with the binding to dopamine D2 receptor being affected most dramatically. Thus, the presence of a glycine at the beginning of the finger loop appears to be critical for the arrestin-receptor interaction.

GPCR Signaling Regulation: The Role of GRKs and Arrestins

Every animal species expresses hundreds of different G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) that respond to a wide variety of external stimuli. GPCRs-driven signaling pathways are involved in pretty much every physiological function and in many pathologies. Therefore, GPCRs are targeted by about a third of clinically used drugs. The signaling of most GPCRs via G proteins is terminated by the phosphorylation of active receptor by specific kinases (GPCR kinases, or GRKs) and subsequent binding of arrestin proteins, that selectively recognize active phosphorylated receptors. In addition, GRKs and arrestins play a role in multiple signaling pathways in the cell, both GPCR-initiated and receptor-independent. Here we focus on the mechanisms of GRK- and arrestin-mediated regulation of GPCR signaling, which includes homologous desensitization and redirection of signaling to additional pathways by bound arrestins.

Using In Vitro Pull-Down and In-Cell Overexpression Assays to Study Protein Interactions with Arrestin

Nonvisual arrestins (arrestin-2/arrestin-3) interact with hundreds of G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) subtypes and dozens of non-receptor signaling proteins. Here we describe the methods used to identify the interaction sites of arrestin-binding partners on arrestin-3 and the use of monofunctional individual arrestin-3 elements in cells. Our in vitro pull-down assay with purified proteins demonstrates that relatively few elements in arrestin engage each partner, whereas cell-based functional assays indicate that certain arrestin elements devoid of other functionalities can perform individual functions in living cells.

Arrestin-mediated signaling: Is there a controversy?

The activation of the mitogen-activated protein (MAP) kinases extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK)1/2 was traditionally used as a readout of signaling of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) via arrestins, as opposed to conventional GPCR signaling via G proteins. Several recent studies using HEK293 cells where all G proteins were genetically ablated or inactivated, or both non-visual arrestins were knocked out, demonstrated that ERK1/2 phosphorylation requires G protein activity, but does not necessarily require the presence of non-visual arrestins. This appears to contradict the prevailing paradigm. Here we discuss these results along with the recent data on gene edited cells and arrestin-mediated signaling. We suggest that there is no real controversy. G proteins might be involved in the activation of the upstream-most MAP3Ks, although in vivo most MAP3K activation is independent of heterotrimeric G proteins, being initiated by receptor tyrosine kinases and/or integrins. As far as MAP kinases are concerned, the best-established role of arrestins is scaffolding of the three-tiered cascades (MAP3K-MAP2K-MAPK). Thus, it seems likely that arrestins, GPCR-bound and free, facilitate the propagation of signals in these cascades, whereas signal initiation via MAP3K activation may be independent of arrestins. Different MAP3Ks are activated by various inputs, some of which are mediated by G proteins, particularly in cell culture, where we artificially prevent signaling by receptor tyrosine kinases and integrins, thereby favoring GPCR-induced signaling. Thus, there is no reason to change the paradigm: Arrestins and G proteins play distinct non-overlapping roles in cell signaling.

Arrestin mutations: Some cause diseases, others promise cure

Arrestins play a key role in homologous desensitization of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and regulate several other vital signaling pathways in cells. Considering the critical roles of these proteins in cellular signaling, surprisingly few disease-causing mutations in human arrestins were described. Most of these are loss-of-function mutations of visual arrestin-1 that cause excessive rhodopsin signaling and hence night blindness. Only one dominant arrestin-1 mutation was discovered so far. It reduces the thermal stability of the protein, which likely results in photoreceptor death via unfolded protein response. In case of the two nonvisual arrestins, only polymorphisms were described, some of which appear to be associated with neurological disorders and altered response to certain treatments. Structure-function studies revealed several ways of enhancing arrestins' ability to quench GPCR signaling. These enhanced arrestins have potential as tools for gene therapy of disorders associated with excessive signaling of mutant GPCRs.

Arrestins and G proteins in cellular signaling: The coin has two sides

Several studies have suggested that arrestin-mediated signaling by GPCRs requires G protein activation; however, in this issue of Science Signaling, Luttrell et al. documented arrestin-dependent activation of ERK1/2 by a number of GPCRs. These studies do not contradict each other, but illustrate the complexity of cellular signaling that cannot and should not be reduced to simplistic models.

Arrestins: Introducing Signaling Bias Into Multifunctional Proteins

Arrestins were discovered as proteins that bind active phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and block their interactions with G proteins, i.e., for their role in homologous desensitization of GPCRs. Mammals express only four arrestin subtypes, two of which are largely restricted to the retina. Two nonvisual arrestins are ubiquitous and interact with hundreds of different GPCRs and dozens of other binding partners. Changes of just a few residues on the receptor-binding surface were shown to dramatically affect GPCR preference of inherently promiscuous nonvisual arrestins. Mutations on the cytosol-facing side of arrestins modulate their interactions with individual downstream signaling molecules. Thus, it appears feasible to construct arrestin mutants specifically linking particular GPCRs with signaling pathways of choice or mutants that sever the links between selected GPCRs and unwanted pathways. Signaling-biased "designer arrestins" have the potential to become valuable molecular tools for research and therapy.

Enhanced Mutant Compensates for Defects in Rhodopsin Phosphorylation in the Presence of Endogenous Arrestin-1

We determined the effects of different expression levels of arrestin-1-3A mutant with enhanced binding to light-activated rhodopsin that is independent of phosphorylation. To this end, transgenic mice that express mutant rhodopsin with zero, one, or two phosphorylation sites, instead of six in the WT mouse rhodopsin, and normal complement of WT arrestin-1, were bred with mice expressing enhanced phosphorylation-independent arrestin-1-3A mutant. The resulting lines were characterized by retinal histology (thickness of the outer nuclear layer, reflecting the number of rod photoreceptors, and the length of the outer segments, which reflects rod health), as well as single- and double-flash ERG to determine the functionality of rods and the rate of photoresponse recovery. The effect of co-expression of enhanced arrestin-1-3A mutant with WT arrestin-1 in these lines depended on its level: higher (240% of WT) expression reduced the thickness of ONL and the length of OS, whereas lower (50% of WT) expression was harmless in the retinas expressing rhodopsin with zero or one phosphorylation site, and improved photoreceptor morphology in animals expressing rhodopsin with two phosphorylation sites. Neither expression level increased the amplitude of the a- and b-wave of the photoresponse in any of the lines. However, high expression of enhanced arrestin-1-3A mutant facilitated photoresponse recovery 2-3-fold, whereas lower level was ineffective. Thus, in the presence of normal complement of WT arrestin-1 only supra-physiological expression of enhanced mutant is sufficient to compensate for the defects of rhodopsin phosphorylation.

Structural Basis of Arrestin-Dependent Signal Transduction

Arrestins are a small family of proteins with four isoforms in humans. Remarkably, two arrestins regulate signaling from >800 G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) or nonreceptor activators by simultaneously binding an activator and one out of hundreds of other signaling proteins. When arrestins are bound to GPCRs or other activators, the affinity for these signaling partners changes. Thus, it is proposed that an activator alters arrestin's ability to transduce a signal. The comparison of all available arrestin structures identifies several common conformational rearrangements associated with activation. In particular, it identifies elements that are directly involved in binding to GPCRs or other activators, elements that likely engage distinct downstream effectors, and elements that likely link the activator-binding sites with the effector-binding sites.

GPCRs and Signal Transducers: Interaction Stoichiometry

Until the late 1990s, class A G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) were believed to function as monomers. Indirect evidence that they might internalize or even signal as dimers has emerged, along with proof that class C GPCRs are obligatory dimers. Crystal structures of GPCRs and their much larger binding partners were consistent with the idea that two receptors might engage a single G protein, GRK, or arrestin. However, recent biophysical, biochemical, and structural evidence invariably suggests that a single GPCR binds G proteins, GRKs, and arrestins. Here we review existing evidence of the stoichiometry of GPCR interactions with signal transducers and discuss potential biological roles of class A GPCR oligomers, including proposed homo- and heterodimers.

Arrestins: structural disorder creates rich functionality

Arrestins are soluble relatively small 44–46 kDa proteins that specifically bind hundreds of active phosphorylated GPCRs and dozens of non-receptor partners. There are binding partners that demonstrate preference for each of the known arrestin conformations: free, receptor-bound, and microtubule-bound. Recent evidence suggests that conformational flexibility in every functional state is the defining characteristic of arrestins. Flexibility, or plasticity, of proteins is often described as structural disorder, in contrast to the fixed conformational order observed in high-resolution crystal structures. However, protein-protein interactions often involve highly flexible elements that can assume many distinct conformations upon binding to different partners. Existing evidence suggests that arrestins are no exception to this rule: their flexibility is necessary for functional versatility. The data on arrestins and many other multi-functional proteins indicate that in many cases, “order” might be artificially imposed by highly non-physiological crystallization conditions and/or crystal packing forces. In contrast, conformational flexibility (and its extreme case, intrinsic disorder) is a more natural state of proteins, representing true biological order that underlies their physiologically relevant functions.

Molecular Mechanisms of GPCR Signaling: A Structural Perspective

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are cell surface receptors that respond to a wide variety of stimuli, from light, odorants, hormones, and neurotransmitters to proteins and extracellular calcium. GPCRs represent the largest family of signaling proteins targeted by many clinically used drugs. Recent studies shed light on the conformational changes that accompany GPCR activation and the structural state of the receptor necessary for the interactions with the three classes of proteins that preferentially bind active GPCRs, G proteins, G protein-coupled receptor kinases (GRKs), and arrestins. Importantly, structural and biophysical studies also revealed activation-related conformational changes in these three types of signal transducers. Here, we summarize what is already known and point out questions that still need to be answered. Clear understanding of the structural basis of signaling by GPCRs and their interaction partners would pave the way to designing signaling-biased proteins with scientific and therapeutic potential.

Structural basis of arrestin-3 activation and signaling

A unique aspect of arrestin-3 is its ability to support both receptor-dependent and receptor-independent signaling. Here, we show that inositol hexakisphosphate (IP₆) is a non-receptor activator of arrestin-3 and report the structure of IP₆-activated arrestin-3 at 2.4-Å resolution. IP₆-activated arrestin-3 exhibits an inter-domain twist and a displaced C-tail, hallmarks of active arrestin. IP₆ binds to the arrestin phosphate sensor, and is stabilized by trimerization. Analysis of the trimerization surface, which is also the receptor-binding surface, suggests a feature called the finger loop as a key region of the activation sensor. We show that finger loop helicity and flexibility may underlie coupling to hundreds of diverse receptors and also promote arrestin-3 activation by IP₆. Importantly, we show that effector-binding sites on arrestins have distinct conformations in the basal and activated states, acting as switch regions. These switch regions may work with the inter-domain twist to initiate and direct arrestin-mediated signaling.

While arrestins are mainly associated with GPCR signaling, arrestin-3 can signal independently of receptor interaction. Here the authors present the structure of arrestin-3 bound to inositol hexakisphosphate (IP₆) and propose a model for arrestin-3 activation.

Functional role of the three conserved cysteines in the N domain of visual arrestin-1

Arrestins specifically bind active and phosphorylated forms of their cognate G protein-coupled receptors, blocking G protein coupling and often redirecting the signaling to alternative pathways. High-affinity receptor binding is accompanied by two major structural changes in arrestin: release of the C-tail and rotation of the two domains relative to each other. The first requires detachment of the arrestin C-tail from the body of the molecule, whereas the second requires disruption of the network of charge-charge interactions at the interdomain interface, termed the polar core. These events can be facilitated by mutations destabilizing the polar core or the anchoring of the C-tail that yield "preactivated" arrestins that bind phosphorylated and unphosphorylated receptors with high affinity. Here we explored the functional role in arrestin activation of the three native cysteines in the N domain, which are conserved in all arrestin subtypes. Using visual arrestin-1 and rhodopsin as a model, we found that substitution of these cysteines with serine, alanine, or valine virtually eliminates the effects of the activating polar core mutations on the binding to unphosphorylated rhodopsin while only slightly reducing the effects of the C-tail mutations. Thus, these three conserved cysteines play a role in the domain rotation but not in the C-tail release.

Differential manipulation of arrestin-3 binding to basal and agonist-activated G protein-coupled receptors. Cell Signal. 2017;36:98-107. [PMID: 28461104 DOI: 10.1016/j.cellsig.2017.04.021]

Non-visual arrestins interact with hundreds of different G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Here we show that by introducing mutations into elements that directly bind receptors, the specificity of arrestin-3 can be altered. Several mutations in the two parts of the central "crest" of the arrestin molecule, middle-loop and C-loop, enhanced or reduced arrestin-3 interactions with several GPCRs in receptor subtype and functional state-specific manner. For example, the Lys139Ile substitution in the middle-loop dramatically enhanced the binding to inactive M₂ muscarinic receptor, so that agonist activation of the M₂ did not further increase arrestin-3 binding. Thus, the Lys139Ile mutation made arrestin-3 essentially an activation-independent binding partner of M₂, whereas its interactions with other receptors, including the β₂-adrenergic receptor and the D₁ and D₂ dopamine receptors, retained normal activation dependence. In contrast, the Ala248Val mutation enhanced agonist-induced arrestin-3 binding to the β₂-adrenergic and D₂ dopamine receptors, while reducing its interaction with the D₁ dopamine receptor. These mutations represent the first example of altering arrestin specificity via enhancement of the arrestin-receptor interactions rather than selective reduction of the binding to certain subtypes.

Analyzing the roles of multi-functional proteins in cells: The case of arrestins and GRKs

Most proteins have multiple functions. Obviously, conventional methods of manipulating the level of the protein of interest in the cell, such as over-expression, knockout or knockdown, affect all of its functions simultaneously. The key advantage of these methods is that over-expression, knockout or knockdown does not require any knowledge of the molecular mechanisms of the function(s) of the protein of interest. The disadvantage is that these approaches are inadequate to elucidate the role of an individual function of the protein in a particular cellular process. An alternative is the use of re-engineered proteins, in which a single function is eliminated or enhanced. The use of mono-functional elements of a multi-functional protein can also yield cleaner answers. This approach requires detailed knowledge of the structural basis of each function of the protein in question. Thus, a lot of preliminary structure-function work is necessary to make it possible. However, when this information is available, replacing the protein of interest with a mutant in which individual functions are modified can shed light on the biological role of those particular functions. Here, we illustrate this point using the example of protein kinases, most of which have additional non-enzymatic functions, as well as arrestins, known multi-functional signaling regulators in the cell.

Arrestins: Critical Players in Trafficking of Many GPCRs

Arrestins specifically bind active phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Receptor binding induces the release of the arrestin C-tail, which in non-visual arrestins contains high-affinity binding sites for clathrin and its adaptor AP2. Thus, serving as a physical link between the receptor and key components of the internalization machinery of the coated pit is the best-characterized function of non-visual arrestins in GPCR trafficking. However, arrestins also regulate GPCR trafficking less directly by orchestrating their ubiquitination and deubiquitination. Several reports suggest that arrestins play additional roles in receptor trafficking. Non-visual arrestins appear to be required for the recycling of internalized GPCRs, and the mechanisms of their function in this case remain to be elucidated. Moreover, visual and non-visual arrestins were shown to directly bind N-ethylmaleimide-sensitive factor, an important ATPase involved in vesicle trafficking, but neither molecular details nor the biological role of these interactions is clear. Considering how many different proteins arrestins appear to bind, we can confidently expect the elucidation of additional trafficking-related functions of these versatile signaling adaptors.

Arrestins regulate cell spreading and motility via focal adhesion dynamics

Cells lacking both nonvisual arrestins show excessive spreading, defects in focal adhesion disassembly, and sensitivity to microtubules. This phenotype is rescued by wild-type arrestins but not mutants deficient in clathrin binding, suggesting that arrestins regulate focal adhesion disassembly by linking microtubules and clathrin.

Focal adhesions (FAs) play a key role in cell attachment, and their timely disassembly is required for cell motility. Both microtubule-dependent targeting and recruitment of clathrin are critical for FA disassembly. Here we identify nonvisual arrestins as molecular links between microtubules and clathrin. Cells lacking both nonvisual arrestins showed excessive spreading on fibronectin and poly-d-lysine, increased adhesion, and reduced motility. The absence of arrestins greatly increases the size and lifespan of FAs, indicating that arrestins are necessary for rapid FA turnover. In nocodazole washout assays, FAs in arrestin-deficient cells were unresponsive to disassociation or regrowth of microtubules, suggesting that arrestins are necessary for microtubule targeting–dependent FA disassembly. Clathrin exhibited decreased dynamics near FA in arrestin-deficient cells. In contrast to wild-type arrestins, mutants deficient in clathrin binding did not rescue the phenotype. Collectively the data indicate that arrestins are key regulators of FA disassembly linking microtubules and clathrin.

Arrestin-3 binds the MAP kinase JNK3α2 via multiple sites on both domains

Although arrestins bind dozens of non-receptor partners, the interaction sites for most signaling proteins remain unknown. Here we report the identification of arrestin-3 elements involved in binding MAP kinase JNK3α2. Using purified JNK3α2 and MBP fusions containing separated arrestin-3 domains and peptides exposed on the non-receptor-binding surface of arrestin-3 we showed that both domains bind JNK3α2 and identified one element on the N-domain and two on the C-domain that directly interact with JNK3α2. Using in vitro competition we confirmed that JNK3α2 engages identified N-domain element and one of the C-domain peptides in the full-length arrestin-3. The 25-amino acid N-domain element has the highest affinity for JNK3α2, suggesting that it is the key site for JNK3α2 docking. The identification of elements involved in protein-protein interactions paves the way to targeted redesign of signaling proteins to modulate cell signaling in desired ways. The tools and methods developed here to elucidate the molecular mechanism of arrestin-3 interactions with JNK3α2 are suitable for mapping of arrestin-3 sites involved in interactions with other partners.

Mutations in arrestin-3 differentially affect binding to neuropeptide Y receptor subtypes

Based on the identification of residues that determine receptor selectivity in arrestins and the phylogenetic analysis of the arrestin (arr) family, we introduced fifteen mutations of receptor-discriminator residues in arr-3, which were identified previously using mutagenesis, in vitro binding, and BRET-based recruitment assay in intact cells. The effects of these mutations were tested using neuropeptide Y receptors Y1R and Y2R. NPY-elicited arr-3 recruitment to Y1R was not affected by these mutations, or even alanine substitution of all ten residues (arr-3-NCA), which prevented arr-3 binding to other receptors tested so far. However, NCA and two other mutations prevented agonist-independent arr-3 pre-docking to Y1R. In contrast, eight out of 15 mutations significantly reduced agonist-dependent arr-3 recruitment to Y2R. NCA eliminated arr-3 binding to active Y2R, whereas Tyr239Thr reduced it ~7-fold. Thus, manipulation of key residues on the receptor-binding surface generates arr-3 with high preference for Y1R over Y2R. Several mutations differentially affect arr-3 pre-docking and agonist-induced recruitment. Thus, arr-3 recruitment to the receptor involves several mechanistically distinct steps. Targeted mutagenesis can fine-tune arrestins directing them to specific receptors and particular activation states of the same receptor.

Arrestin makes T cells stop and become active

T-cell activation requires signaling by T-cell receptors (TCRs) that bind antigen on the antigen-presenting cells (APCs) at the immunological synapse (IS). Sustained signaling requires continuous supply of new TCRs to the IS. In this issue of The EMBO Journal, Fernández-Arenas et al (2014) describe a novel role of β-arrestin-1 at the IS periphery: endocytosis of TCRs and chemokine CXCR4 receptors. Internalized TCRs are then delivered to the IS, where they engage antigen and support prolonged signaling, whereas CXCR4 internalization stops T-cell migration.

Arrestin-3 binds c-Jun N-terminal kinase 1 (JNK1) and JNK2 and facilitates the activation of these ubiquitous JNK isoforms in cells via scaffolding

Non-visual arrestins scaffold mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) cascades. The c-Jun N-terminal kinases (JNKs) are members of MAPK family. Arrestin-3 has been shown to enhance the activation of JNK3, which is expressed mainly in neurons, heart, and testes, in contrast to ubiquitous JNK1 and JNK2. Although all JNKs are activated by MKK4 and MKK7, both of which bind arrestin-3, the ability of arrestin-3 to facilitate the activation of JNK1 and JNK2 has never been reported. Using purified proteins we found that arrestin-3 directly binds JNK1α1 and JNK2α2, interacting with the latter comparably to JNK3α2. Phosphorylation of purified JNK1α1 and JNK2α2 by MKK4 or MKK7 is increased by arrestin-3. Endogenous arrestin-3 interacted with endogenous JNK1/2 in different cell types. Arrestin-3 also enhanced phosphorylation of endogenous JNK1/2 in intact cells upon expression of upstream kinases ASK1, MKK4, or MKK7. We observed a biphasic effect of arrestin-3 concentrations on phosphorylation of JNK1α1 and JNK2α2 both in vitro and in vivo. Thus, arrestin-3 acts as a scaffold, facilitating JNK1α1 and JNK2α2 phosphorylation by MKK4 and MKK7 via bringing JNKs and their activators together. The data suggest that arrestin-3 modulates the activity of ubiquitous JNK1 and JNK2 in non-neuronal cells, impacting the signaling pathway that regulates their proliferation and survival.

Extensive shape shifting underlies functional versatility of arrestins

Among four vertebrate arrestins, only two are ubiquitously expressed. Arrestins specifically bind active phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), thereby precluding further G protein activation. Recent discoveries suggest that the formation of the arrestin-receptor complex initiates the second round of signaling with comparable biological importance. Despite having virtually no recognizable sequence motifs known to mediate protein-protein interactions, arrestins bind a surprising variety of signaling proteins with mind-boggling range of functional consequences. High conformational flexibility allows arrestins to show many distinct 'faces' to the world, which allows these relatively small ∼45kDa proteins to bind various partners under different physiological conditions, organizing multi-protein signaling complexes and localizing them to distinct subcellular compartments.

JNK3 enzyme binding to arrestin-3 differentially affects the recruitment of upstream mitogen-activated protein (MAP) kinase kinases

Arrestin-3 was previously shown to bind JNK3α2, MKK4, and ASK1. However, full JNK3α2 activation requires phosphorylation by both MKK4 and MKK7. Using purified proteins we show that arrestin-3 directly interacts with MKK7 and promotes JNK3α2 phosphorylation by both MKK4 and MKK7 in vitro as well as in intact cells. The binding of JNK3α2 promotes an arrestin-3 interaction with MKK4 while reducing its binding to MKK7. Interestingly, the arrestin-3 concentration optimal for scaffolding the MKK7-JNK3α2 module is ∼10-fold higher than for the MKK4-JNK3α2 module. The data provide a mechanistic basis for arrestin-3-dependent activation of JNK3α2. The opposite effects of JNK3α2 on arrestin-3 interactions with MKK4 and MKK7 is the first demonstration that the kinase components in mammalian MAPK cascades regulate each other's interactions with a scaffold protein. The results show how signaling outcomes can be affected by the relative expression of scaffolding proteins and components of signaling cascades that they assemble.

Critical role of the central 139-loop in stability and binding selectivity of arrestin-1

Arrestin-1 selectively binds active phosphorylated rhodopsin (P-Rh*), demonstrating much lower affinity for inactive phosphorylated (P-Rh) and unphosphorylated active (Rh*) forms. Receptor interaction induces significant conformational changes in arrestin-1, which include large movement of the previously neglected 139-loop in the center of the receptor binding surface, away from the incoming receptor. To elucidate the functional role of this loop, in mouse arrestin-1 we introduced deletions of variable lengths and made several substitutions of Lys-142 in it and Asp-72 in the adjacent loop. Several mutants with perturbations in the 139-loop demonstrate increased binding to P-Rh*, dark P-Rh, Rh*, and phospho-opsin. Enhanced binding of arrestin-1 mutants to non-preferred forms of rhodopsin correlates with decreased thermal stability. The 139-loop perturbations increase P-Rh* binding of arrestin-1 at low temperatures and further change its binding profile on the background of 3A mutant, where the C-tail is detached from the body of the molecule by triple alanine substitution. Thus, the 139-loop stabilizes basal conformation of arrestin-1 and acts as a brake, preventing its binding to non-preferred forms of rhodopsin. Conservation of this loop in other subtypes suggests that it has the same function in all members of the arrestin family.

Involvement of distinct arrestin-1 elements in binding to different functional forms of rhodopsin

Solution NMR spectroscopy of labeled arrestin-1 was used to explore its interactions with dark-state phosphorylated rhodopsin (P-Rh), phosphorylated opsin (P-opsin), unphosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin (Rh*), and phosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin (P-Rh*). Distinct sets of arrestin-1 elements were seen to be engaged by Rh* and inactive P-Rh, which induced conformational changes that differed from those triggered by binding of P-Rh*. Although arrestin-1 affinity for Rh* was seen to be low (K(D) > 150 μM), its affinity for P-Rh (K(D) ~80 μM) was comparable to the concentration of active monomeric arrestin-1 in the outer segment, suggesting that P-Rh generated by high-gain phosphorylation is occupied by arrestin-1 under physiological conditions and will not signal upon photo-activation. Arrestin-1 was seen to bind P-Rh* and P-opsin with fairly high affinity (K(D) of~50 and 800 nM, respectively), implying that arrestin-1 dissociation is triggered only upon P-opsin regeneration with 11-cis-retinal, precluding noise generated by opsin activity. Based on their observed affinity for arrestin-1, P-opsin and inactive P-Rh very likely affect the physiological monomer-dimer-tetramer equilibrium of arrestin-1, and should therefore be taken into account when modeling photoreceptor function. The data also suggested that complex formation with either P-Rh* or P-opsin results in a global transition in the conformation of arrestin-1, possibly to a dynamic molten globule-like structure. We hypothesize that this transition contributes to the mechanism that triggers preferential interactions of several signaling proteins with receptor-activated arrestins.

Engineering visual arrestin-1 with special functional characteristics

Arrestin-1 preferentially binds active phosphorylated rhodopsin. Previously, a mutant with enhanced binding to unphosphorylated active rhodopsin (Rh*) was shown to partially compensate for lack of rhodopsin phosphorylation in vivo. Here we showed that reengineering of the receptor binding surface of arrestin-1 further improves the binding to Rh* while preserving protein stability. In mammals, arrestin-1 readily self-associates at physiological concentrations. The biological role of this phenomenon can only be elucidated by replacing wild type arrestin-1 in living animals with a non-oligomerizing mutant retaining all other functions. We demonstrate that constitutively monomeric forms of arrestin-1 are sufficiently stable for in vivo expression. We also tested the idea that individual functions of arrestin-1 can be independently manipulated to generate mutants with the desired combinations of functional characteristics. Here we showed that this approach is feasible; stable forms of arrestin-1 with high Rh* binding can be generated with or without the ability to self-associate. These novel molecular tools open the possibility of testing of the biological role of arrestin-1 self-association and pave the way to elucidation of full potential of compensational approach to gene therapy of gain-of-function receptor mutations.

Manipulation of very few receptor discriminator residues greatly enhances receptor specificity of non-visual arrestins

Based on the identification of residues that determine receptor selectivity of arrestins and the analysis of the evolution in the arrestin family, we introduced 10 mutations of "receptor discriminator" residues in arrestin-3. The recruitment of these mutants to M2 muscarinic (M2R), D1 (D1R) and D2 (D2R) dopamine, and β(2)-adrenergic receptors (β(2)AR) was assessed using bioluminescence resonance energy transfer-based assays in cells. Seven of 10 mutations differentially affected arrestin-3 binding to individual receptors. D260K and Q262P reduced the binding to β(2)AR, much more than to other receptors. The combination D260K/Q262P virtually eliminated β(2)AR binding while preserving the interactions with M2R, D1R, and D2R. Conversely, Y239T enhanced arrestin-3 binding to β(2)AR and reduced the binding to M2R, D1R, and D2R, whereas Q256Y selectively reduced recruitment to D2R. The Y239T/Q256Y combination virtually eliminated the binding to D2R and reduced the binding to β(2)AR and M2R, yielding a mutant with high selectivity for D1R. Eleven of 12 mutations significantly changed the binding to light-activated phosphorhodopsin. Thus, manipulation of key residues on the receptor-binding surface modifies receptor preference, enabling the construction of non-visual arrestins specific for particular receptor subtypes. These findings pave the way to the construction of signaling-biased arrestins targeting the receptor of choice for research or therapeutic purposes.

Synthetic biology with surgical precision: targeted reengineering of signaling proteins

The complexity of living systems exceeds everything else studied by natural sciences. Sophisticated networks of intimately intertwined signaling pathways coordinate cellular functions. Clear understanding how the integration of multiple inputs produces coherent behavior is one of the major challenges of cell biology. Integration via perfectly timed highly regulated protein-protein interactions and precise targeting of the "output" proteins to particular substrates is emerging as a common theme of signaling regulation. This often involves specialized scaffolding proteins, whose key function is to ensure that correct partners come together in an appropriate place at the right time. Defective or faulty signaling underlies many congenital and acquired human disorders. Several pioneering studies showed that ectopic expression of existing proteins or their elements can restore functions destroyed by mutations or normalize the signaling pushed out of balance by disease and/or current small molecule-based therapy. Several recent studies show that proteins with new functional modalities can be generated by mixing and matching existing domains, or via functional recalibration and fine-tuning of existing proteins by precisely targeted mutations. Using arrestins as an example, we describe how manipulation of individual functions yields signaling-biased proteins. Creative protein redesign generates novel tools valuable for unraveling the intricacies of cell biology. Engineered proteins with specific functional changes also have huge therapeutic potential in disorders associated with inherited or acquired signaling errors.

Silent scaffolds: inhibition OF c-Jun N-terminal kinase 3 activity in cell by dominant-negative arrestin-3 mutant

We established a new in vivo arrestin-3-JNK3 interaction assay based on bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) between JNK3-luciferase and Venus-arrestins. We tested the ability of WT arrestin-3 and its 3A mutant that readily binds β2-adrenergic receptors as well as two mutants impaired in receptor binding, Δ7 and KNC, to directly bind JNK3 and to promote JNK3 phosphorylation in cells. Both receptor binding-deficient mutants interact with JNK3 significantly better than WT and 3A arrestin-3. WT arrestin-3 and Δ7 mutant robustly promoted JNK3 activation, whereas 3A and KNC mutants did not. Thus, receptor binding, JNK3 interaction, and JNK3 activation are three distinct arrestin functions. We found that the KNC mutant, which tightly binds ASK1, MKK4, and JNK3 without facilitating JNK3 phosphorylation, has a dominant-negative effect, competitively decreasing JNK activation by WT arrestin-3. Thus, KNC is a silent scaffold, a novel type of molecular tool for the suppression of MAPK signaling in living cells.

Role of receptor-attached phosphates in binding of visual and non-visual arrestins to G protein-coupled receptors

Arrestins are a small family of proteins that regulate G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Arrestins specifically bind to phosphorylated active receptors, terminating G protein coupling, targeting receptors to endocytic vesicles, and initiating G protein-independent signaling. The interaction of rhodopsin-attached phosphates with Lys-14 and Lys-15 in β-strand I was shown to disrupt the interaction of α-helix I, β-strand I, and the C-tail of visual arrestin-1, facilitating its transition into an active receptor-binding state. Here we tested the role of conserved lysines in homologous positions of non-visual arrestins by generating K2A mutants in which both lysines were replaced with alanines. K2A mutations in arrestin-1, -2, and -3 significantly reduced their binding to active phosphorhodopsin in vitro. The interaction of arrestins with several GPCRs in intact cells was monitored by a bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET)-based assay. BRET data confirmed the role of Lys-14 and Lys-15 in arrestin-1 binding to non-cognate receptors. However, this was not the case for non-visual arrestins in which the K2A mutations had little effect on net BRET(max) values for the M2 muscarinic acetylcholine (M2R), β(2)-adrenergic (β(2)AR), or D2 dopamine receptors. Moreover, a phosphorylation-deficient mutant of M2R interacted with wild type non-visual arrestins normally, whereas phosphorylation-deficient β(2)AR mutants bound arrestins at 20-50% of the level of wild type β(2)AR. Thus, the contribution of receptor-attached phosphates to arrestin binding varies depending on the receptor-arrestin pair. Although arrestin-1 always depends on receptor phosphorylation, its role in the recruitment of arrestin-2 and -3 is much greater in the case of β(2)AR than M2R and D2 dopamine receptor.

The effect of arrestin conformation on the recruitment of c-Raf1, MEK1, and ERK1/2 activation

Arrestins are multifunctional signaling adaptors originally discovered as proteins that “arrest” G protein activation by G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Recently GPCR complexes with arrestins have been proposed to activate G protein-independent signaling pathways. In particular, arrestin-dependent activation of extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2 (ERK1/2) has been demonstrated. Here we have performed in vitro binding assays with pure proteins to demonstrate for the first time that ERK2 directly binds free arrestin-2 and -3, as well as receptor-associated arrestins-1, -2, and -3. In addition, we showed that in COS-7 cells arrestin-2 and -3 association with β₂-adrenergic receptor (β2AR) significantly enhanced ERK2 binding, but showed little effect on arrestin interactions with the upstream kinases c-Raf1 and MEK1. Arrestins exist in three conformational states: free, receptor-bound, and microtubule-associated. Using conformationally biased arrestin mutants we found that ERK2 preferentially binds two of these: the “constitutively inactive” arrestin-Δ7 mimicking microtubule-bound state and arrestin-3A, a mimic of the receptor-bound conformation. Both rescue arrestin-mediated ERK1/2/activation in arrestin-2/3 double knockout fibroblasts. We also found that arrestin-2-c-Raf1 interaction is enhanced by receptor binding, whereas arrestin-3-c-Raf1 interaction is not.

Nonvisual arrestins function as simple scaffolds assembling the MKK4-JNK3α2 signaling complex

Arrestins make up a small family of proteins with four mammalian members that play key roles in the regulation of multiple G protein-coupled receptor-dependent and -independent signaling pathways. Although arrestins were reported to serve as scaffolds for MAP kinase cascades, promoting the activation of JNK3, ERK1/2, and p38, the molecular mechanisms involved were not elucidated, and even the direct binding of arrestins with MAP kinases was never demonstrated. Here, using purified proteins, we show that both nonvisual arrestins directly bind JNK3α2 and its upstream activator MKK4, and that the affinity of arrestin-3 for these kinases is higher than that of arrestin-2. Reconstitution of the MKK4-JNK3α2 signaling module from pure proteins in the presence of different arrestin-3 concentrations showed that arrestin-3 acts as a "true" scaffold, facilitating JNK3α2 phosphorylation by bringing the two kinases together. Both the level of JNK3α2 phosphorylation by MKK4 and JNK3α2 activity toward its substrate ATF2 increase at low and then decrease at high arrestin-3 levels, yielding a bell-shaped concentration dependence expected with true scaffolds that do not activate the upstream kinase or its substrate. Thus, direct binding of both kinases and true scaffolding is the molecular mechanism of action of arrestin-3 on the MKK4-JNK3α2 signaling module.

The functional cycle of visual arrestins in photoreceptor cells

Visual arrestin-1 plays a key role in the rapid and reproducible shutoff of rhodopsin signaling. Its highly selective binding to light-activated phosphorylated rhodopsin is an integral part of the functional perfection of rod photoreceptors. Structure-function studies revealed key elements of the sophisticated molecular mechanism ensuring arrestin-1 selectivity and paved the way to the targeted manipulation of the arrestin-1 molecule to design mutants that can compensate for congenital defects in rhodopsin phosphorylation. Arrestin-1 self-association and light-dependent translocation in photoreceptor cells work together to keep a constant supply of active rhodopsin-binding arrestin-1 monomer in the outer segment. Recent discoveries of arrestin-1 interaction with other signaling proteins suggest that it is a much more versatile signaling regulator than previously thought, affecting the function of the synaptic terminals and rod survival. Elucidation of the fine molecular mechanisms of arrestin-1 interactions with rhodopsin and other binding partners is necessary for the comprehensive understanding of rod function and for devising novel molecular tools and therapeutic approaches to the treatment of visual disorders.

Progressive reduction of its expression in rods reveals two pools of arrestin-1 in the outer segment with different roles in photoresponse recovery

Light-induced rhodopsin signaling is turned off with sub-second kinetics by rhodopsin phosphorylation followed by arrestin-1 binding. To test the availability of the arrestin-1 pool in dark-adapted outer segment (OS) for rhodopsin shutoff, we measured photoresponse recovery rates of mice with arrestin-1 content in the OS of 2.5%, 5%, 60%, and 100% of wild type (WT) level by two-flash ERG with the first (desensitizing) flash at 160, 400, 1000, and 2500 photons/rod. The time of half recovery (t_half) in WT retinas increases with the intensity of the initial flash, becoming ∼2.5-fold longer upon activation of 2500 than after 160 rhodopsins/rod. Mice with 60% and even 5% of WT arrestin-1 level recovered at WT rates. In contrast, the mice with 2.5% of WT arrestin-1 had a dramatically slower recovery than the other three lines, with the t_half increasing ∼28 fold between 160 and 2500 rhodopsins/rod. Even after the dimmest flash, the rate of recovery of rods with 2.5% of normal arrestin-1 was two times slower than in other lines, indicating that arrestin-1 level in the OS between 100% and 5% of WT is sufficient for rapid recovery, whereas with lower arrestin-1 the rate of recovery dramatically decreases with increased light intensity. Thus, the OS has two distinct pools of arrestin-1: cytoplasmic and a separate pool comprising ∼2.5% that is not immediately available for rhodopsin quenching. The observed delay suggests that this pool is localized at the periphery, so that its diffusion across the OS rate-limits the recovery. The line with very low arrestin-1 expression is the first where rhodopsin inactivation was made rate-limiting by arrestin manipulation.

A single mutation in arrestin-2 prevents ERK1/2 activation by reducing c-Raf1 binding

Arrestins regulate the signaling and trafficking of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). GPCR complexes with both nonvisual arrestins channel signaling to G protein-independent pathways, one of which is the activation of extracellular signal regulated kinase 1/2 (ERK1/2). Here we used alanine-scanning mutagenesis of residues on the nonreceptor-binding surface conserved between arrestin-2 and arrestin-3. We show that an Arg307Ala mutation significantly reduced arrestin-2 binding to c-Raf1, whereas the binding of the mutant to active phosphorylated receptor and downstream kinases MEK1 and ERK2 was not affected. In contrast to wild-type arrestin-2, the Arg307Ala mutant failed to rescue arrestin-dependent ERK1/2 activation via β2-adrenergic receptor in arrestin-2/3 double knockout mouse embryonic fibroblasts. Thus, Arg307 plays a specific role in arrestin-2 binding to c-Raf1 and is indispensable in the productive scaffolding of c-Raf1-MEK1-ERK1/2 signaling cascade. Arg307Ala mutation specifically eliminates arrestin-2 signaling through ERK, which makes arrestin-2-Arg307Ala the first signaling-biased arrestin mutant constructed. In the crystal structure the side chain of homologous arrestin-3 residue Lys308 points in a different direction. Alanine substitution of Lys308 does not significantly affect c-Raf1 binding to arrestin-3 and its ability to promote ERK1/2 activation, suggesting that the two nonvisual arrestins perform the same function via distinct molecular mechanisms.