Cellular mechanisms that determine selective RGS protein regulation of G protein-coupled receptor signaling

Class A and C GPCR Dimers in Neurodegenerative Diseases

Neurodegenerative diseases affect over 30 million people worldwide with an ascending trend. Most individuals suffering from these irreversible brain damages belong to the elderly population, with onset between 50 and 60 years. Although the pathophysiology of such diseases is partially known, it remains unclear upon which point a disease turns degenerative. Moreover, current therapeutics can treat some of the symptoms but often have severe side effects and become less effective in long-term treatment. For many neurodegenerative diseases, the involvement of G proteincoupled receptors (GPCRs), which are key players of neuronal transmission and plasticity, has become clearer and holds great promise in elucidating their biological mechanism. With this review, we introduce and summarize class A and class C GPCRs, known to form heterodimers or oligomers to increase their signalling repertoire. Additionally, the examples discussed here were shown to display relevant alterations in brain signalling and had already been associated with the pathophysiology of certain neurodegenerative diseases. Lastly, we classified the heterodimers into two categories of crosstalk, positive or negative, for which there is known evidence.

Residue-level determinants of RGS R4 subfamily GAP activity and specificity towards the Gi subfamily

The structural basis for the GTPase-accelerating activity of regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins, as well as the mechanistic basis for their specificity in interacting with the heterotrimeric (αβγ) G proteins they inactivate, is not sufficiently understood at the family level. Here, we used biochemical assays to compare RGS domains across the RGS family and map those individual residues that favorably contribute to GTPase-accelerating activity, and those residues responsible for attenuating RGS domain interactions with Gα subunits. We show that conserved interactions of RGS residues with both the Gα switch I and II regions are crucial for RGS activity, while the reciprocal effects of "modulatory" and "disruptor" residues selectively modulate RGS activity. Our results quantify how specific interactions between RGS domains and Gα subunits are set by a balance between favorable RGS residue interactions with particular Gα switch regions, and unfavorable interactions with the Gα helical domain.

Ratiometric GPCR signaling enables directional sensing in yeast

Accurate detection of extracellular chemical gradients is essential for many cellular behaviors. Gradient sensing is challenging for small cells, which can experience little difference in ligand concentrations on the up-gradient and down-gradient sides of the cell. Nevertheless, the tiny cells of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae reliably decode gradients of extracellular pheromones to find their mates. By imaging the behavior of polarity factors and pheromone receptors, we quantified the accuracy of initial polarization during mating encounters. We found that cells bias the orientation of initial polarity up-gradient, even though they have unevenly distributed receptors. Uneven receptor density means that the gradient of ligand-bound receptors does not accurately reflect the external pheromone gradient. Nevertheless, yeast cells appear to avoid being misled by responding to the fraction of occupied receptors rather than simply the concentration of ligand-bound receptors. Such ratiometric sensing also serves to amplify the gradient of active G protein. However, this process is quite error-prone, and initial errors are corrected during a subsequent indecisive phase in which polarity clusters exhibit erratic mobile behavior.

Cells use surface receptors to decode spatial information from chemical gradients, but accurate decoding is hampered by small cell size and the presence of molecular noise. This study shows that yeast cells decode pheromone gradients by measuring the local ratio of bound to unbound receptors. This mechanism corrects for uneven receptor density at the surface and amplifies the gradient transmitted to downstream components.

A highly conserved δ-opioid receptor region determines RGS4 interaction

The δ-opioid receptor (δ-OR) couples to Gi/Go proteins to modulate a variety of responses in the nervous system. Τhe regulator of G protein signalling 4 (RGS4) was previously shown to directly interact within the C-terminal region of δ-OR using its N-terminal domain to negatively modulate opioid receptor signalling. Herein, using molecular dynamics simulations and in vitro pull-down experiments we delimit this interaction to 12 helix 8 residues of δ-ΟR and to the first 17 N-terminal residues (NT) of RGS4. Monitoring the complex arrangement and stabilization between RGS4 and δ-OR by molecular dynamics simulations combined with mutagenesis studies, we defined that two critical interactions are formed: one between Phe329 of helix8 of δ-ΟR and Pro9 of the NT of RGS4 and the other a salt bridge between Glu323 of δ-ΟR and Lys17 of RGS4. Our observations allow drafting for the first time a structural model of a ternary complex including the δ-opioid receptor, a G protein and a RGS protein. Furthermore, the high degree of conservation among opioid receptors of the RGS4-binding region, points to a conserved interaction mode between opioid receptors and this important regulatory protein.

RGS6 and RGS7 Discriminate between the Highly Similar Gαi and Gαo Proteins Using a Two-Tiered Specificity Strategy

RGS6 and RGS7 are regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins that inactivate heterotrimeric (αβγ) G proteins and mediate diverse biological functions, such as cardiac and neuronal signaling. Uniquely, both RGS6 and RGS7 can discriminate between Gα_o and Gα_i1-two similar Gα subunits that belong to the same G_i sub-family. Here, we show that the isolated RGS domains of RGS6 and RGS7 are sufficient to achieve this specificity. We identified three specific RGS6/7 "disruptor residues" that can attenuate RGS interactions toward Gα subunits and demonstrated that their insertion into a representative high-activity RGS causes a significant, yet non-specific, reduction in activity. We further identified a unique "modulatory" residue that bypasses this negative effect, specifically toward Gα_o. Hence, the exquisite specificity of RGS6 and RGS7 toward closely related Gα subunits is achieved via a two-tier specificity system, whereby a Gα-specific modulatory motif overrides the inhibitory effect of non-specific disruptor residues. Our findings expand the understanding of the molecular toolkit used by the RGS family to achieve specific interactions with selected Gα subunits-emphasizing the functional importance of the RGS domain in determining the activity and selectivity of RGS R7 sub-family members toward particular Gα subunits.

Genetic Analysis of Rare Human Variants of Regulators of G Protein Signaling Proteins and Their Role in Human Physiology and Disease

Regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins modulate the physiologic actions of many neurotransmitters, hormones, and other signaling molecules. Human RGS proteins comprise a family of 20 canonical proteins that bind directly to G protein-coupled receptors/G protein complexes to limit the lifetime of their signaling events, which regulate all aspects of cell and organ physiology. Genetic variations account for diverse human traits and individual predispositions to disease. RGS proteins contribute to many complex polygenic human traits and pathologies such as hypertension, atherosclerosis, schizophrenia, depression, addiction, cancers, and many others. Recent analysis indicates that most human diseases are due to extremely rare genetic variants. In this study, we summarize physiologic roles for RGS proteins and links to human diseases/traits and report rare variants found within each human RGS protein exome sequence derived from global population studies. Each RGS sequence is analyzed using recently described bioinformatics and proteomic tools for measures of missense tolerance ratio paired with combined annotation-dependent depletion scores, and protein post-translational modification (PTM) alignment cluster analysis. We highlight selected variants within the well-studied RGS domain that likely disrupt RGS protein functions and provide comprehensive variant and PTM data for each RGS protein for future study. We propose that rare variants in functionally sensitive regions of RGS proteins confer profound change-of-function phenotypes that may contribute, in newly appreciated ways, to complex human diseases and/or traits. This information provides investigators with a valuable database to explore variation in RGS protein function, and for targeting RGS proteins as future therapeutic targets.

Regulators of G protein signaling in cardiovascular function during pregnancy

G protein-coupled receptor signaling mechanisms are implicated in many aspects of cardiovascular control, and dysfunction of such signaling mechanisms is commonly associated with disease states. Investigators have identified a large number of regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins that variously contribute to the modulation of intracellular second-messenger signaling kinetics. These many RGS proteins each interact with a specific set of second-messenger cascades and receptor types and exhibit tissue-specific expression patterns. Increasing evidence supports the contribution of RGS proteins, or their loss, in the pathogenesis of cardiovascular dysfunctions. This review summarizes the current understanding of the functional contributions of RGS proteins, particularly within the B/R4 family, in cardiovascular disorders of pregnancy including gestational hypertension, uterine artery dysfunction, and preeclampsia.

Inflammation-associated regulation of RGS in astrocytes and putative implication in neuropathic pain

Background

Regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS) are major physiological modulators of G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCR) signaling. Several GPCRs expressed in both neurons and astrocytes participate in the central control of pain processing, and the reduced efficacy of analgesics in neuropathic pain conditions may rely on alterations in RGS function. The expression and the regulation of RGS in astrocytes is poorly documented, and we herein hypothesized that neuroinflammation which is commonly observed in neuropathic pain could influence RGS expression in astrocytes.

Methods

In a validated model of neuropathic pain, the spared nerve injury (SNI), the regulation of RGS2, RGS3, RGS4, and RGS7 messenger RNA (mRNA) was examined up to 3 weeks after the lesion. Changes in the expression of the same RGS were also studied in cultured astrocytes exposed to defined activation protocols or to inflammatory cytokines.

Results

We evidenced a differential regulation of these RGS in the lumbar spinal cord of animals undergoing SNI. In particular, RGS3 appeared upregulated at early stages after the lesion whereas expression of RGS2 and RGS4 was decreased at later stages. Decrease in RGS7 expression was already observed after 3 days and outlasted until 21 days after the lesion. In cultured astrocytes, we observed that changes in the culture conditions distinctly influenced the constitutive expression of these RGS. Also, brief exposures (4 to 8 h) to either interleukin-1β, interleukin-6, or tumor necrosis factor α caused rapid changes in the mRNA levels of the RGS, which however did not strictly recapitulate the regulations observed in the spinal cord of lesioned animals. Longer exposure (48 h) to inflammatory cytokines barely influenced RGS expression, confirming the rapid but transient regulation of these cell signaling modulators.

Conclusion

Changes in the environment of astrocytes mimicking the inflammation observed in the model of neuropathic pain can affect RGS expression. Considering the role of astrocytes in the onset and progression of neuropathic pain, we propose that the inflammation-mediated modulation of RGS in astrocytes constitutes an adaptive mechanism in a context of neuroinflammation and may participate in the regulation of nociception.

Effective Attenuation of Adenosine A1R Signaling by Neurabin Requires Oligomerization of Neurabin

The adenosine A1 receptor (A1R) is a key mediator of the neuroprotective effect by endogenous adenosine. Yet targeting this receptor for neuroprotection is challenging due to its broad expression throughout the body. A mechanistic understanding of the regulation of A1R signaling is necessary for the future design of therapeutic agents that can selectively enhance A1R-mediated responses in the nervous system. In this study, we demonstrate that A1R activation leads to a sustained localization of regulator of G protein signaling 4 (RGS4) at the plasma membrane, a process that requires neurabin (a neural tissue-specific protein). A1R and RGS4 interact with the overlapping regions of neurabin. In addition, neurabin domains required for oligomerization are essential for formation of the A1R/neurabin/RGS4 ternary complex, as well as for stable localization of RGS4 at the plasma membrane and attenuation of A1R signaling. Thus, A1R and RGS4 each likely interact with one neurabin molecule in a neurabin homo-oligomer to form a ternary complex, representing a novel mode of regulation of G protein-coupled receptor signaling by scaffolding proteins. Our mechanistic analysis of neurabin-mediated regulation of A1R signaling in this study will be valuable for the future design of therapeutic agents that can selectively enhance A1R-mediated responses in the nervous system.

A novel regulatory role of RGS4 in STAT5B activation, neurite outgrowth and neuronal differentiation

The Regulator of G protein Signalling 4 (RGS4) is a multitask protein that interacts with and negatively modulates opioid receptor signalling. Previously, we showed that the δ-opioid receptor (δ-OR) forms a multiprotein signalling complex consisting of Gi/Go proteins and the Signal Transducer and Activator of Transcription 5B (STAT5B) that leads to neuronal differentiation and neurite outgrowth upon δ-ΟR activation. Here, we investigated whether RGS4 could participate in signalling pathways to regulate neurotropic events. We demonstrate that RGS4 interacts directly with STAT5B independently of δ-ΟR presence both in vitro and in living cells. This interaction involves the N-terminal portion of RGS4 and the DNA-binding SH3 domain of STAT5B. Expression of RGS4 in HEK293 cells expressing δ-OR and/or erythropoietin receptor results in inhibition of [D-Ser², Leu⁵, Thr⁶]-enkephalin (DSLET)-and erythropoietin-dependent STAT5B phosphorylation and subsequent transcriptional activation. DSLET-dependent neurite outgrowth of neuroblastoma cells is also blocked by RGS4 expression, whereas primary cortical cultures of RGS4 knockout mice (RGS4^-/-) exhibit enhanced neuronal sprouting after δ-OR activation. Additional studies in adult brain extracts from RGS4^-/- mice revealed increased levels of p-STAT5B. Finally, neuronal progenitor cultures from RGS4^-/- mice exhibit enhanced proliferation with concomitant increases in the mRNA levels of the anti-apoptotic STAT5B target genes bcl2 and bcl-xl. These observations suggest that RGS4 is implicated in opioid dependent neuronal differentiation and neurite outgrowth via a "non-canonical" signaling pathway regulating STAT5B-directed responses.

Yeast GPCR signaling reflects the fraction of occupied receptors, not the number

According to receptor theory, the effect of a ligand depends on the amount of agonist-receptor complex. Therefore, changes in receptor abundance should have quantitative effects. However, the response to pheromone in Saccharomyces cerevisiae is robust (unaltered) to increases or reductions in the abundance of the G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR), Ste2, responding instead to the fraction of occupied receptor. We found experimentally that this robustness originates during G-protein activation. We developed a complete mathematical model of this step, which suggested the ability to compute fractional occupancy depends on the physical interaction between the inhibitory regulator of G-protein signaling (RGS), Sst2, and the receptor. Accordingly, replacing Sst2 by the heterologous hsRGS4, incapable of interacting with the receptor, abolished robustness. Conversely, forcing hsRGS4:Ste2 interaction restored robustness. Taken together with other results of our work, we conclude that this GPCR pathway computes fractional occupancy because ligand-bound GPCR-RGS complexes stimulate signaling while unoccupied complexes actively inhibit it. In eukaryotes, many RGSs bind to specific GPCRs, suggesting these complexes with opposing activities also detect fraction occupancy by a ratiometric measurement. Such complexes operate as push-pull devices, which we have recently described.

Regulator of G protein signaling 2 (Rgs2) regulates neural crest development through Pparδ-Sox10 cascade

Neural crest cells are multipotent progenitors that migrate extensively and differentiate into numerous derivatives. The developmental plasticity and migratory ability of neural crest cells render them an attractive model for studying numerous aspects of cell progression. We observed that zebrafish rgs2 was expressed in neural crest cells. Disrupting Rgs2 expression by using a dominant negative rgs2 construct or rgs2 morpholinos reduced GTPase-activating protein activity, induced the formation of neural crest progenitors, increased the proliferation of nonectomesenchymal neural crest cells, and inhibited the formation of ectomesenchymal neural crest derivatives. The transcription of pparda (which encodes Pparδ, a Wnt-activated transcription factor) was upregulated in Rgs2-deficient embryos, and Pparδ inhibition using a selective antagonist in the Rgs2-deficient embryos repaired neural crest defects. Our results clarify the mechanism through which the Rgs2-Pparδ cascade regulates neural crest development; specifically, Pparδ directly binds to the promoter and upregulates the transcription of the neural crest specifier sox10. This study reveals a unique regulatory mechanism, the Rgs2-Pparδ-Sox10 signaling cascade, and defines a key molecular regulator, Rgs2, in neural crest development.

RGS14 regulates the lifetime of Gα-GTP signaling but does not prolong Gβγ signaling following receptor activation in live cells

RGS14 is a multifunctional scaffolding protein possessing two distinct G protein interaction sites including a regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) domain that acts as a GTPase activating protein (GAP) to deactivate Gαi/o‐GTP proteins, and a G protein regulatory (GPR) motif that binds inactive Gαi1/3‐GDP proteins independent of Gβγ. GPR interactions with Gαi recruit RGS14 to the plasma membrane to interact with Gαi‐linked GPCRs and regulate Gαi signaling. While RGS14 actions on Gα proteins are well characterized, consequent effects on Gβγ signaling remain unknown. Conventional RGS proteins act as dedicated GAPs to deactivate Gα and Gβγ signaling following receptor activation. RGS14 may do the same or, alternatively, may coordinate its actions to deactivate Gα‐GTP with the RGS domain and then capture the same Gα‐GDP via its GPR motif to prevent heterotrimer reassociation and prolong Gβγ signaling. To test this idea, we compared the regulation of G protein activation and deactivation kinetics by a conventional RGS protein, RGS4, and RGS14 in response to GPCR agonist/antagonist treatment utilizing bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET). Co‐expression of either RGS4 or RGS14 inhibited the release of free Gβγ after agonist stimulation and increased the deactivation rate of Gα, consistent with their roles as GTPase activating proteins (GAPs). Overexpression of inactive Gαi1 to recruit RGS14 to the plasma membrane did not alter RGS14′s capacity to act as a GAP for a second Gαo protein. These results demonstrate the role of RGS14 as a dedicated GAP and suggest that the G protein regulatory (GPR) motif functions independently of the RGS domain and is silent in regulating GAP activity in a cellular context.

Roles for Regulator of G Protein Signaling Proteins in Synaptic Signaling and Plasticity

The regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) family of proteins serves critical roles in G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) and heterotrimeric G protein signal transduction. RGS proteins are best understood as negative regulators of GPCR/G protein signaling. They achieve this by acting as GTPase activating proteins (GAPs) for Gα subunits and accelerating the turnoff of G protein signaling. Many RGS proteins also bind additional signaling partners that either regulate their functions or enable them to regulate other important signaling events. At neuronal synapses, GPCRs, G proteins, and RGS proteins work in coordination to regulate key aspects of neurotransmitter release, synaptic transmission, and synaptic plasticity, which are necessary for central nervous system physiology and behavior. Accumulating evidence has revealed key roles for specific RGS proteins in multiple signaling pathways at neuronal synapses, regulating both pre- and postsynaptic signaling events and synaptic plasticity. Here, we review and highlight the current knowledge of specific RGS proteins (RGS2, RGS4, RGS7, RGS9-2, and RGS14) that have been clearly demonstrated to serve critical roles in modulating synaptic signaling and plasticity throughout the brain, and we consider their potential as future therapeutic targets.

Adenosine Receptors Differentially Regulate the Expression of Regulators of G-Protein Signalling (RGS) 2, 3 and 4 in Astrocyte-Like Cells

The “regulators of g-protein signalling” (RGS) comprise a large family of proteins that limit by virtue of their GTPase accelerating protein domain the signal transduction of G-protein coupled receptors. RGS proteins have been implicated in various neuropsychiatric diseases such as schizophrenia, drug abuse, depression and anxiety and aggressive behaviour. Since conditions associated with a large increase of adenosine in the brain such as seizures or ischemia were reported to modify the expression of some RGS proteins we hypothesized that adenosine might regulate RGS expression in neural cells. We measured the expression of RGS-2,-3, and -4 in both transformed glia cells (human U373 MG astrocytoma cells) and in primary rat astrocyte cultures stimulated with adenosine agonists. Expression of RGS-2 mRNA as well as RGS2 protein was increased up to 30-fold by adenosine agonists in astrocytes. The order of potency of agonists and the blockade by the adenosine A2B-antagonist MRS1706 indicated that this effect was largely mediated by adenosine A2B receptors. However, a smaller effect was observed due to activation of adenosine A2A receptors. In astrocytoma cells adenosine agonists elicited an increase in RGS-2 expression solely mediated by A2B receptors. Expression of RGS-3 was inhibited by adenosine agonists in both astrocytoma cells and astrocytes. However while this effect was mediated by A2B receptors in astrocytoma cells it was mediated by A2A receptors in astrocytes as assessed by the order of potency of agonists and selective blockade by the specific antagonists MRS1706 and ZM241385 respectively. RGS-4 expression was inhibited in astrocytoma cells but enhanced in astrocytes by adenosine agonists.

Regulator of G Protein Signaling 14: A Molecular Brake on Synaptic Plasticity Linked to Learning and Memory

The regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins are a diverse family of proteins that function as central components of G protein and other signaling pathways. In the brain, regulator of G protein signaling 14 (RGS14) is enriched in neurons in the hippocampus where the mRNA and protein are highly expressed. This brain region plays a major role in processing learning and forming new memories. RGS14 is an unusual RGS protein that acts as a multifunctional scaffolding protein to integrate signaling events and pathways essential for synaptic plasticity, including conventional and unconventional G protein signaling, mitogen-activated protein kinase, and, possibly, calcium signaling pathways. Within the hippocampus of primates and rodents, RGS14 is predominantly found in the enigmatic CA2 subfield. Principal neurons within the CA2 subfield differ from neighboring hippocampal regions in that they lack a capacity for long-term potentiation (LTP) of synaptic transmission, which is widely viewed as the cellular substrate of learning and memory formation. RGS14 was recently identified as a natural suppressor of LTP in hippocampal CA2 neurons as well as forms of learning and memory that depend on the hippocampus. Although CA2 has only recently been studied, compelling recent evidence implicates area CA2 as a critical component of hippocampus circuitry with functional roles in mediating certain types of learning and memory. This review will highlight the known functions of RGS14 in cell signaling and hippocampus physiology, and discuss potential roles for RGS14 in human cognition and disease.

Regulators of G-protein-signaling proteins: negative modulators of G-protein-coupled receptor signaling

Regulators of G-protein-signaling (RGS) proteins are a category of intracellular proteins that have an inhibitory effect on the intracellular signaling produced by G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). RGS along with RGS-like proteins switch on through direct contact G-alpha subunits providing a variety of intracellular functions through intracellular signaling. RGS proteins have a common RGS domain that binds to G alpha. RGS proteins accelerate GTPase and thus enhance guanosine triphosphate hydrolysis through the alpha subunit of heterotrimeric G proteins. As a result, they inactivate the G protein and quickly turn off GPCR signaling thus terminating the resulting downstream signals. Activity and subcellular localization of RGS proteins can be changed through covalent molecular changes to the enzyme, differential gene splicing, and processing of the protein. Other roles of RGS proteins have shown them to not be solely committed to being inhibitors but behave more as modulators and integrators of signaling. RGS proteins modulate the duration and kinetics of slow calcium oscillations and rapid phototransduction and ion signaling events. In other cases, RGS proteins integrate G proteins with signaling pathways linked to such diverse cellular responses as cell growth and differentiation, cell motility, and intracellular trafficking. Human and animal studies have revealed that RGS proteins play a vital role in physiology and can be ideal targets for diseases such as those related to addiction where receptor signaling seems continuously switched on.

Regulator of G protein signaling 2 (RGS2) and RGS4 form distinct G protein-dependent complexes with protease activated-receptor 1 (PAR1) in live cells

Protease-activated receptor 1 (PAR1) is a G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR) that is activated by natural proteases to regulate many physiological actions. We previously reported that PAR1 couples to G_i, G_q and G₁₂ to activate linked signaling pathways. Regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins serve as GTPase activating proteins to inhibit GPCR/G protein signaling. Some RGS proteins interact directly with certain GPCRs to modulate their signals, though cellular mechanisms dictating selective RGS/GPCR coupling are poorly understood. Here, using bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET), we tested whether RGS2 and RGS4 bind to PAR1 in live COS-7 cells to regulate PAR1/Gα-mediated signaling. We report that PAR1 selectively interacts with either RGS2 or RGS4 in a G protein-dependent manner. Very little BRET activity is observed between PAR1-Venus (PAR1-Ven) and either RGS2-Luciferase (RGS2-Luc) or RGS4-Luc in the absence of Gα. However, in the presence of specific Gα subunits, BRET activity was markedly enhanced between PAR1-RGS2 by Gα_q/11, and PAR1-RGS4 by Gα_o, but not by other Gα subunits. Gα_q/11-YFP/RGS2-Luc BRET activity is promoted by PAR1 and is markedly enhanced by agonist (TFLLR) stimulation. However, PAR1-Ven/RGS-Luc BRET activity was blocked by a PAR1 mutant (R205A) that eliminates PAR1-G_q/11 coupling. The purified intracellular third loop of PAR1 binds directly to purified His-RGS2 or His-RGS4. In cells, RGS2 and RGS4 inhibited PAR1/Gα-mediated calcium and MAPK/ERK signaling, respectively, but not RhoA signaling. Our findings indicate that RGS2 and RGS4 interact directly with PAR1 in Gα-dependent manner to modulate PAR1/Gα-mediated signaling, and highlight a cellular mechanism for selective GPCR/G protein/RGS coupling.

Functional role, mechanisms of regulation, and therapeutic potential of regulator of G protein signaling 2 in the heart

G protein-mediated signal transduction is essential for the regulation of cardiovascular function, including heart rate, growth, contraction, and vascular tone. Regulators of G protein Signaling (RGS proteins) fine-tune G protein-coupled receptor-induced signaling by regulating its magnitude and duration through direct interaction with the α subunits of heterotrimeric G proteins. Changes in the RGS protein expression and/or function in the heart often lead to pathophysiological changes and are associated with cardiac disease in animals and humans, including hypertrophy, fibrosis development, heart failure, and arrhythmias. This article focuses on Regulator of G protein Signaling 2 (RGS2), which is widely expressed in many tissues and is highly regulated in its expression and function. Most information to date has been obtained in biochemical, cellular, and animal studies, but data from humans is emerging. We review recent advances on the functional role of cardiovascular RGS2 and the mechanisms that determine its signaling selectivity, expression, and functionality. We highlight key unanswered questions and discuss the potential of RGS2 as a therapeutic target.

Zebrafish rgs4 is essential for motility and axonogenesis mediated by Akt signaling

The schizophrenia susceptibility gene, Rgs4, is one of the most intensively studied regulators of G-protein signaling members, well known to be fundamental in regulating neurotransmission. However, little is known about its role in the developing nervous system. We have isolated zebrafish rgs4 and shown that it is transcribed in the developing nervous system. Rgs4 knockdown did not affect neuron number and patterning but resulted in locomotion defects and aberrant development of axons. This was confirmed using a selective Rgs4 inhibitor, CCG-4986. Rgs4 knockdown also attenuated the level of phosphorylated-Akt1, and injection of constitutively-activated AKT1 rescued the motility defects and axonal phenotypes in the spinal cord but not in the hindbrain and trigeminal neurons. Our in vivo analysis reveals a novel role for Rgs4 in regulating axonogenesis during embryogenesis, which is mediated by another schizophrenia-associated gene, Akt1, in a region-specific manner.

A finer tuning of G-protein signaling through regulated control of RGS proteins

Regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS) proteins are GTPase-activating proteins (GAP) for various Gα subunits of heterotrimeric G proteins. Through this mechanism, RGS proteins regulate the magnitude and duration of G-protein-coupled receptor signaling and are often referred to as fine tuners of G-protein signaling. Increasing evidence suggests that RGS proteins themselves are regulated through multiple mechanisms, which may provide an even finer tuning of G-protein signaling and crosstalk between G-protein-coupled receptors and other signaling pathways. This review summarizes the current data on the control of RGS function through regulated expression, intracellular localization, and covalent modification of RGS proteins, as related to cell function and the pathogenesis of diseases.

Neurabin scaffolding of adenosine receptor and RGS4 regulates anti-seizure effect of endogenous adenosine

Endogenous adenosine is an essential protective agent against neural damage by various insults to the brain. However, the therapeutic potential of adenosine receptor-directed ligands for neuroprotection is offset by side effects in peripheral tissues and organs. An increase in adenosine receptor responsiveness to endogenous adenosine would enhance neuroprotection while avoiding the confounding effects of exogenous ligands. Here we report novel regulation of adenosine-evoked responses by a neural tissue-specific protein, neurabin. Neurabin attenuated adenosine A(1) receptor (A1R) signaling by assembling a complex between the A1R and the regulator of G-protein signaling 4 (RGS4), a protein known to turn off G-protein signaling. Inactivation of the neurabin gene enhanced A1R signaling and promoted the protective effect of adenosine against excitotoxic seizure and neuronal death in mice. Furthermore, administration of a small molecule inhibitor of RGS4 significantly attenuated seizure severity in mice. Notably, the dose of kainate capable of inducing an ∼50% rate of death in wild-type (WT) mice did not affect neurabin-null mice or WT mice cotreated with an RGS4 inhibitor. The enhanced anti-seizure and neuroprotective effect achieved by disruption of the A1R/neurabin/RGS4 complex is elicited by the on-site and on-demand release of endogenous adenosine, and does not require administration of A1R ligands. These data identify neurabin-RGS4 as a novel tissue-selective regulatory mechanism for fine-tuning adenosine receptor function in the nervous system. Moreover, these findings implicate the A1R/neurabin/RGS4 complex as a valid therapeutic target for specifically manipulating the neuroprotective effects of endogenous adenosine.

Regulatory mechanisms underlying the modulation of GIRK1/GIRK4 heteromeric channels by P2Y receptors

The muscarinic K(+) channel (I (K,ACh)) is a heterotetramer composed of GIRK1 (Kir3.1) and GIRK4 (Kir3.4) subunits of a G protein-coupled inwardly rectifying channel, and plays an important role in mediating electrical responses to the vagal stimulation in the heart. I (K,ACh) displays biphasic changes (activation followed by inhibition) through the stimulation of the purinergic P2Y receptors, but the regulatory mechanism involved in these modulation of I (K,ACh) by P2Y receptors remains to be fully elucidated. Various P2Y receptor subtypes and GIRK1/GIRK4 (I (GIRK)) were co-expressed in Chinese hamster ovary cells, and the effect of stimulation of P2Y receptor subtypes on I (GIRK) were examined using the whole-cell patch-clamp method. Extracellular application of 10 μM ATP induced a transient activation of I (GIRK) through the P2Y(1) receptor, which was completely abolished by pretreatment with pertussis toxin. ATP initially caused an additive transient increase in ACh-activated I (GIRK) (via M(2) receptor), which was followed by subsequent inhibition. This inhibition of I (GIRK) by ATP was attenuated by co-expression of regulator of G-protein signaling 2, or phosphatidylinositol-4-phosphate-5-kinase, or intracellular phosphatidylinositol 4,5-bisphosphate loading, but not by the exposure to protein kinase C inhibitors. P2Y(4) stimulation also persistently suppressed the ACh-activated I (GIRK). In addition, I (GIRK) evoked by the stimulation of the P2Y(4) receptor exhibited a transient activation, but that evoked by the stimulation of P2Y(2) or P2Y(12) receptor showed a rather persistent activation. These results reveal (1) that P2Y(1) and P2Y(4) are primarily coupled to the G(q)-phospholipase C-pathway, while being weakly linked to G(i/o), and (2) that P2Y(2) and P2Y(12) involve G(i/o) activation.

Regulator of G protein signaling 2 deficiency causes endothelial dysfunction and impaired endothelium-derived hyperpolarizing factor-mediated relaxation by dysregulating Gi/o signaling

Regulator of G protein signaling 2 (RGS2) is a GTPase-activating protein for G(q/11)α and G(i/o)α subunits. RGS2 deficiency is linked to hypertension in mice and humans, although causative mechanisms are not understood. Because endothelial dysfunction and increased peripheral resistance are hallmarks of hypertension, determining whether RGS2 regulates microvascular reactivity may reveal mechanisms relevant to cardiovascular disease. Here we have determined the effects of systemic versus endothelium- or vascular smooth muscle-specific deletion of RGS2 on microvascular contraction and relaxation. Contraction and relaxation of mesenteric resistance arteries were analyzed in response to phenylephrine, sodium nitroprusside, or acetylcholine with or without inhibitors of nitric oxide (NO) synthase or K(+) channels that mediate endothelium-derived hyperpolarizing factor (EDHF)-dependent relaxation. The results showed that deleting RGS2 in vascular smooth muscle had minor effects. Systemic or endothelium-specific deletion of RGS2 strikingly inhibited acetylcholine-evoked relaxation. Endothelium-specific deletion of RGS2 had little effect on NO-dependent relaxation but markedly impaired EDHF-dependent relaxation. Acute, inducible deletion of RGS2 in endothelium did not affect blood pressure significantly. Impaired EDHF-mediated vasodilatation was rescued by blocking G(i/o)α activation with pertussis toxin. These findings indicated that systemic or endothelium-specific RGS2 deficiency causes endothelial dysfunction resulting in impaired EDHF-dependent vasodilatation. RGS2 deficiency enables endothelial G(i/o) activity to inhibit EDHF-dependent relaxation, whereas RGS2 sufficiency facilitates EDHF-evoked relaxation by squelching endothelial G(i/o) activity. Mutation or down-regulation of RGS2 in hypertension patients therefore may contribute to endothelial dysfunction and defective EDHF-dependent relaxation. Blunting G(i/o) signaling might improve endothelial function in such patients.

RGS proteins maintain robustness of GPCR-GIRK coupling by selective stimulation of the G protein subunit Gαo

Termination of heterotrimeric guanine nucleotide-binding protein (G protein) signaling downstream of activated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) is accelerated by regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins, which act as guanosine triphosphatase (GTPase)-activating proteins (GAPs). Using a Xenopus oocyte expression system, we found that although RGS proteins had a negative effect of accelerating the kinetics of GPCR-coupled potassium ion (K+) channel (GIRK) deactivation, they also had positive effects of increasing the amplitudes and activation kinetics of neurotransmitter-evoked GIRK currents. The RGS box domain alone was sufficient to stimulate neurotransmitter-dependent activation of GIRK currents. Moreover, RGS4 mutants with compromised GAP activity augmented GPCR-GIRK coupling (as assessed by measurement of the GIRK current elicited by neurotransmitter). By accelerating G protein activation kinetics, RGS4 specifically stimulated Gα₀, which stimulated GPCR-GIRK coupling despite its GAP activity. Opposing actions of RGS proteins thus both stimulate and inhibit G proteins to modulate the amplitude and kinetics of neurotransmitter-induced GIRK currents, thereby distinguishing the responses to activation of different G protein isoforms.

Signaling by sensory receptors

Sensory systems detect small molecules, mechanical perturbations, or radiation via the activation of receptor proteins and downstream signaling cascades in specialized sensory cells. In vertebrates, the two principal categories of sensory receptors are ion channels, which mediate mechanosensation, thermosensation, and acid and salt taste; and G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), which mediate vision, olfaction, and sweet, bitter, and umami tastes. GPCR-based signaling in rods and cones illustrates the fundamental principles of rapid activation and inactivation, signal amplification, and gain control. Channel-based sensory systems illustrate the integration of diverse modulatory signals at the receptor, as seen in the thermosensory/pain system, and the rapid response kinetics that are possible with direct mechanical gating of a channel. Comparisons of sensory receptor gene sequences reveal numerous examples in which gene duplication and sequence divergence have created novel sensory specificities. This is the evolutionary basis for the observed diversity in temperature- and ligand-dependent gating among thermosensory channels, spectral tuning among visual pigments, and odorant binding among olfactory receptors. The coding of complex external stimuli by a limited number of sensory receptor types has led to the evolution of modality-specific and species-specific patterns of retention or loss of sensory information, a filtering operation that selectively emphasizes features in the stimulus that enhance survival in a particular ecological niche. The many specialized anatomic structures, such as the eye and ear, that house primary sensory neurons further enhance the detection of relevant stimuli.

G protein-coupled receptors and resistance to inhibitors of cholinesterase-8A (Ric-8A) both regulate the regulator of g protein signaling 14 RGS14·Gαi1 complex in live cells

Regulator of G protein Signaling 14 (RGS14) is a multifunctional scaffolding protein that integrates both conventional and unconventional G protein signaling pathways. Like other RGS (regulator of G protein signaling) proteins, RGS14 acts as a GTPase accelerating protein to terminate conventional Gα(i/o) signaling. However, unlike other RGS proteins, RGS14 also contains a G protein regulatory/GoLoco motif that specifically binds Gα(i1/3)-GDP in cells and in vitro. The non-receptor guanine nucleotide exchange factor Ric-8A can bind and act on the RGS14·Gα(i1)-GDP complex to play a role in unconventional G protein signaling independent of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Here we demonstrate that RGS14 forms a Gα(i/o)-dependent complex with a G(i)-linked GPCR and that this complex is regulated by receptor agonist and Ric-8A (resistance to inhibitors of cholinesterase-8A). Using live cell bioluminescence resonance energy transfer, we show that RGS14 functionally associates with the α(2A)-adrenergic receptor (α(2A)-AR) in a Gα(i/o)-dependent manner. This interaction is markedly disrupted after receptor stimulation by the specific agonist UK14304, suggesting complex dissociation or rearrangement. Agonist-mediated dissociation of the RGS14·α(2A)-AR complex occurs in the presence of Gα(i/o) but not Gα(s) or Gα(q). Unexpectedly, RGS14 does not dissociate from Gα(i1) in the presence of stimulated α(2A)-AR, suggesting preservation of RGS14·Gα(i1) complexes after receptor activation. However, Ric-8A facilitates dissociation of both the RGS14·Gα(i1) complex and the Gα(i1)-dependent RGS14·α(2A)-AR complex after receptor activation. Together, these findings indicate that RGS14 can form complexes with GPCRs in cells that are dependent on Gα(i/o) and that these RGS14·Gα(i1)·GPCR complexes may be substrates for other signaling partners such as Ric-8A.

Regulators of G-protein signaling in the heart and their potential as therapeutic targets

Signal transduction through G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) is central for the regulation of virtually all cellular functions and has been widely implicated in human disease. Regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS proteins) belong to a diverse protein family that was originally discovered for their ability to accelerate signal termination in response to GPCR stimulation, thereby reducing the amplitude and duration of GPCR effects. All RGS proteins share a common RGS domain that interacts with G protein α subunits and mediates their biological regulation of GPCR signaling. However, RGS proteins differ widely in size and the organization of their sequences flanking the RGS domain, which contain several additional functional domains that facilitate protein-protein (or protein-lipid) interactions. RGS proteins are subject to posttranslational modifications, and, in addition, their expression, activity, and subcellular localization can be dynamically regulated. Thus, there exists a wide array of mechanisms that facilitate their proper function as modulators and integrators of G-protein signaling. Several RGS proteins have been implicated in the cardiac remodeling response and heart rate regulation, and changes in RGS protein expression and/or function are believed to participate in the pathophysiology of cardiac hypertrophy, failure and arrhythmias as well as hypertension. This review is based on recent advances in our understanding of the expression pattern, regulation, and functional role of canonical RGS proteins, with a special focus on the healthy heart and the diseased heart. In addition, we discuss their potential and promise as therapeutic targets as well as strategies to modulate their expression and function.

RGS14 at the interface of hippocampal signaling and synaptic plasticity

Learning and memory are encoded within the brain as biochemical and physical changes at synapses that alter synaptic transmission, a process known as synaptic plasticity. Although much is known about factors that positively regulate synaptic plasticity, very little is known about factors that negatively regulate this process. Recently, the signaling protein RGS14 (Regulator of G protein Signaling 14) was identified as a natural suppressor of hippocampal-based learning and memory as well as synaptic plasticity within CA2 hippocampal neurons. RGS14 is a multifunctional scaffolding protein that integrates unconventional G protein and mitogen-activated protein (MAP) kinase signaling pathways that are themselves key regulators of synaptic plasticity, learning, and memory. Here, we highlight the known roles for RGS14 in brain physiology and unconventional G protein signaling pathways, and propose molecular models to describe how RGS14 may integrate these diverse signaling pathways to modulate synaptic plasticity in CA2 hippocampal neurons.

Evidence for RGS4 modulation of melatonin and thyrotrophin signalling pathways in the pars tuberalis

In mammals, the pineal hormone melatonin is secreted nocturnally and acts in the pars tuberalis (PT) of the anterior pituitary to control seasonal neuroendocrine function. Melatonin signals through the type 1 Gi-protein coupled melatonin receptor (MT1), inhibiting adenylate cyclase (AC) activity and thereby reducing intracellular concentrations of the second messenger, cAMP. Because melatonin action ceases by the end of the night, this allows a daily rise in cAMP levels, which plays a key part in the photoperiodic response mechanism in the PT. In addition, melatonin receptor desensitisation and sensitisation of AC by melatonin itself appear to fine-tune this process. Opposing the actions of melatonin, thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), produced by PT cells, signals through its cognate Gs-protein coupled receptor (TSH-R), leading to increased cAMP production. This effect may contribute to increased TSH production by the PT during spring and summer, and is of considerable interest because TSH plays a pivotal role in seasonal neuroendocrine function. Because cAMP stands at the crossroads between melatonin and TSH signalling pathways, any protein modulating cAMP production has the potential to impact on photoperiodic readout. In the present study, we show that the regulator of G-protein signalling RGS4 is a melatonin-responsive gene, whose expression in the PT increases some 2.5-fold after melatonin treatment. Correspondingly, RGS4 expression is acutely sensitive to changing day length. In sheep acclimated to short days (SP, 8 h light/day), RGS4 expression increases sharply following dark onset, peaking in the middle of the night before declining to basal levels by dawn. Extending the day length to 16 h (LP) by an acute 8-h delay in lights off causes a corresponding delay in the evening rise of RGS4 expression, and the return to basal levels is delayed some 4 h into the next morning. To test the hypothesis that RGS4 expression modulates interactions between melatonin- and TSH-dependent cAMP signalling pathways, we used transient transfections of MT1, TSH-R and RGS4 in COS7 cells along with a cAMP-response element luciferase reporter (CRE-luc). RGS4 attenuated MT1-mediated inhibition of TSH-stimulated CRE-luc activation. We propose that RGS4 contributes to photoperiodic sensitivity in the morning induction of cAMP-dependent gene expression in the PT.

RGS10 restricts upregulation by chemokines of T cell adhesion mediated by α4β1 and αLβ2 integrins

Chemokines rapidly and transiently upregulate α4β1 and αLβ2 integrin-mediated adhesion during T lymphocyte extravasation by activating Gα-dependent inside-out signaling. To limit and terminate Gα-mediated signaling, cells can use several mechanisms, including the action of regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins, which accelerate the GTPase activity of Gα subunits. Using human T cells silenced for or overexpressing RGS10, we show in this article that RGS10 functions as an inhibitor of Gα(i)-dependent, chemokine-upregulated T cell adhesion mediated by α4β1 and αLβ2. Shear stress-dependent detachment and cell spreading analyses revealed that RGS10 action mainly targets the adhesion strengthening and spreading phases of α4β1-mediated cell attachment. Associated with these observations, chemokine-stimulated Vav1-Rac1 activation was longer sustained and of higher intensity in RGS10-silenced T cells, or inhibited in cells overexpressing RGS10. Of importance, expression of constitutively activated Rac1 forms in cells overexpressing RGS10 led to the rescue of CXCL12-stimulated adhesion to VCAM-1 to levels similar to those in control transfectants. Instead, adhesion under flow conditions, soluble binding experiment, flow cytometry, and biochemical analyses revealed that the earlier chemokine-triggered integrin activation step was mostly independent of RGS10 actions. The data strongly suggest that RGS10 opposes activation by chemokines of the Vav1-Rac1 pathway in T cells, leading to repression of adhesion strengthening mediated by α4β1. In addition to control chemokine-upregulated T cell attachment, RGS10 also limited adhesion-independent cell chemotaxis and activation of cdc42. These results identify RGS10 as a key molecule that contributes to the termination of Gα-dependent signaling during chemokine-activated α4β1- and αLβ2-dependent T cell adhesion.

Integrating energy calculations with functional assays to decipher the specificity of G protein-RGS protein interactions

The diverse Regulator of G protein Signaling (RGS) family sets the timing of G protein signaling. To understand how the structure of RGS proteins determines their common ability to inactivate G proteins and their selective G protein recognition, we combined structure-based energy calculations with biochemical measurements of RGS activity. We found a previously unidentified group of variable 'Modulatory' residues that reside at the periphery of the RGS domain-G protein interface and fine-tune G protein recognition. Mutations of Modulatory residues in high-activity RGS proteins impaired RGS function, whereas redesign of low-activity RGS proteins in critical Modulatory positions yielded complete gain of function. Therefore, RGS proteins combine a conserved core interface with peripheral Modulatory residues to selectively optimize G protein recognition and inactivation. Finally, we show that our approach can be extended to analyze interaction specificity across other large protein families.

Potent and selective inhibition of angiotensin AT1 receptor signaling by RGS2: roles of its N-terminal domain

Emerging evidence indicates that R4/B subfamily RGS (regulator of G protein signaling) proteins play roles in functional regulation in the cardiovascular system. In this study, we compared effects of three R4/B subfamily proteins, RGS2, RGS4 and RGS5 on angiotensin AT1 receptor signaling, and investigated roles of the N-terminus of RGS2. In HEK293T cells expressing AT1 receptor stably, intracellular Ca(2+) responses induced by angiotensin II were much more strongly attenuated by RGS2 than by RGS4 and RGS5. N-terminally deleted RGS2 proteins lost this potent inhibitory effect. Replacement of the N-terminal residues 1-71 of RGS2 with the corresponding residues (1-51) of RGS5 decreased significantly the inhibitory effect. On the other hand, replacement of the residues 1-51 of RGS5 with the residues 1-71 of RGS2 increased the inhibitory effect dramatically. Furthermore, we investigated functional contribution of N-terminal subdomains of RGS2, namely, an N-terminal region (residues 16-55) with an amphipathic α helix domain (the subdomain N1), a probable non-specific membrane-targeting subdomain, and another region (residues 56-71) between the α helix and the RGS box (the subdomain N2), a probable GPCR-recognizing subdomain. RGS2 chimera proteins with the residues 1-33 or 34-52 of RGS5 showed weak inhibitory activity, and either of RGS5 chimera proteins with residues 1-55 or 56-71 of RGS2 showed strong inhibitory effects on AT1 receptor signaling. The present study indicates the essential roles of both N-terminal subdomains for the potent inhibitory activity of RGS2 on AT1 receptor signaling.

Novel insights into the function of β-cell M3 muscarinic acetylcholine receptors: therapeutic implications

Impaired function of pancreatic β-cells is one of the hallmarks of type 2 diabetes. β-cell function is regulated by the activity of many hormones and neurotransmitters, which bind to specific cell surface receptors. The M(3) muscarinic acetylcholine receptor (M3R) belongs to the superfamily of G protein-coupled receptors and, following ligand dependent activation, selectively activates G proteins of the G(q/11) family. Recent studies with M3R mutant mice strongly suggest that β-cell M3Rs play a central role in promoting insulin release and maintaining correct glucose homeostasis. In this review, we highlight recent studies indicating that β-cell M3Rs and components of downstream signaling pathways might represent promising new targets for the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

Molecular organization and dynamics of the melatonin MT₁ receptor/RGS20/G(i) protein complex reveal asymmetry of receptor dimers for RGS and G(i) coupling

Functional asymmetry of G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) dimers has been reported for an increasing number of cases, but the molecular architecture of signalling units associated to these dimers remains unclear. Here, we characterized the molecular complex of the melatonin MT₁ receptor, which directly and constitutively couples to G(i) proteins and the regulator of G-protein signalling (RGS) 20. The molecular organization of the ternary MT₁/G(i)/RGS20 complex was monitored in its basal and activated state by bioluminescence resonance energy transfer between probes inserted at multiple sites of the complex. On the basis of the reported crystal structures of G(i) and the RGS domain, we propose a model wherein one G(i) and one RGS20 protein bind to separate protomers of MT₁ dimers in a pre-associated complex that rearranges upon agonist activation. This model was further validated with MT₁/MT₂ heterodimers. Collectively, our data extend the concept of asymmetry within GPCR dimers, reinforce the notion of receptor specificity for RGS proteins and highlight the advantage of GPCRs organized as dimers in which each protomer fulfils its specific task by binding to different GPCR-interacting proteins.

RGS/Gi2alpha interactions modulate platelet accumulation and thrombus formation at sites of vascular injury

Although much is known about extrinsic regulators of platelet function such as nitric oxide and prostaglandin I(2) (PGI(2)), considerably less is known about intrinsic mechanisms that prevent overly robust platelet activation after vascular injury. Here we provide the first evidence that regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS) proteins serve this role in platelets, using mice with a G184S substitution in G(i2α) that blocks RGS/G(i2) interactions to examine the consequences of lifting constraints on G(i2)-dependent signaling without altering receptor:effector coupling. The results show that the G(i2α)(G184S) allele enhances platelet aggregation in vitro and increases platelet accumulation after vascular injury when expressed either as a global knock-in or limited to hematopoietic cells. Biochemical studies show that these changes occur in concert with an attenuated rise in cyclic adenosine monophosphate levels in response to prostacyclin and a substantial increase in basal Akt activation. In contrast, basal cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) levels, agonist-stimulated increases in [Ca(++)](i), Rap1 activation, and α-granule secretion were unaffected. Collectively, these observations (1) demonstrate an active role for RGS proteins in regulating platelet responsiveness, (2) show that this occurs in a pathway-selective manner, and (3) suggest that RGS proteins help to prevent unwarranted platelet activation as well as limiting the magnitude of the normal hemostatic response.

RGS4 is a negative regulator of insulin release from pancreatic beta-cells in vitro and in vivo

Therapeutic strategies that augment insulin release from pancreatic beta-cells are considered beneficial in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. We previously demonstrated that activation of beta-cell M(3) muscarinic receptors (M3Rs) greatly promotes glucose-stimulated insulin secretion (GSIS), suggesting that strategies aimed at enhancing signaling through beta-cell M3Rs may become therapeutically useful. M3R activation leads to the stimulation of G proteins of the G(q) family, which are under the inhibitory control of proteins known as regulators of G protein signaling (RGS proteins). At present, it remains unknown whether RGS proteins play a role in regulating insulin release. To address this issue, we initially demonstrated that MIN6 insulinoma cells express functional M3Rs and that RGS4 was by far the most abundant RGS protein expressed by these cells. Strikingly, siRNA-mediated knockdown of RGS4 expression in MIN6 cells greatly enhanced M3R-mediated augmentation of GSIS and calcium release. We obtained similar findings using pancreatic islets prepared from RGS4-deficient mice. Interestingly, RGS4 deficiency had little effect on insulin release caused by activation of other beta-cell GPCRs. Finally, treatment of mutant mice selectively lacking RGS4 in pancreatic beta-cells with a muscarinic agonist (bethanechol) led to significantly increased plasma insulin and reduced blood glucose levels, as compared to control littermates. Studies with beta-cell-specific M3R knockout mice showed that these responses were mediated by beta-cell M3Rs. These findings indicate that RGS4 is a potent negative regulator of M3R function in pancreatic beta-cells, suggesting that RGS4 may represent a potential target to promote insulin release for therapeutic purposes.

Regulators of G-protein signaling accelerate GPCR signaling kinetics and govern sensitivity solely by accelerating GTPase activity

G-protein heterotrimers, composed of a guanine nucleotide-binding G alpha subunit and an obligate G betagamma dimer, regulate signal transduction pathways by cycling between GDP- and GTP-bound states. Signal deactivation is achieved by G alpha-mediated GTP hydrolysis (GTPase activity) which is enhanced by the GTPase-accelerating protein (GAP) activity of "regulator of G-protein signaling" (RGS) proteins. In a cellular context, RGS proteins have also been shown to speed up the onset of signaling, and to accelerate deactivation without changing amplitude or sensitivity of the signal. This latter paradoxical activity has been variably attributed to GAP/enzymatic or non-GAP/scaffolding functions of these proteins. Here, we validated and exploited a G alpha switch-region point mutation, known to engender increased GTPase activity, to mimic in cis the GAP function of RGS proteins. While the transition-state, GDP x AlF(4)(-)-bound conformation of the G202A mutant was found to be nearly identical to wild-type, G alpha(i1)(G202A) x GDP assumed a divergent conformation more closely resembling the GDP x AlF(4)(-)-bound state. When placed within Saccharomyces cerevisiae G alpha subunit Gpa1, the fast-hydrolysis mutation restored appropriate dose-response behaviors to pheromone signaling in the absence of RGS-mediated GAP activity. A bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) readout of heterotrimer activation with high temporal resolution revealed that fast intrinsic GTPase activity could recapitulate in cis the kinetic sharpening (increased onset and deactivation rates) and blunting of sensitivity also engendered by RGS protein action in trans. Thus G alpha-directed GAP activity, the first biochemical function ascribed to RGS proteins, is sufficient to explain the activation kinetics and agonist sensitivity observed from G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling in a cellular context.

Fine-tuning of GPCR activity by receptor-interacting proteins

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) mediate physiological responses to various ligands, such as hormones, neurotransmitters and sensory stimuli. The signalling and trafficking properties of GPCRs are often highly malleable depending on the cellular context. Such fine-tuning of GPCR function can be attributed in many cases to receptor-interacting proteins that are differentially expressed in distinct cell types. In some cases these GPCR-interacting partners directly mediate receptor signalling, whereas in other cases they act mainly as scaffolds to modulate G protein-mediated signalling. Furthermore, GPCR-interacting proteins can have a big impact on the regulation of GPCR trafficking, localization and/or pharmacological properties.

Ric-8A, a Galpha protein guanine nucleotide exchange factor potentiates taste receptor signaling

Taste receptors for sweet, bitter and umami tastants are G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). While much effort has been devoted to understanding G-protein-receptor interactions and identifying the components of the signalling cascade downstream of these receptors, at the level of the G-protein the modulation of receptor signal transduction remains relatively unexplored. In this regard a taste-specific regulator of G-protein signaling (RGS), RGS21, has recently been identified. To study whether guanine nucleotide exchange factors (GEFs) are involved in the transduction of the signal downstream of the taste GPCRs we investigated the expression of Ric-8A and Ric-8B in mouse taste cells and their interaction with G-protein subunits found in taste buds. Mammalian Ric-8 proteins were initially identified as potent GEFs for a range of Gα subunits and Ric-8B has recently been shown to amplify olfactory signal transduction. We find that both Ric-8A and Ric-8B are expressed in a large portion of taste bud cells and that most of these cells contain IP3R-3 a marker for sweet, umami and bitter taste receptor cells. Ric-8A interacts with Gα-gustducin and Gαi2 through which it amplifies the signal transduction of hTas2R16, a receptor for bitter compounds. Overall, these findings are consistent with a role for Ric-8 in mammalian taste signal transduction.

Regulators of G protein signaling proteins as central components of G protein-coupled receptor signaling complexes

The regulators of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins bind directly to G protein alpha (Gα) subunits to regulate the signaling functions of Gα and their linked G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Recent studies indicate that RGS proteins also interact with GPCRs, not just G proteins, to form preferred functional pairs. Interactions between GPCRs and RGS proteins may be direct or indirect (via a linker protein) and are dictated by the receptors, rather than the linked G proteins. Emerging models suggest that GPCRs serve as platforms for assembling an overlapping and distinct constellation of signaling proteins that perform receptor-specific signaling tasks. Compelling evidence now indicates that RGS proteins are central components of these GPCR signaling complexes. This review will outline recent discoveries of GPCR/RGS pairs as well as new data in support of the idea that GPCRs serve as platforms for the formation of multiprotein signaling complexes.

Differential modulation of mu- and delta-opioid receptor agonists by endogenous RGS4 protein in SH-SY5Y cells

Regulator of G-protein signaling (RGS) proteins are a family of molecules that control the duration of G protein signaling. A variety of RGS proteins have been reported to modulate opioid receptor signaling. Here we show that RGS4 is abundantly expressed in human neuroblastoma SH-SY5Y cells that endogenously express mu- and delta-opioid receptors and test the hypothesis that the activity of opioids in these cells is modulated by RGS4. Endogenous RGS4 protein was reduced by approximately 90% in SH-SY5Y cells stably expressing short hairpin RNA specifically targeted to RGS4. In these cells, the potency and maximal effect of delta-opioid receptor agonist (SNC80)-mediated inhibition of forskolin-stimulated cAMP accumulation was increased compared with control cells. This effect was reversed by transient transfection of a stable RGS4 mutant (HA-RGS4C2S). Furthermore, MAPK activation by SNC80 was increased in cells with knockdown of RGS4. In contrast, there was no change in the mu-opioid (morphine) response at adenylyl cyclase or MAPK. FLAG-tagged opioid receptors and HA-RGS4C2S were transiently expressed in HEK293T cells, and co-immunoprecipitation experiments showed that the delta-opioid receptor but not the mu-opioid receptor could be precipitated together with the stable RGS4. Using chimeras of the delta- and mu-opioid receptors, the C-tail and third intracellular domain of the delta-opioid receptor were suggested to be the sites of interaction with RGS4. The findings demonstrate a role for endogenous RGS4 protein in modulating delta-opioid receptor signaling in SH-SY5Y cells and provide evidence for a receptor-specific effect of RGS4.

Regulators of G protein signalling proteins in the human myometrium

The contractile state of the human myometrium is controlled by extracellular signals that promote relaxation or contraction. Many of these signals function through G protein-coupled receptors at the cell surface, stimulating heterotrimeric G proteins and leading to changes in the activity of effector proteins responsible for bringing about the response. G proteins can interact with multiple receptors and many different effectors and are key players in the response. Regulators of G protein signalling (RGS) proteins are GTPase activating proteins for heterotrimeric G proteins and help terminate the signal. Little is known about the function of RGS proteins in human myometrium and we have therefore analysed transcript levels for RGS proteins at various stages of pregnancy (non-pregnant, preterm, term non-labouring, term labouring). RGS2 and RGS5 were the most abundantly expressed isolates in each of the patient groups. The levels of RGS4 and RGS16 (and to a lesser extent RGS2 and RGS14) increased in term labouring samples relative to the other groups. Yeast two-hybrid analysis and co-immunoprecipitation in myometrial cells revealed that both RGS2 and RGS5 interact directly with the cytoplasmic tail of the oxytocin receptor, suggesting they might help regulate signalling through this receptor.

Regulator of G protein signaling 4 confers selectivity to specific G proteins to modulate mu- and delta-opioid receptor signaling

In vitro studies have shown that the Regulator of G protein Signaling 4 (RGS4) interacts with the C-termini of mu- and delta-opioid receptors (mu-OR, delta-OR) (Georgoussi et al., 2006, Cell. Signal.18, 771-782). Herein we demonstrate that RGS4 associates with these receptors in living cells and forms selective complexes with Gi/Go proteins in a receptor dependent manner. This interaction occurs within the predicted fourth intracellular loop of mu, delta-ORs as part of a signaling complex consisting of the opioid receptor, activated Galpha and RGS4. RGS4 is recruited to the plasma membrane upon opioid receptor stimulation. Expression of RGS4 in HEK293 cells attenuated agonist-mediated extracellular signal regulated kinase (ERK1,2) phosphorylation for both receptors and accelerated agonist-induced internalization of the delta-OR. RGS4 lacking its N-terminal domain failed to interact with both opioid receptors and to modulate opioid receptor signaling. Our findings demonstrate that RGS4 plays a key role in G protein coupling selectivity and signaling of the mu- and delta-OmicronRs.

Evidence for a direct and functional interaction between the regulators of G protein signaling-2 and phosphorylated C terminus of cholecystokinin-2 receptor

Signaling of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) is regulated by different mechanisms. One of these involves regulators of G protein signaling (RGS), which are diverse and multifunctional proteins that bind to active Galpha subunits of G proteins and act as GTPase-activating proteins. Little is known about the molecular mechanisms that govern the selective use of RGS proteins in living cells. We first demonstrated that CCK2R-mediated inositol phosphate production, known to be G(q)-dependent, is more sensitive to RGS2 than to RGS4 and is insensitive to RGS8. Both basal and agonist-stimulated activities of the CCK2R are regulated by RGS2. By combining biochemical, functional, and in silico structural approaches, we demonstrate that a direct and functional interaction occurs between RGS2 and agonist-stimulated cholecystokinin receptor-2 (CCK2R) and identified the precise residues involved: phosphorylated Ser434 and Thr439 located in the C-terminal tail of CCK2R and Lys62, Lys63, and Gln67, located in the N-terminal domain of RGS2. These findings confirm previous reports that RGS proteins can interact with GPCRs to modulate their signaling and provide a molecular basis for RGS2 recognition by the CCK2R.