The amino terminus of Galpha(z) is required for receptor recognition, whereas its alpha4/beta6 loop is essential for inhibition of adenylyl cyclase

Inhibition of adenylyl cyclase by GTPase-deficient Gαi is mechanistically different from that mediated by receptor-activated Gαi

Signal transduction through G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) has been a major focus in cell biology for decades. Numerous disorders are associated with GPCRs that utilize Gi proteins to inhibit adenylyl cyclase (AC) as well as regulate other effectors. Several early studies have successfully defined the AC-interacting domains of several members of Gαi by measuring the loss of activity upon homologous replacements of putative regions of constitutive active Gαi mutants. However, whether such findings can indeed be translated into the context of a receptor-activated Gαi have not been rigorously verified. To address this issue, an array of known and new chimeric mutations was introduced into GTPase-deficient Q204L (QL) and R178C (RC) mutants of Gαi1, followed by examinations on their ability to inhibit AC. Surprisingly, most chimeras failed to abolish the constitutive activity brought on by the QL mutation, while some were able to eliminate the inhibitory activity of RC mutants. Receptor-mediated inhibition of AC was similarly observed in the same chimeric constructs harbouring the pertussis toxin (PTX)-resistant C351I mutation. Moreover, RC-bearing loss-of-function chimeras appeared to be hyper-deactivated by endogenous RGS protein. Molecular docking revealed a potential interaction between AC and the α3/β5 loop of Gαi1. Subsequent cAMP assays support a cooperative action of the α3/β5 loop, the α4 helix, and the α4/β6 loop in mediating AC inhibition by Gαi1-i3. Our results unveiled a notable functional divergence between constitutively active mutants and receptor-activated Gαi1 to inhibit AC, and identified a previously unknown AC-interacting domain of Gαi subunits. These results collectively provide valuable insights on the mechanism of AC inhibition in the cellular environment.

Molecular Pharmacology of δ-Opioid Receptors

Opioids are among the most effective analgesics available and are the first choice in the treatment of acute severe pain. However, partial efficacy, a tendency to produce tolerance, and a host of ill-tolerated side effects make clinically available opioids less effective in the management of chronic pain syndromes. Given that most therapeutic opioids produce their actions via µ-opioid receptors (MOPrs), other targets are constantly being explored, among which δ-opioid receptors (DOPrs) are being increasingly considered as promising alternatives. This review addresses DOPrs from the perspective of cellular and molecular determinants of their pharmacological diversity. Thus, DOPr ligands are examined in terms of structural and functional variety, DOPrs' capacity to engage a multiplicity of canonical and noncanonical G protein-dependent responses is surveyed, and evidence supporting ligand-specific signaling and regulation is analyzed. Pharmacological DOPr subtypes are examined in light of the ability of DOPr to organize into multimeric arrays and to adopt multiple active conformations as well as differences in ligand kinetics. Current knowledge on DOPr targeting to the membrane is examined as a means of understanding how these receptors are especially active in chronic pain management. Insight into cellular and molecular mechanisms of pharmacological diversity should guide the rational design of more effective, longer-lasting, and better-tolerated opioid analgesics for chronic pain management.

An intact helical domain is required for Gα14 to stimulate phospholipase Cβ

Background

Stimulation of phospholipase Cβ (PLCβ) by the activated α-subunit of G_q (Gα_q) constitutes a major signaling pathway for cellular regulation, and structural studies have recently revealed the molecular interactions between PLCβ and Gα_q. Yet, most of the PLCβ-interacting residues identified on Gα_q are not unique to members of the Gα_q family. Molecular modeling predicts that the core PLCβ-interacting residues located on the switch regions of Gα_q are similarly positioned in Gα_z which does not stimulate PLCβ. Using wild-type and constitutively active chimeras constructed between Gα_z and Gα₁₄, a member of the Gα_q family, we examined if the PLCβ-interacting residues identified in Gα_q are indeed essential.

Results

Four chimeras with the core PLCβ-interacting residues composed of Gα_z sequences were capable of binding PLCβ2 and stimulating the formation of inositol trisphosphate. Surprisingly, all chimeras with a Gα_z N-terminal half failed to functionally associate with PLCβ2, despite the fact that many of them contained the core PLCβ-interacting residues from Gα₁₄. Further analyses revealed that the non-PLCβ2 interacting chimeras were capable of interacting with other effector molecules such as adenylyl cyclase and tetratricopeptide repeat 1, indicating that they could adopt a GTP-bound active conformation.

Conclusion

Collectively, our study suggests that the previously identified PLCβ-interacting residues are insufficient to ensure productive interaction of Gα₁₄ with PLCβ, while an intact N-terminal half of Gα₁₄ is apparently required for PLCβ interaction.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12900-015-0043-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Gα16 interacts with tetratricopeptide repeat 1 (TPR1) through its β3 region to activate Ras independently of phospholipase Cβ signaling

Background

G protein-coupled receptors constitute the largest family of cell surface receptors in the mammalian genome. As the core of the G protein signal transduction machinery, the Gα subunits are required to interact with multiple partners. The GTP-bound active state of many Gα subunits can bind a multitude of effectors and regulatory proteins. Yet it remains unclear if the different proteins utilize distinct or common structural motifs on the Gα subunit for binding. Using Gα₁₆ as a model, we asked if its recently discovered adaptor protein tetratricopeptide repeat 1 (TPR1) binds to the same region as its canonical effector, phospholipase Cβ (PLCβ).

Results

We have examined the specificity of Gα₁₆/TPR1 association by testing a series of chimeras between Gα₁₆ and Gα_z. TPR1 co-immunoprecipitated with Gα₁₆ and more tightly with its constitutively active Gα₁₆QL, but not Gα_z. Progressive replacement of Gα₁₆ sequence with the corresponding residues of Gα_z eventually identified a stretch of six amino acids in the β3 region of Gα₁₆ which are responsible for TPR1 interaction and the subsequent Ras activation. Insertion of these six residues into Gα_z allowed productive TPR1-interaction. Since the β3 region only minimally contributes to interact with PLCβ, several chimeras exhibited differential abilities to stimulate PLCβ and Ras. The ability of the chimeras to activate downstream transcription factors such as signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 and nuclear factor κB appeared to be associated with PLCβ signaling.

Conclusions

Our results suggest that Gα₁₆ can signal through TPR1/Ras and PLCβ simultaneously and independently. The β3 region of Gα₁₆ is essential for interaction with TPR1 and the subsequent activation of Ras, but has relatively minor influence on the PLCβ interaction. Gα₁₆ may utilize different structural domains to bind TPR1 and PLCβ.

Mutations on the Switch III region and the alpha3 helix of Galpha16 differentially affect receptor coupling and regulation of downstream effectors

Background

Gα₁₆ can activate phospholipase Cβ (PLCβ) directly like Gα_q. It also couples to tetratricopeptide repeat 1 (TPR1) which is linked to Ras activation. It is unknown whether PLCβ and TPR1 interact with the same regions on Gα₁₆. Previous studies on Gα_q have defined two minimal clusters of amino acids that are essential for the coupling to PLCβ. Cognate residues in Gα₁₆ might also be essential for interacting with PLCβ, and possibly contribute to TPR1 interaction and other signaling events.

Results

Alanine mutations were introduced to the two amino acid clusters (246–248 and 259–260) in the switch III region and α3 helix of Gα₁₆. Regulations of PLCβ and STAT3 were partially weakened by each cluster mutant. A mutant harboring mutations at both clusters generally produced stronger suppressions. Activation of Jun N-terminal kinase (JNK) by Gα₁₆ was completely abolished by mutating either clusters. Contrastingly, phosphorylations of extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) and nuclear factor κB (NF-κB) were not significantly affected by these mutations. The interactions between the mutants and PLCβ2 and TPR1 were also reduced in co-immunoprecipitation assays. Coupling between G₁₆ and different categories of receptors was impaired by the mutations, with the effect of switch III mutations being more pronounced than those in the α3 helix. Mutations of both clusters almost completely abolished the receptor coupling and prevent receptor-induced Gβγ release.

Conclusion

The integrity of the switch III region and α3 helix of Gα₁₆ is critical for the activation of PLCβ, STAT3, and JNK but not ERK or NF-κB. Binding of Gα₁₆ to PLCβ2 or TPR1 was reduced by the mutations of either cluster. The same region could also differentially affect the effectiveness of receptor coupling to G₁₆. The studied region was shown to bear multiple functionally important roles of G₁₆.

How do receptors activate G proteins?

Heterotrimeric G proteins couple the activation of heptahelical receptors at the cell surface to the intracellular signaling cascades that mediate the physiological responses to extracellular stimuli. G proteins are molecular switches that are activated by receptor-catalyzed GTP for GDP exchange on the G protein alpha subunit, which is the rate-limiting step in the activation of all downstream signaling. Despite the important biological role of the receptor-G protein interaction, relatively little is known about the structure of the complex and how it leads to nucleotide exchange. This chapter will describe what is known about receptor and G protein structure and outline a strategy for assembling the current data into improved models for the receptor-G protein complex that will hopefully answer the question as to how receptors flip the G protein switch.

Heterotrimeric G protein activation by G-protein-coupled receptors

Heterotrimeric G proteins have a crucial role as molecular switches in signal transduction pathways mediated by G-protein-coupled receptors. Extracellular stimuli activate these receptors, which then catalyse GTP-GDP exchange on the G protein alpha-subunit. The complex series of interactions and conformational changes that connect agonist binding to G protein activation raise various interesting questions about the structure, biomechanics, kinetics and specificity of signal transduction across the plasma membrane.

Identification of a stretch of six divergent amino acids on the alpha5 helix of Galpha16 as a major determinant of the promiscuity and efficiency of receptor coupling

A broad repertory of G-protein-coupled receptors shows effective coupling with the haematopoietic G16 protein. In the present study, individual residues along the C-terminal alpha5 helix of Galpha16 were examined for their contributions in defining receptor-coupling specificity. Residues that are relatively conserved within, but diverse between, the subfamilies of cloned Galpha subunits were mutated into the corresponding Galpha(z) residues. Six G(i)-linked receptors with different coupling efficiencies to Galpha16 were examined for their ability to utilize the various Galpha16 mutants to mediate agonist-induced inositol phosphate accumulation and Ca2+ mobilization. Co-operative enhancements of receptor coupling were observed with chimaeras harbouring multiple mutations at Glu350, Lys357 and Leu364 of Galpha16. Mutation of Leu364 into isoleucine appeared to be more efficient in enhancing receptor recognition compared with mutations at the other two sites. Mutation of a stretch of six consecutive residues (362-367) lying towards the end of the alpha5 helix was found to broaden significantly the receptor-coupling profile of Galpha16, and the effect was mediated partly through interactions with the beta2-beta3 loop. These results suggested that a stretch of six distinctive residues at the alpha5 helix of Galpha16 is particularly important, whereas other discrete residues spreading along the alpha5 helix function co-operatively for determining the specificity of receptor recognition.

Effects of mutations in the N terminal region of the yeast G protein α-subunit Gpa1p on signaling by pheromone receptors

The sites and modes of interaction between G protein-coupled receptors and their cognate heterotrimeric G proteins remain poorly defined. The C-terminus of the Galpha subunit is the best established site of contact of G proteins with receptors, but structural analyses and crosslinking studies suggest the possibility of interactions at the N-terminus of Galpha as well. We screened for mutations in the N-terminal region of the Galpha subunit encoded by the yeast GPA1 gene that specifically affect the ability of the G protein to be activated by the yeast alpha-mating factor receptor. The screen led to identification of substitutions of glutamine or proline for Leu18 of Gpa1p that reduce the response to the pheromones alpha-factor and a-factor without affecting cellular levels of the subunit or its ability to interact with beta and gamma subunits. The mutations do not appear to affect the intrinsic ability of the G protein to be converted to the activated state. The low yield of different mutations with this phenotype indicates either that the N-terminal segment of the yeast Galpha subunit does not undergo extensive interactions with the alpha-factor receptor, or that this region can not be altered without detrimental effects upon the formation of G protein trimers.

Replacement of the α5 helix of Gα16 with Gαs-specific sequences enhances promiscuity of Gα16 toward Gs-coupled receptors

G(16) can couple indiscriminately to a large number of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), making it a prime candidate as a universal adaptor for GPCRs. In order to increase the promiscuity of Galpha(16), three chimeras incorporating increasing lengths of G(s)-specific residues (25, 44 or 81 residues) into the C-terminus of Galpha(16) were constructed and named 16s25, 16s44 and 16s81, respectively. The chimeras were examined for their ability to mediate receptor-induced stimulation of phospholipase C (PLC) and Ca(2+) mobilization. 16s25 was more effective than 16s44 and 16s81 at coupling to G(s)-linked receptors. 16s25 coupled productively to 10 different G(s)-coupled receptors examined and, for 50% of these receptors, 16s25-mediated PLC activities were higher than those mediated via Galpha(16). Similar results were observed for agonist-induced Ca(2+) mobilizations. These results show that incorporating the alpha5 helix of Galpha(s) into Galpha(16) can increase the promiscuity of 16s25 towards G(s)-coupled receptors.

Closely related G-protein-coupled receptors use multiple and distinct domains on G-protein alpha-subunits for selective coupling

The molecular basis of selectivity in G-protein receptor coupling has been explored by comparing the abilities of G-protein heterotrimers containing chimeric Galpha subunits, comprised of various regions of Gi1alpha, Gtalpha, and Gqalpha, to stabilize the high affinity agonist binding state of serotonin, adenosine, and muscarinic receptors. The data indicate that multiple and distinct determinants of selectivity exist for individual receptors. While the A1 adenosine receptor does not distinguish between Gi1alpha and Gtalpha sequences, the 5-HT1A and 5-HT1B serotonin and M2 muscarinic receptors can couple with Gi1 but not Gt. It is possible to distinguish domains that eliminate coupling and are defined as "critical," from those that impair coupling and are defined as "important." Domains within the N terminus, alpha4-helix, and alpha4-helix-alpha4/beta6-loop of Gi1alpha are involved in 5-HT and M2 receptor interactions. Chimeric Gi1alpha/Gqalpha subunits verify the critical role of the Galpha C terminus in receptor coupling, however, the individual receptors differ in the C-terminal amino acids required for coupling. Furthermore, the EC50 for interactions with Gi1 differ among the individual receptors. These results suggest that coupling selectivity ultimately involves subtle and cooperative interactions among various domains on both the G-protein and the associated receptor as well as the G-protein concentration.

The beta6/alpha5 regions of Galphai2 and GalphaoA increase the promiscuity of Galpha16 but are insufficient for pertussis toxin-catalyzed ADP-ribosylation

Replacement of beta6/alpha5 region at the C-terminus on Galpha16 with Galphaz-specific residues has been shown to broaden the promiscuity of Galpha16. Here, we substituted the last 44 residues of Galpha16 with the corresponding region from either Galphai2 or GalphaoA (16i44 and 16o44). 16i44 and 16o44 chimeras were more effective than Galpha16 at coupling to Gi-linked delta-opioid, mu-opioid, and Xenopus melatonin MT1c receptors when coexpressed in green monkey fibroblast (COS-7) cells. 16i44, but not 16o44, also enhanced the formyl peptide-induced stimulation of phospholipase C activity. Both chimeras were resistant to pertussis toxin-catalyzed [32P]ADP-ribosylation, despite the fact that pertussis toxin partially inhibited the chimera-mediated stimulation of phospholipase Cbeta. The use of Galphat1 as a Gbetagamma scavenger revealed that the pertussis toxin-sensitivity can be attributed to endogenous Gbetagamma subunits released from G(i/o). Although incorporation of a Galphai-like beta6/alpha5 region into the C-terminus of Galpha16 increases its promiscuity, this region is not sufficient to support recognition by pertussis toxin.

Characterization of the 5-HT6 receptor coupled to Ca2+ signaling using an enabling chimeric G-protein

We examined the feasibility of coupling the 5-HT(6) receptor to a Ca(2+) signaling read-out using a chimeric G-protein, comprising of G(alphaq) with the C-terminal five amino acids from G(alphas), to facilitate assays on the fluorometric imaging plate reader (FLIPR). Using a transient transfection assay in human embryonic kidney (HEK) cells, Ca(2+) signaling in response to serotonin (5-HT) was facilitated by co-transfection of the 5-HT(6) receptor with the G(alphaq)/G(alphas) chimera, but not with the 5-HT(6) receptor alone or with a similar chimera incorporating the C-terminal five amino acids of G(alphai3). A series of agonist concentration-response curves were constructed using the 5-HT(6)-G(alphaq)/G(alphas) signaling assay generating the following rank order of agonist potency; 5-methoxytryptamine (EC(50), 9 nM)=5-HT (12 nM)=2-methyl 5-HT (13 nM)>tryptamine (86 nM)=5-carboxamidotryptamine (5-CT) (119 nM)>>lisuride (>1 microM). In comparison, essentially identical EC(50) values were observed for the stimulation of cAMP accumulation with the same compounds; 5-methoxytryptamine (EC(50), 6 nM)=5-HT (6 nM)=2-methyl 5-HT (15 nM)>tryptamine (91 nM)=5-CT (153 nM)>lisuride (>350 nM). Clozapine and SB 271046 both produced a concentration-dependent antagonism of the 5-HT-stimulated Ca(2+) response with IC(50) values of 45 and 11 nM, respectively. In contrast, aripiprazole, a recently launched atypical anti-psychotic with a novel mechanism of action described as a dopamine/serotonin stabilizer, was essentially devoid of 5-HT(6) receptor antagonist activity. Our results demonstrate that a FLIPR-based Ca(2+) signaling assay is a feasible approach to the functional characterization of 5-HT(6) receptor ligands. Moreover, the equivalent coupling efficiency, as indexed by agonist potency, observed using this system compared with the native coupling assay to cAMP suggests that the C-terminal five amino acids of G(alphas) are the major determinant for the receptor/G-protein interaction of the 5-HT(6) receptor subtype.

Galpha(16/z) chimeras efficiently link a wide range of G protein-coupled receptors to calcium mobilization

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) represent a class of important therapeutic targets for drug discovery. The integration of GPCRs into contemporary high-throughput functional assays is critically dependent on the presence of appropriate G proteins. Given that different GPCRs can discriminate against distinct G proteins, a universal G protein adapter is extremely desirable. In this report, the authors evaluated two highly promiscuous Galpha(16/z) chimeras, 16z25 and 16z44, for their ability to translate GPCR activation into Ca(2+) mobilization using the fluorescence imaging plate reader (FLIPR) and aequorin. A panel of 24 G(s)- or G(i)-coupled receptors was examined for their functional association with the Galpha(16/z) chimeras. Although most of the GPCRs tested were incapable of inducing Ca(2+) mobilization upon their activation by specific agonists, the introduction of 16z25 or 16z44 allowed all of these GPCRs to mediate agonist-induced Ca(2+) mobilization. In contrast, only 16 of the GPCRs tested were capable of using Galpha(16) to mobilize intracellular Ca(2+). Analysis of dose-response curves obtained with the delta-opioid, dopamine D(1), and Xenopus melatonin Mel1c receptors revealed that the Galpha(16/z) chimeras possess better sensitivity than Galpha(16) in both the FLIPR and aequorin assays. Collectively, these studies help to validate the promiscuity of the Galpha(16/z) chimeras as well as their application in contemporary drug-screening assays that are based on ligand-induced Ca(2+) mobilization.

The role of transmembrane helix 5 in agonist binding to the human H3 receptor

We have used alanine scanning mutagenesis to identify residues in transmembrane domain 5 of the histamine H3 receptor that are important for agonist binding. All of the mutants generated were functionally expressed as demonstrated by their ability to bind [(125)I]iodoproxyfan with comparable affinity to the wild-type receptor and their ability to inhibit forskolin-stimulated cAMP formation when activated by histamine. Many mutations produced small changes in the potency of histamine, but the most pronounced reduction in potency and affinity of the agonists, histamine, R-alpha-methylhistamine, imetit, and impentamine, was seen with mutation of glutamate 206. Our modeling suggests that this residue plays a key role in ligand binding by interacting with the imidazole ring of histamine. Interestingly, L199A greatly reduced agonist potency in functional assays but had only minor effects on agonist affinity, implicating a role for this residue in the mechanism of receptor activation. We also studied the functional effects of the mutations by linking the receptor to calcium signaling using a chimeric G protein. A comparison of the two functional assays demonstrated contrasting effects on agonist activity. Histamine, imetit, and impentamine were full agonists in the cAMP assay, but imetit exhibited only partial agonist activity through the chimeric G protein. Furthermore, impentamine, another potent agonist in the cAMP assay, was only able to activate the E206A mutant in the calcium assay despite being inactive at the wild-type receptor. These observations suggest that the agonist receptor complexes formed by these three different H3 agonists are not conformationally equivalent.

G alpha minigenes expressing C-terminal peptides serve as specific inhibitors of thrombin-mediated endothelial activation

The C termini of G protein alpha subunits are critical for binding to their cognate receptors, and peptides corresponding to the C terminus can serve as competitive inhibitors of G protein-coupled receptor-G protein interactions. This interface is quite specific as a single amino acid difference annuls the ability of a G alpha(i) peptide to bind the A(1) adenosine receptor (Gilchrist, A., Mazzoni, M., Dineen, B., Dice, A., Linden, J., Dunwiddie, T., and Hamm, H. E. (1998 ) J. Biol. Chem. 273, 14912--14919). Recently, we demonstrated that a plasmid minigene vector encoding the C-terminal sequence of G alpha(i) could specifically inhibit downstream responses to agonist stimulation of the muscarinic M(2) receptor (Gilchrist, A., Bunemann, M., Li, A., Hosey, M. M., and H. E. Hamm (1999) J. Biol. Chem. 274, 6610--6616). To selectively antagonize G protein signal transduction events and determine which G protein underlies a given thrombin-induced response, we generated minigene vectors that encode the C-terminal sequence for each family of G alpha subunits. Minigene vectors expressing G alpha C-terminal peptides (G alpha(i), G alpha(q), G alpha(12), and G alpha(13)) or the control minigene vector, which expresses the G alpha(i) peptide in random order (G(iR)), were systematically introduced into a human microvascular endothelial cell line. The C-terminal peptides serve as competitive inhibitors presumably by blocking the site on the G protein-coupled receptor that normally binds the G protein. Our results not only confirm that each G protein can control certain signaling events, they emphasize the specificity of the G protein-coupled receptor-G protein interface. In addition, the C-terminal G alpha minigenes appear to be a powerful tool for dissecting out the G protein that mediates a given physiological function following thrombin activation.

G(z) signaling: emerging divergence from G(i) signaling

A large variety of neurotransmitters, hormones, and chemokines regulate cellular functions via cell surface receptors that are coupled to guanine nucleotide-binding regulatory proteins (G proteins) belonging to the G(i) subfamily. All members of the G(i) subfamily, with the sole exception of G(z), are substrates for the pertussis toxin ADP-ribosyl transferase. G(z) also exhibits unique biochemical and regulatory properties. Initial portrayals of the cellular functions of G(z) bear high resemblance to those of other G(i) proteins both in terms of the receptors and effectors linked to G(z). However, recent discoveries have begun to insinuate a distinct role for G(z) in cellular communication. Functional interactions of the alpha subunit of G(z) (Galpha(z)) with the NKR-P1 receptor, Galpha(z)-specific regulator of G protein signaling, p21-activated kinase, G protein-regulated inducers of neurite outgrowth, and the Eya2 transcription cofactor have been demonstrated. These findings provide possible links for G(z) to participate in cellular development, survival, proliferation, differentiation and even apoptosis. In this review, we have drawn a sketch of a signaling network with G(z) as the centerpiece. The emerging picture is one that distinguishes G(z) from other members of the G(i) subfamily.