JBC

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kostenis, E.
Right arrow Articles by Wess, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kostenis, E.
Right arrow Articles by Wess, J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Volume 272, Number 38, Issue of September 19, 1997 pp. 23675-23681
©1997 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

Genetic Analysis of Receptor-Galpha q Coupling Selectivity*

(Received for publication, May 20, 1997, and in revised form, July 14, 1997)

Evi Kostenis , Jesus Gomeza , Christian Lerche and Jürgen Wess Dagger

From the Laboratory of Bioorganic Chemistry, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892

ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
FOOTNOTES
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
REFERENCES


ABSTRACT

Many different G protein-linked receptors are preferentially coupled to G proteins of the Gq/11 family. To elucidate the molecular basis underlying this selectivity, different Gq/11-coupled receptors (m3 muscarinic, V1a vasopressin, and gastrin-releasing peptide receptor) were coexpressed (in COS-7 cells) with mutant alpha s subunits in which residues present at the C terminus of alpha s were replaced with the corresponding alpha q/11 residues. Remarkably, whereas none of the receptors was able to interact with wild type alpha s to a significant extent, all three receptors gained the ability to productively couple to a mutant alpha s subunit containing a single Glu right-arrow Asn point mutation at position -3. Moreover, the m3 muscarinic and the V1a vasopressin receptors but not the GRP receptor also gained the ability to interact with a mutant alpha s subunit containing a single Gln right-arrow Glu point mutation at position -5, indicating that the alpha q/11 residues present in these mutant G protein constructs play key roles in determining the selectivity of receptor recognition.

To identify the site(s) on Gq/11-coupled receptors that can functionally interact with the C terminus of alpha q/11 subunits, we next analyzed the ability of a series of hybrid m2/m3 muscarinic receptors to interact with a mutant alpha s subunit (sq5) in which the last five amino acids of alpha s were replaced with the corresponding alpha q/11 sequence. Similar to the wild type m2 and m3 muscarinic receptors, none of the investigated hybrid receptors was able to efficiently interact with wild type alpha s. Interestingly, however, three mutant m2 receptors in which different segments of the second and third intracellular loops were replaced with the corresponding m3 receptor sequences were identified, which, in contrast to the Gi/o-coupled wild type m2 receptor, gained the ability to efficiently activate the sq5 subunit. This observation suggests that multiple intracellular receptor domains form a binding pocket for the C terminus of G protein alpha q/11 subunits.


INTRODUCTION

Upon binding of extracellular ligands, G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs)1 undergo conformational changes that enable the receptor proteins to interact with specific classes of heterotrimeric G proteins consisting of alpha , beta , and gamma  subunits (1-7). The activated G protein subunits (alpha -GTP and/or free beta gamma ) are then able to bind to and modulate the activity of downstream effector enzymes and/or ion channels. Typically, an individual GPCR can interact with only a distinct subset of the many structurally similar G proteins that are expressed within a cell (1-7). How this selectivity is achieved at a molecular level is not well understood at present, particularly since the molecular architecture of the receptor·G protein complex has not been elucidated.

Numerous mutagenesis and biochemical studies (1-7) have shown that multiple intracellular GPCR domains, primarily including the second intracellular loop (i2) as well as the N- and C-terminal portions of the third intracellular loop (i3), play key roles in determining selective G protein recognition. Specific residues contained within these domains are predicted to form a binding pocket for the G protein heterotrimer (7), in analogy to the ligand binding domain present on the extracellular surface of GPCRs (1, 2, 4, 6).

Accumulating evidence (8-11) suggests that the C-terminal portion of the G protein alpha  subunits, via binding to the intracellular receptor surface (12, 13), is of fundamental importance for dictating the specificity of receptor-G protein interactions. Several recent studies (8-11) have shown, for example, that substitution of alpha i or alpha s residues into the C-terminal segment of alpha q subunits results in mutant G proteins that can be activated by Gi- or Gs-coupled receptors, respectively. By taking advantage of this observation, the C-terminal amino acids in alpha i/o subunits that are critical for proper receptor recognition have been mapped in great detail (11). In contrast, the functional roles of individual amino acids present at the C termini of other classes of Galpha subunits have not been studied systematically to date.

To identify the site(s) on GPCRs that can functionally interact with the C terminus of alpha i/o subunits, we have recently used a novel experimental strategy involving the coexpression of hybrid receptors with hybrid Galpha subunits. We initially showed that the wild type m2 muscarinic receptor, a prototypical Gi/o-coupled receptor (14-16), does not efficiently interact with wild type alpha q but can productively couple to mutant alpha q subunits in which the last five amino acids of alpha q were replaced with the corresponding alpha i or alpha o sequences (9). We then demonstrated, by analyzing a large number of mutant m2 receptors, that the ability of the m2 receptor to interact with such hybrid alpha q subunits was critically dependent on the structural integrity of a four-amino acid motif (VTIL; Val385, Thr386, Ile389, and Leu390) predicted to be located at the C terminus of the i3 loop (9, 11). In addition, gain-of-function studies showed that substitution of the VTIL motif into mutant m3 muscarinic receptors (which were unable to couple to wild type alpha q) could confer onto these receptors the ability to efficiently couple to mutant alpha q containing alpha i or alpha o sequences at their C terminus (9). These data therefore suggested that the VTIL motif can functionally interact with the C terminus of alpha i/o subunits and that this contact is intimately involved in determining coupling selectivity and triggering G protein activation.

To investigate whether the results obtained with the Gi/o-coupled m2 muscarinic receptor are generally applicable, we recently have extended these studies to other functional classes of GPCRs and Galpha subunits. In the present study, we first wanted to examine which specific amino acids present at the C terminus of alpha q/11 subunits are of particular importance for selective receptor recognition. Toward this goal, we systematically substituted distinct alpha q/11 residues into the C terminus of alpha s (a G protein subunit that mediates the activation of adenylyl cyclase) and studied whether the resulting mutant alpha  subunits gained the ability to be activated by different Gq/11-coupled receptors. Remarkably, two alpha q/11 residues were identified which, when substituted into wild type alpha s, resulted in alpha s single point mutants that, in contrast to wild type alpha s, could be recognized by Gq/11-coupled receptors.

The second goal of this study was to identify the site(s) on Gq/11-coupled receptors that can functionally interact with the C terminus of alpha q/11 subunits. To address this issue, we took advantage of the finding that the Gi/o-coupled m2 muscarinic receptor, in contrast to the Gq/11-coupled m3 muscarinic receptor (15, 16), cannot functionally interact with a mutant alpha s subunit containing alpha q sequence at its C terminus. Based on this observation, mutant m2 muscarinic receptors in which distinct intracellular domains were replaced with the corresponding m3 receptor sequences were studied for their ability to gain coupling to this mutant alpha  subunit. These coexpression experiments led to the novel finding that multiple m3 receptor regions, including residues within the i2 loop and the N- and C-terminal portions of the i3 domain, are critical for selective recognition of the C terminus of alpha q/11 subunits.


EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES

DNA Constructs

A rat alpha s cDNA (17) cloned into the pcDNAI expression vector (10) was used as a template for PCR mutagenesis. All wild type and mutant Galpha s subunits contained an internal hemagglutinin epitope tag (DVPDYAS; Refs. 18 and 19). The presence of the epitope tag that replaced alpha s residues 76-82 did not affect the receptor and effector coupling properties of wild type alpha s (18, 19). The construction of sq5 (which codes for a mutant alpha s subunit in which the last five amino acids of alpha s were replaced with the corresponding alpha q sequence) has been described previously (10). To introduce mutations into the C-terminal segment of alpha s, a 42-base pair NsiI-XbaI fragment was removed from the wild type plasmid and replaced with PCR fragments containing the desired mutations. The correctness of all PCR-derived sequences was verified by dideoxy sequencing of the mutant plasmids (20).

The construction of the hybrid m2/m3 muscarinic receptors used in this study has been described previously (Refs. 21-23; for precise amino acid compositions, see legend to Fig. 4).


Fig. 4. Structure of chimeric m2/m3 muscarinic receptors used in this study. The following m2 receptor sequences (human) were replaced with the homologous segments of the m3 muscarinic receptor (rat): m2-i2 (m2120-139 right-arrow m3164-183), m2-Ni3 (m2208-228 right-arrow m3252-272), m2-Y (m2-Ser210 right-arrow m3-Tyr254), m2-AALS (m2-Val385-Thr386, Ile389-Leu390 right-arrow m3-Ala488-Ala489, Leu492-Ser493), and m2-tail (m2401-466 right-arrow m3504-589).
[View Larger Version of this Image (33K GIF file)]

Cell Culture and Transfection Conditions

COS-7 cells were grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium supplemented with 10% fetal calf serum at 37 °C in a humidified 5% CO2 incubator. For transfections, 1 × 106 cells were seeded into 100-mm dishes. About 24 h later, COS-7 cells were cotransfected with the indicated G protein and receptor constructs (0.8 µg of DNA each) by using a DEAE-dextran procedure (24). To reduce the expression levels of the different receptor and G protein constructs, transfection mixtures were supplemented with 2.4 µg of pcDNAI vector DNA. The following wild type receptor expression plasmids were used: human m2 muscarinic receptor in pcD (25), rat m3 muscarinic receptor in pcD (25), mouse gastrin-releasing peptide (GRP) receptor (26) in pcDNA3 (kindly provided by J. Battey, NIH), and rat V1a vasopressin receptor (27) in pcD-SP6/T7 (kindly provided by M. Brownstein, NIH).

cAMP Assays

Approximately 20-24 h after transfections, cells were transferred into six-well plates, and 2 µCi/ml [3H]adenine (15 Ci/mmol; American Radiolabeled Chemicals) was added to the growth medium. After a 24-36 h labeling period, cells were preincubated in Hanks' balanced salt solution containing 20 mM Hepes and 1 mM 3-isobutyl-1-methylxanthine for 20 min (room temperature) and then stimulated with the appropriate agonist ligands for 30 min at 37 °C. The reaction was terminated by aspiration of the medium and addition of 1 ml of ice-cold 5% trichloroacetic acid containing 1 mM ATP and 1 mM cAMP. Increases in intracellular [3H]cAMP levels were then determined by anion-exchange chromatography as described (28).

Radioligand Binding Assays

N-[3H]Methylscopolamine (79.5 Ci/mmol; NEN Life Science Products) saturation binding experiments were carried out with membrane homogenates prepared from transfected COS-7 cells essentially as described (29). Nonspecific binding was determined in the presence of 1 µM atropine. Protein concentrations were determined by the method of Bradford (30). Binding data were analyzed by using the computer program Ligand (31).

Western Blotting

All wild type and mutant Galpha s subunits were detected with the 12CA5 monoclonal antibody (Boehringer Mannheim) directed against the hemagglutinin epitope tag present in all G protein constructs. Samples containing 20 µg of membrane protein prepared from transfected COS-7 cells were resolved by SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (10%), electroblotted onto nitrocellulose, and probed with the 12CA5 antibody as described (9). Immunoreactive proteins were detected by incubation with horseradish peroxidase-conjugated sheep anti-mouse antibody (Amersham Life Science, Inc.) and visualized using an enhanced chemiluminescence system (Amersham).

Drugs

[Arg8]Vasopressin was purchased from Sigma. All other ligands used in this study were obtained through Research Biochemicals Inc.


RESULTS

Functional Interaction of Gq/11-coupled Receptors with Mutant alpha s Subunits

All studies were carried out with COS-7 cells cotransfected with different GPCRs and Galpha constructs. Initially, the ability of the rat m3 muscarinic receptor (25), a prototypical Gq/11-coupled receptor (15, 16), to interact with wild type alpha s (s(wt)) was examined. As expected, based on its known G protein coupling preference, the m3 muscarinic receptor, when cotransfected with s(wt) (or vector DNA as a control) and stimulated with the agonist carbachol (500 µM), did not efficiently stimulate cAMP production. The maximum increase in cAMP accumulation (above basal levels) mediated by the m3 receptor in the absence or presence of cotransfected s(wt) amounted to only 1.5-2-fold (see Fig. 2A). However, coexpression of the m3 muscarinic receptor with a mutant alpha s subunit in which the last five amino acids (QYELL) were replaced with the corresponding alpha q sequence (EYNLV; resulting in the hybrid alpha  subunit, sq5) led to a pronounced stimulation (6-8-fold) of adenylyl cyclase activity (see Fig. 2A). Essentially similar results were obtained with two other Gq/11-coupled receptors, the rat V1a vasopressin (27) and the mouse GRP receptor (26). Like the m3 receptor, these two peptide receptors, when activated by the appropriate agonist ligands ([Arg8]vasopressin (1 µM) and bombesin (1 µM)), did not couple efficiently to s(wt) (see Figs. 2, B and C). In contrast, both peptide receptors were able to productively interact with sq5, mediating 4-8-fold increases in cAMP levels in the presence of this G protein subunit (see Figs. 2, B and C).


Fig. 2. Functional interaction of different Gq/11-coupled receptors with C-terminal-modified mutant alpha s subunits. COS-7 cells were cotransfected with expression plasmids coding for the wild type m3 muscarinic (A), V1a vasopressin (B), or GRP (C) receptor and the indicated G protein constructs (or pCDNAI vector DNA as a control). The structure of the different mutant alpha s subunits, in which one or more amino acids at the C terminus of s(wt) were replaced with the corresponding alpha q/11 residues, is shown in Fig. 1. In sq5, the last five amino acids of s(wt) were replaced with the corresponding alpha q sequence. Transfected cells were incubated for 30 min (at 37 °C) in the absence or presence of the appropriate agonist ligands. Basal cAMP levels (no ligand added) were similar for the different wild type and mutant G protein constructs (data not shown). The resulting increases in intracellular cAMP levels (fold stimulation above basal) were determined as described under "Experimental Procedures." In each experiment, the cAMP response mediated by sq5 was set equal to 100%. Data are given as means ± S.E. of three to eight independent experiments, each carried out in triplicate. The following ligands were used: A, carbachol (500 µM); B, [Arg8]vasopressin (1 µM); C, bombesin (1 µM).
[View Larger Version of this Image (35K GIF file)]

We next wanted to examine which specific amino acids within the C-terminal segment of alpha q/11 are of particular importance for proper receptor recognition. Toward this goal, specific residues at the C terminus of s(wt) were replaced either alone or in combination with the corresponding alpha q/11 residues (Fig. 1). The ability of different Gq/11-coupled receptors to gain coupling to these mutant alpha s subunits was then examined in cotransfected COS-7 cells.


Fig. 1. Comparison of the C-terminal five amino acids of different classes of G protein alpha  subunits. Mutant alpha s subunits were created by replacing the marked alpha s residues (arrows), either individually or in combination, with the corresponding alpha q/11 residues. The single-letter amino acid code is used. The boxed leucine residue (position -2) is conserved among all known mammalian alpha  subunits. Sequences were taken from Ref. 46.
[View Larger Version of this Image (26K GIF file)]

As shown in Fig. 1, the C-terminal five amino acids of alpha s differ in only three residues from the corresponding alpha q/11 sequence (the leucine residue at position -2 is conserved among all mammalian alpha  subunits, and a tyrosine residue is present at position -4 in both alpha s and alpha q/11). Therefore, three alpha s single point mutants, s(Q right-arrow E), s(E right-arrow N), and s(QL right-arrow EV), and all three possible alpha s double point mutants, s(QE right-arrow EN), s(EL right-arrow NV), and s(QL right-arrow EV), were prepared (Figs. 1 and 2). Western analysis using a monoclonal antibody directed against the hemagglutinin epitope tag present in all G protein constructs (18, 19) showed that all mutant alpha s subunits were expressed at similar levels as s(wt) and sq5 (Fig. 3).


Fig. 3. Immunoblot analysis of wild type and mutant Galpha s subunits expressed in COS-7 cells. Equal amounts of membrane protein (20 µg) prepared from transfected COS-7 cells were analyzed by SDS-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis (10%) and Western blotting using the 12CA5 monoclonal antibody as described under "Experimental Procedures." Two additional blots gave similar results.
[View Larger Version of this Image (84K GIF file)]

Initially, the ability of the m3 muscarinic receptor to functionally interact with the different mutant alpha s subunits was examined (Fig. 2A). Remarkably, the m3 receptor gained the ability to activate two alpha s single point mutants, s(Q right-arrow E) and s(E right-arrow N), to a significant extent. In the presence of carbachol (500 µM) and either of these two subunits, the m3 receptor was able to mediate a marked increase in adenylyl cyclase activity ((4-5-fold, as compared with an 6-8-fold increase observed with sq5) (Fig. 2A). In contrast, coexpression of the m3 muscarinic receptor with s(L right-arrow V) did not result in a cAMP response that was significantly different from background (as determined in cells transfected with either vector DNA or s(wt)) (Fig. 2A).

To examine whether the functional effects caused by the single amino acid substitutions were additive, three alpha s double point mutants, s(QE right-arrow EN), s(EL right-arrow NV), and s(QL right-arrow EV), were constructed and functionally analyzed. When coexpressed with the m3 muscarinic receptor, s(QE right-arrow EN) was able to mediate a cAMP response that was similar in magnitude to that observed with sq5 (Fig. 2A), indicating that the functional effects of the Q right-arrow E and E right-arrow N point mutations were additive. In contrast, the s(EL right-arrow NV) and s(QL right-arrow EV) double point mutants showed functional responses similar to those found with s(E right-arrow N) and s(Q right-arrow E), respectively, suggesting that the C-terminal amino acid of alpha q/11 is not critical for receptor recognition.

To study whether the results obtained with the m3 muscarinic receptor are also applicable to other Gq/11-coupled receptors, the different Galpha s constructs were also coexpressed with the V1a vasopressin and the GRP receptor. As shown in Fig. 2B, the V1a vasopressin receptor showed a functional profile that was very similar to that found with the m3 muscarinic receptor. In contrast, the activity pattern seen with the GRP peptide receptor differed somewhat from that found with the two other receptors. Similar to the m3 muscarinic and V1a vasopressin receptors, the GRP receptor gained the ability to activate s(E right-arrow N) (as well as the s(QE right-arrow EN) and s(EL right-arrow NV) double point mutants) and did not efficiently couple to s(L right-arrow V) (Fig. 2C). However, in contrast to the two other receptors examined in this study, the GRP receptor did not interact to a significant extent with the s(Q right-arrow E) single point and the s(QL right-arrow EV) double point mutants (Fig. 2C).

Identification of Receptor Sites Critical for the Recognition of the C-terminus of alpha q/11

The second major goal of this study was to identify the site(s) on Gq/11-coupled receptors that can functionally interact with the C terminus of alpha q/11 subunits. To address this question, we employed a gain-of-function mutagenesis approach, analyzing the ability of a series of hybrid m2/m3 muscarinic receptors (Fig. 4) to interact with the mutant alpha s subunit, sq5, in which the last five amino acids of alpha s were replaced with the corresponding alpha q sequence. As shown in Fig. 5, the m2 muscarinic receptor, a prototypical Gi/o-coupled receptor, did not activate either s(wt) or sq5 to a significant extent. We thus hypothesized that substitution into the m2 receptor of the m3 receptor domain(s) capable of recognizing the C terminus of alpha q should enable the resulting hybrid receptor(s) to interact with the sq5 subunit. The m2-i2, m2-Ni3, m2-Y, and m2-AALS hybrid receptors (Fig. 4) were included in this analysis because previous studies had shown that the m3 receptor regions/residues contained in these constructs are critical for efficient recognition of Gq/11 proteins (22, 23, 32, 33) (m2-tail was included as a negative control; see Refs. 21 and 23). N-[3H]Methylscopolamine saturation binding studies showed that all hybrid receptors were expressed at levels similar to those found with the m2 and m3 wild type receptors (for Bmax values, see legend to Fig. 5).


Fig. 5. Functional interaction of chimeric m2/m3 muscarinic receptors with a C-terminal-modified mutant alpha s subunit, sq5. COS-7 cells were cotransfected with the indicated receptor constructs (for receptor structures and precise amino acid compositions, see Fig. 3) and vector DNA (pCDNAI, control), s(wt), or sq5. Cells were incubated for 30 min at 37 °C with 500 µM carbachol, and the resulting increases in intracellular cAMP levels were determined as described under "Experimental Procedures." Data are presented as fold increase in cAMP above basal levels in the absence of carbachol. Basal cAMP levels for the wild type m3 muscarinic receptor cotransfected with s(wt) amounted to 800 ± 150 cpm/well. The basal cAMP levels observed with all other receptor constructs were not significantly different from this value. Also, basal cAMP levels found with cells cotransfected with sq5 were similar to the corresponding s(wt) values. Data are given as means ± S.E. of three independent experiments, each carried out in triplicate. N-[3H]Methylscopolamine saturation binding studies gave the following Bmax values (fmol/mg membrane protein; n = 3): m2(wt) (293 ± 17), m3(wt) (284 ± 5), m2-i2 (192 ± 23), m2-Ni3 (297 ± 18), m2-Y (315 ± 54), m2-AALS (324 ± 40), and m2-tail (409 ± 27).
[View Larger Version of this Image (22K GIF file)]

Interestingly, three of the investigated hybrid receptors, m2-i2, m2-Ni3, and m2-AALS, gained the ability to productively interact with the sq5 mutant subunit, mediating 4-6-fold increases in cAMP production (Fig. 5). In contrast, none of these hybrid receptors was able to efficiently interact with s(wt). In these constructs, the i2 loop, the first 21 amino acids of the i3 domain, and a four-amino acid motif (AALS; Ala488, Ala489, Leu492, and Ser493) at the C terminus of the i3 loop were derived from the m3 muscarinic receptor. The m2-Y mutant receptor (which contains a Ser210 right-arrow Tyr point mutation at the N terminus of the i3 loop) and the m2-tail construct (in which the last 66 amino acids of the m2 receptor were replaced with the corresponding m3 receptor sequence) showed a functional profile similar to that of the wild type m2 muscarinic receptor.


DISCUSSION

The alpha  subunits of heterotrimeric G proteins are known to play central roles in receptor-G protein and G protein-effector interactions (3, 5). Whereas more centrally located loop and helical domains of Galpha are known to be involved in effector binding, considerable evidence suggests that the C-terminal segment of Galpha can directly contact the receptor protein (3, 5). Consistent with this notion, high resolution crystal structures (34, 35) suggest that the C terminus of Galpha subunits is surface-exposed and thus easily accessible for interactions with the receptor. In addition, several recent studies (8-11) show that the C-terminal portion of Galpha subunits also plays a key role in dictating the specificity of receptor-G protein coupling. It could be demonstrated (8, 9) for example that mutant versions of alpha q (a subunit that can activate various isoforms of phospholipase C-beta ) in which the last five amino acids of alpha q replaced with the corresponding alpha i/o sequences allowed stimulation of phospholipase C-beta by receptors (A1 adenosine, D2 dopamine, and m2 muscarinic receptors) that otherwise are exclusively coupled to G proteins of the Gi/o class which cannot activate phospholipase C-beta efficiently. Subsequently, by studying the ability of the Gi/o-coupled m2 muscarinic receptor to activate mutant alpha q subunits containing single C-terminal alpha i residues, the functional roles of individual amino acids present at the C terminus of alpha i/o subunits have been defined (11).

Whereas the structural characteristics of the C-terminal domain of subunits of the alpha i/o protein family (including alpha -transducin) have been analyzed in great detail (36-39), little is known about the functional roles of the corresponding amino acids present in other classes of Galpha subunits. One goal of the present study therefore was to examine which specific amino acids present at the extreme C terminus of G proteins of the alpha q/11 family are involved in proper receptor recognition. To address this question, we employed a gain-of-function mutagenesis approach involving the coexpression of different Gq/11-coupled receptors with mutant alpha s subunits containing distinct alpha q/11 residues at their C termini. Consistent with the results of a previous study (10), we initially demonstrated that the m3 muscarinic, the V1a vasopressin, and the GRP receptors (which are all prototypical Gq/11-coupled receptors) do not couple efficiently to wild type alpha s but can productively interact with a mutant alpha s subunit (sq5) in which the last five amino acids of alpha s were replaced with the corresponding alpha q/11 sequence.

Since the C-terminal five amino acids of alpha s differ in only three residues from the corresponding alpha q/11 sequence (Fig. 1), three alpha s single point mutants (s(Q right-arrow E), s(E right-arrow N), and s(L right-arrow V)) were prepared and functionally analyzed. Whereas none of the tested Gq/11-coupled receptors was able to activate the s(L right-arrow V) subunit, all of them gained the ability to productively interact with the s(E right-arrow N) single point mutant. Two of the receptors (m3 muscarinic and V1a vasopressin) were also capable of activating the s(Q right-arrow E) subunit. These two receptors were able to interact with the s(QE right-arrow EN) double point mutant with greater efficacy than observed with the s(Q right-arrow E) and s(E right-arrow N) single point mutants, mimicking quantitatively the functional activity of the sq5 subunit. Taken together, these gain-of-function experiments strongly suggest that two C-terminal alpha q/11 residues, an asparagine at position -3 and a glutamate at position -5, play key roles in determining the receptor selectivity of G protein alpha q/11 subunits. Consistent with this notion, these two residues are found, with no exception, in all members of the alpha q/11 protein family (alpha q, alpha 11, alpha 14, alpha 15, and alpha 16; Fig. 1).

Interestingly, molecular genetic and biochemical studies (11, 36-38) show that the C-terminal residues of subunits of the alpha i/o protein family, which dictate the specificity of receptor recognition, are present at positions -4 (cysteine), -3 (glycine), and -1 (phenylalanine/tyrosine) (Fig. 1). Thus, the precise positions of the C-terminal amino acids that are critical for determining the specificity of receptor-G protein interactions differ between different functional classes of Galpha subunits. However, in both alpha i/o and alpha q/11 subunits, the residue present at the -3 position is of critical importance for receptor-G protein coupling selectivity. As shown in Fig. 1, the residues present at this position are perfectly conserved within individual Galpha subfamilies and can correctly predict the coupling profile of a given Galpha subunit. It is therefore likely that the corresponding residues in alpha s and alpha 12/13 (glutamate and methionine, respectively) have a similar functional importance as the glycine and asparagine residues present at -3 position of alpha i/o and alpha q/11 subunits, respectively. This, however, remains to be tested experimentally.

In the crystal structures of two G protein heterotrimers, the C-terminal segment of Galpha was disordered and not visible (34, 35). However, NMR studies on a C-terminal alpha -transducin peptide suggest that the last four amino acids of alpha i/o subunits form a type II' beta -turn (which depends on the presence of the conserved glycine residue at -3 position) that is broken upon interaction with the ligand-occupied receptor (39). Dratz et al. (39) therefore speculated that different types of beta -turn at the extreme C terminus of Galpha subunits are critical for determining the selectivity of receptor recognition. It is possible that the asparagine side chain present at -3 position in alpha q/11 subunits is able to hydrogen bond back to the main chain, thus forming a type VIII beta -turn characterized by a spatial arrangement of the C-terminal amino acids which differs from that found with alpha i/o subunits (39).

To gain deeper insight into the molecular mechanisms governing receptor-G protein interactions and G protein activation, the receptor site that interacts with the extreme C terminus of Galpha needs to be identified. By using a coexpression strategy analogous to that described here, we could previously show that the C terminus of alpha i/o subunits can contact a four-amino acid motif on the m2 muscarinic receptor (VTIL; Val385, Thr386, Ile389, and Leu390) predicted to be located at the C terminus of the i3 loop (9, 11). Since these residues are located in a region that is thought to be alpha -helically arranged (23, 40-42), the VTIL motif is predicted to form a hydrophobic surface that is critical for G protein recognition.

To examine whether this receptor-Galpha contact site is also conserved among other functional classes of GPCRs and G proteins, the second major goal of the present study was to map the site(s) on Gq/11-coupled receptors that is (are) recognized by the C terminus of alpha q/11 subunits. We initially showed that neither the wild type m2 nor the wild type m3 muscarinic receptor, consistent with their known G protein coupling preference for Gi/o and Gq/11 proteins, respectively, can efficiently interact with wild type alpha s. Whereas the m3 muscarinic receptor gained the ability to interact with the chimeric alpha s/alpha q subunit, sq5, the m2 muscarinic receptor was unable to interact with this mutant subunit. We therefore speculated that substitution into the m2 muscarinic receptor of the m3 receptor region(s) which can recognize the C terminus of alpha q/11 subunits should confer on the resulting hybrid receptor(s) the ability to activate sq5. Consistent with this concept, we found that a mutant m2 muscarinic receptor, m2-AALS (Figs. 4 and 5), in which the VTIL motif was replaced with the corresponding m3 receptor residues (Ala488, Ala489, Leu492, and Ser493, respectively) gained the ability to functionally interact with the sq5 subunit. This observation suggests that the VTIL/AALS residues define a conserved GPCR site that is generally involved in the recognition of the C terminus of Galpha subunits.

Interestingly, however, functional analysis of additional m2/m3 hybrid receptors showed that the m2-AALS construct was not the only mutant receptor capable of activating sq5. Two additional m2 mutant receptors, m2-i2 and m2-Ni3 (Figs. 4, 5), were identified that showed a functional profile very similar to that of m2-AALS. In these two mutant receptors, the i2 loop and the N-terminal portion of the i3 loop, respectively, were replaced with the corresponding m3 receptor sequences. Previous studies have shown that these two domains, together with the AALS motif present at the C terminus of the i3 loop, are critical for selective recognition of Gq/11 proteins by the m3 muscarinic receptor (23, 33).

One possible explanation for the observed ability of multiple m2/m3 hybrid receptors to activate the chimeric alpha s/alpha q subunit, sq5, is that the C terminus of alpha q/11 subunits can be contacted by multiple m3 receptor regions. Based on detailed site-directed mutagenesis studies (33) and several theoretical considerations (43), we recently proposed a model of the intracellular m3 receptor surface in which the functionally critical receptor residues present in the i2 loop and at the N and C terminus of the i3 domain all project into the interior of the receptor protein, thus forming a well defined G protein binding pocket (Fig. 6), analogous to the ligand binding site present on the extracellular receptor surface. It is therefore conceivable that the C-terminal portion of the Galpha subunits, by binding to this intracellular receptor "cavity," can interact with multiple receptor sites that lie adjacent to each other in the properly folded receptor protein.


Fig. 6. Model of the intracellular m3 muscarinic receptor surface depicting residues critical for selective recognition of Gq/11 proteins. The view is from the intracellular side of the membrane. The position and relative orientation of the seven transmembrane helices (I-VII) is based on the model proposed by Baldwin (43). The highlighted amino acids are predicted to determine the G protein coupling selectivity of the m3 muscarinic receptor (22, 23, 32, 33). Numbers refer to amino acid positions in the rat m3 muscarinic receptor sequence (25). For clarity, only the membrane-proximal portions of the i3 loop that are thought to form alpha -helical extensions of transmembrane helices V and VI (23, 40-42) are depicted. The highlighted residues at the N and C terminus of the i3 loop are predicted to form two hydrophobic patches, which, together with several hydrophilic residues in the i2 loop, are critical for proper G protein recognition (modified according to Ref. 7).
[View Larger Version of this Image (41K GIF file)]

As indicated above, we previously identified only one major receptor contact site for the C terminus of alpha i/o subunits by using a coexpression strategy analogous to that described here (9). One possible reason for the discrepancy between this finding and the results of the present study is that the relative functional importance of the i2 loop and the N- and C-terminal segments of the i3 domain may differ among different receptor-Galpha pairs. Alternatively, it is possible that the assay system employed in this study was more sensitive than the one used previously. In the present study, neither of the two wild type nor the different m2/m3 hybrid receptors were able to couple to wild type alpha s, thus allowing for a straightforward interpretation of the coexpression experiments involving the chimeric Galpha subunit, sq5. In contrast, the interpretation of our previous mutagenesis data was complicated by the fact that several of the analyzed m2/m3 hybrid receptors gained some degree of coupling to wild type alpha q (which served as template for introducing C-terminal alpha i residues) and were therefore able to activate phospholipase C-beta even in the absence of coexpressed hybrid alpha q/alpha i subunits (9).

The conclusion drawn from these gain-of-function mutagenesis experiments that the C terminus of Galpha subunits can be contacted by several different receptor sites is also supported by a recent loss-of-function study (44) examining the ability of an 11-amino acid peptide derived from the C terminus of alpha -transducin to bind to wild type and mutant versions of rhodopsin. This peptide, via direct binding to rhodopsin (12, 39), can stabilize the active metarhodopsin II state and can uncouple rhodopsin-transducin interactions. However, these effects were no longer observed when the peptide was incubated with mutant rhodopsins containing multiple mutations in the i2 loop and at the C terminus of the i3 domain, suggesting that the C terminus of alpha -transducin is recognized by at least two different receptor sites (44).

Although the present study again highlights the key role of the C terminus of Galpha subunits in proper receptor recognition, considerable evidence suggests that other domains on the Galpha subunits as well as the G protein beta gamma complex can also modulate the selectivity of receptor-G protein interactions, most likely by directly contacting the receptor protein (5, 45). The GPCR sites involved in these interactions remain to be identified.

In conclusion, we have shown for the first time that the coupling specificity of Galpha s can be changed by single amino acid substitutions (alpha s right-arrow alpha q), leading to the identification of two C-terminal alpha q/11 residues that are critical for proper receptor recognition. Moreover, our gain-of-function mutagenesis data predict that multiple intracellular receptor domains form a binding pocket for the C-terminal segment of alpha q/11 subunits. By using a coexpression strategy similar to that described here, it should be possible to map other functionally relevant receptor-G protein contact sites. The information gathered from such studies should eventually lead to a refined model of the receptor-G protein interface.


FOOTNOTES

*   This work was supported by a grant from the Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst (NATO) (to E. K.).The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. The article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact.
Dagger    To whom correspondence should be addressed: Laboratory of Bioorganic Chemistry, NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, Bldg. 8A, Rm. B1A-05, Bethesda, Maryland 20892. Tel.: 301-402-3589; Fax: 301-402-4182.
1   The abbreviations used are: GPCR, G protein-coupled receptor; sq5, wild type Galpha s in which the last five amino acids were replaced with the corresponding alpha q sequence; i2 and i3, the second and third intracellular loops of G protein-coupled receptors, respectively; PCR, polymerase chain reaction; GRP, gastrin-releasing peptide; s(wt), wild type Galpha s.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We thank Drs. B. Conklin, J. Battey, and M. Brownstein for generously providing us with receptor or G protein expression plasmids.


REFERENCES

  1. Kobilka, B. (1992) Annu. Rev. Neurosci. 15, 87-114 [CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  2. Savarese, T. M., and Fraser, C. M. (1992) Biochem. J. 283, 1-19
  3. Conklin, B. R., and Bourne, H. R. (1993) Cell 73, 631-641 [CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  4. Strader, C. D., Fong, T. M., Tota, M. R., Underwood, D., and Dixon, R. A. F. (1994) Annu. Rev. Biochem. 63, 101-132 [CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  5. Rens-Domiano, S., and Hamm, H. (1995) FASEB J. 9, 1059-1066 [Abstract]
  6. Dohlman, H. G., Thorner, J., Caron, M. G., and Lefkowitz, R. J. (1991) Annu. Rev. Biochem. 60, 653-688 [CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  7. Wess, J. (1997) FASEB J. 11, 346-354 [Abstract]
  8. Conklin, B. R., Farfel, Z., Lustig, K. D., Julius, D., and Bourne, H. R. (1993) Nature 363, 274-276 [CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  9. Liu, J., Conklin, B. R., Blin, N., Yun, J., and Wess, J. (1995) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 92, 11642-11646 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  10. Conklin, B. R., Herzmark, P., Ishida, S., Voyno-Yasenetskaya, T. A.., Sun, Y., Farfel, Z., and Bourne, H. R. (1996) Mol. Pharmacol. 50, 885-890 [Abstract]
  11. Kostenis, E., Conklin, B. R., and Wess, J. (1997) Biochemistry 36, 1487-1495 [CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  12. Hamm, H. E., Deretik, D., Arendt, A., Hargrave, P. A., Koenig, B., and Hofmann, K. P. (1988) Science 241, 832-835 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  13. Rasenick, M. M., Watanabe, M., Lazarevic, M. B., Hatta, S., and Hamm, H. E. (1994) J. Biol. Chem. 269, 21519-21525 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Parker, E. M., Kameyama, K., Higashijima, T., and Ross, E. M. (1991) J. Biol. Chem. 266, 519-527 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Peralta, E. G., Ashkenazi, A., Winslow, J. W., Ramachandran, J., and Capon, D. J. (1988) Nature 334, 434-437 [CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  16. Offermanns, S., Wieland, T., Homann, D., Sandmann, J., Bombien, E., Spicher, K., Schultz, G., and Jakobs, K. H. (1994) Mol. Pharmacol. 45, 890-898 [Abstract]
  17. Jones, D. T., and Reed, R. R. (1987) J. Biol. Chem. 262, 14241-14249 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Levis, M. J., and Bourne, H. R. (1992) J. Cell Biol. 119, 1297-1307 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Wedegaertner, P. B., and Bourne, H. R. (1994) Cell 77, 1063-1070 [CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  20. Sanger, F., Nicklen, S., and Coulson, A. R. (1977) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 74, 5463-5467 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Wess, J., Bonner, T. I., and Brann, M. R. (1990) Mol. Pharmacol. 38, 872-877 [Abstract]
  22. Blüml, K., Mutschler, E., and Wess, J. (1994) J. Biol. Chem. 269, 402-405 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Blin, N., Yun, J., and Wess, J. (1995) J. Biol. Chem. 270, 17741-17748 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Cullen, B. R. (1987) Methods Enzymol. 152, 684-704 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  25. Bonner, T. I., Buckley, N. J., Young, A. C., and Brann, M. R. (1987) Science 237, 527-532 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Battey, J. F., Way, J. M., Corjay, M. H., Shapira, H., Kusano, K., Harkins, R., Wu, J. M., Slattery, T., Mann, E., and Feldman, R. I. (1991) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 88, 395-399 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  27. Morel, A., O'Carroll, A.-M., Brownstein, M. J., and Lolait, S. J. (1992) Nature 356, 523-526 [CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  28. Salomon, Y., Londos, C., and Rodbell, M. (1974) Anal. Biochem. 58, 541-548 [CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  29. Dörje, F., Wess, J., Lambrecht, G., Tacke, R., Mutschler, E., and Brann, M. R. (1991) J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther. 256, 727-733 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  30. Bradford, M. M. (1976) Anal. Biochem. 72, 248-254 [CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  31. Munson, P. J., and Rodbard, D. (1980) Anal. Biochem. 107, 220-239 [CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  32. Blüml, K., Mutschler, E., and Wess, J. (1994) J. Biol. Chem. 269, 11537-11541 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  33. Wess, J. (1996) Crit. Rev. Neurobiol. 10, 69-99 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  34. Wall, M. A., Coleman, D. E., Lee, E., Iniguez-Lluhi, J. A., Posner, B. A., Gilman, A. G., and Sprang, S. R. (1995) Cell 83, 1047-1058 [CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  35. Lambright, D. G., Sondek, J., Bohm, A., Skiba, N. P., Hamm, H. E., and Sigler, P. B. (1996) Nature 379, 311-319 [CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  36. Garcia, P. D., Onrust, R., Bell, S. M., Sakmar, T. P., and Bourne, H. R. (1995) EMBO J. 14, 4460-4469 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  37. Martin, E. L., Rens-Domiano, S., Schatz, P. J., and Hamm, H. E. (1996) J. Biol. Chem. 271, 361-366 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  38. Osawa, S., and Weiss, E. R. (1995) J. Biol. Chem. 270, 31052-31058 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  39. Dratz, E. A., Furstenau, J. E., Lambert, C. G., Thireault, D. L., Rarick, H., Schepers, T., Pakhlevaniants, S., and Hamm, H. E. (1993) Nature 363, 276-281 [CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  40. Strader, C. D., Sigal, I. S., and Dixon, R. A. F. (1989) FASEB J. 3, 1825-1832 [Abstract]
  41. Burstein, E. S., Spalding, T. A., Hill-Eubanks, D., and Brann, M. R. (1995) J. Biol. Chem. 270, 3141-3146 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  42. Altenbach, C., Yang, K., Farrens, D. L., Khorana, H. G., and Hubbell, W. L. (1996) Biochemistry 35, 12470-12478 [CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  43. Baldwin, J. M. (1993) EMBO J. 12, 1693-1703 [Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  44. Acharya, S., Saad, Y., and Karnik, S. S. (1997) J. Biol. Chem. 272, 6519-6524 [Abstract/Free Full Text]
  45. Bourne, H. R. (1997) Curr. Opin. Cell Biol. 9, 134-142 [CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  46. Watson, S., and Arkinstall, S. (1994) in The G Protein-linked Receptor Facts Book (Watson, S., and Arkinstall, S., eds), pp. 1-291, Academic Press, Ltd., London

©1997 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Biol. Chem.Home page
M. L. Matsumoto, K. Narzinski, G. V. Nikiforovich, and T. J. Baranski
A Comprehensive Structure-Function Map of the Intracellular Surface of the Human C5a Receptor: II. ELUCIDATION OF G PROTEIN SPECIFICITY DETERMINANTS
J. Biol. Chem., February 2, 2007; 282(5): 3122 - 3133.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther.Home page
P. Michal, E. E. El-Fakahany, and V. Dolezal
Muscarinic M2 Receptors Directly Activate Gq/11 and Gs G-Proteins
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., February 1, 2007; 320(2): 607 - 614.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Mol EndocrinolHome page
I. Langer, C. Langlet, and P. Robberecht
Effect of inactivating mutations on phosphorylation and internalization of the human VPAC2 receptor
J. Mol. Endocrinol., April 1, 2005; 34(2): 405 - 414.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther.Home page
E. Kostenis, L. Martini, J. Ellis, M. Waldhoer, A. Heydorn, M. M. Rosenkilde, P. K. Norregaard, R. Jorgensen, J. L. Whistler, and G. Milligan
A Highly Conserved Glycine within Linker I and the Extreme C Terminus of G Protein {alpha} Subunits Interact Cooperatively in Switching G Protein-Coupled Receptor-to-Effector Specificity
J. Pharmacol. Exp. Ther., April 1, 2005; 313(1): 78 - 87.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Biol. Chem.Home page
Y. Sugimoto, T. Nakato, A. Kita, Y. Takahashi, N. Hatae, H. Tabata, S. Tanaka, and A. Ichikawa
A Cluster of Aromatic Amino Acids in the i2 Loop Plays a Key Role for Gs Coupling in Prostaglandin EP2 and EP3 Receptors
J. Biol. Chem., March 19, 2004; 279(12): 11016 - 11026.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page