J Biol Chem, Vol. 274, Issue 39, 27642-27650, September 24, 1999
Identification of the Cysteine Residues in the Amino-terminal
Extracellular Domain of the Human Ca2+ Receptor Critical
for Dimerization
IMPLICATIONS FOR FUNCTION OF MONOMERIC Ca2+
RECEPTOR*
Kausik
Ray,
Benjamin C.
Hauschild,
Peter J.
Steinbach
,
Paul K.
Goldsmith,
Omar
Hauache, and
Allen M.
Spiegel§
From the Metabolic Diseases Branch, NIDDK, and
Center
for Information Technology, National Institutes of Health,
Bethesda, Maryland 20892
 |
ABSTRACT |
We analyzed the effect of substituting serine for
each of the 19 cysteine residues within the amino-terminal
extracellular domain of the human Ca2+ receptor on
cell surface expression and receptor dimerization. C129S, C131S, C437S,
C449S, and C482S were similar to wild type receptor; the other 14 cysteine to serine mutants were retained intracellularly. Four of
these, C60S, C101S, C358S and C395S, were unable to dimerize. A
C129S/C131S double mutant failed to dimerize but was unique in that the
monomeric form expressed at the cell surface. Substitution of a
cysteine for serine 132 within the C129S/C131S mutant restored receptor
dimerization. Mutation of residues Cys-129, Cys-131, and Ser-132,
singly and in various combinations caused a left shift in
Ca2+ response compared with wild type receptor. These
results identify cysteines 129 and 131 as critical in formation of
intermolecular disulfide bond(s) responsible for receptor dimerization.
In a "venus flytrap" model of the receptor extracellular domain,
Cys-129 and Cys-131 are located within a region protruding from one
lobe of the flytrap. We suggest that this region represents a dimer interface for the receptor and that mutation of residues within the
interface causes important changes in Ca2+ response of the receptor.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The Ca2+ receptor
(CaR)1 regulates
extracellular calcium ion ([Ca2+]o) homeostasis
by controlling the rate of parathyroid hormone secretion from the
parathyroid gland and the rate of calcium reabsorption by the kidney
(1). [Ca2+]o activates the CaR, leading to
activation of phospholipase C
via the Gq subfamily of
G-proteins; this increases phosphoinositide (PI) hydrolysis and causes
release of Ca2+ from intracellular stores (2). Recent
evidence suggests that the CaR is also involved in diverse cellular
responses to extracellular Ca2+ within microenvironments in
other organs such as brain, skin, bone, and intestine (3).
The CaR is a member of the superfamily of G-protein-coupled receptors
(GPCR) and belongs to the subfamily (family 3 (4)) that includes
metabotropic glutamate receptors (mGluR) (5), putative pheromone
receptors in the vomeronasal organ (VNR) (6-8), putative taste
receptors (TR) (9), and GABAB receptors (10). Family 3 GPCR
are characterized by a large (>600 residues in the CaR) extracellular
amino-terminal domain (ECD) thought to be structurally related to the
bilobed ("venus flytrap") structure of bacterial periplasmic
binding proteins (10-12).
Recently, it has been shown that both the mGluRs (13-15) and the CaR
(12, 16-19) are expressed at the cell surface as intermolecular disulfide-linked dimers. For mGluR1 (14), mGluR4 (15), and the CaR
(12), the ECD of each receptor, purified as a secreted protein, exists
as a disulfide-linked dimer, suggesting that one or more cysteines in
the ECD is involved in receptor dimer formation. However, the
cysteine(s) forming intermolecular disulfide bond(s) in the CaR or
mGluR ECD have not yet been identified. Proteolysis of the mGluR5
receptor localized cysteine(s) critical for dimer formation to the
first 17 kDa of the ECD (13). This region contains three cysteines
conserved in all mGluRs and in the CaR. The human CaR (hCaR) ECD
contains a total of 19 cysteines (20) all of which are highly conserved
in bovine (2), rat (21, 22), and rabbit (23) CaRs, and all but cysteine
482 (hCaR sequence numbering) are conserved in the chicken CaR (24). We
showed previously that individual cysteine
serine mutations of 14 of these 19 cysteines (all but cysteines 129, 131, 437, 449, and 482)
abolish or drastically reduce receptor cell surface expression and/or
function, likely by causing misfolding and improper processing of the
receptor (18). In the present study, we performed a detailed analysis
of ECD cysteines responsible for dimer formation. We found that
mutation of both cysteines 129 and 131, but not mutation of either
alone, blocks dimer formation. Unlike other ECD cysteine mutations,
however, mutation of both cysteines 129 and 131 results in a monomeric
form of the hCaR expressed at the cell surface and with unique
functional properties.
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
Site-directed Mutagenesis of the hCaR--
Site-directed
mutagenesis was performed on hCaR cDNA in the pCR3.1 vector using a
commercial kit (QuikChangeTM site-directed mutagenesis kit,
Stratagene Inc., La Jolla, CA), according to the manufacturer's
instructions. Briefly, a pair of complementary primers with 25-35
bases was designed for each mutagenesis, and the mutation to change
cysteine to serine or alanine was placed in the middle of the primers.
Parental hCaR inserted in pCR3.1 was amplified using Pyrococcus
furiosus DNA polymerase with these primers for 12 cycles in a DNA
thermal cycler (Perkin-Elmer). After digestion of the parental DNA with
DpnI, the amplified DNA with the nucleotide substitution
incorporated was transformed into Escherichia coli (DH-5
strain). The mutations were confirmed by automated DNA sequencing using
a Taq DyeDeoxy Terminator Cycle Sequencing kit and ABI
prism-377 DNA sequencer (Applied Biosystems, Inc., Foster City, CA).
Most of the 19 single site cysteine to serine (Cys
Ser) mutants
used in this study were described earlier (18). The C129S and S132C
mutants and the Cys
Ala mutants including C60A, C101A, C358A, and
C395A were newly generated. The C129S/C131S and C129A/C131A double
mutants and the C129S/C131S/S132C triple mutant were created by
changing cysteine at a given site to the desired amino acid and using
this mutant DNA as template in the next round of mutagenesis. A
truncation mutant containing the ECD and 1st transmembrane domain
(henceforth termed TM1) was generated by introducing a stop codon in
the first intracellular domain of the WT hCaR clone at amino acid
position lysine 644. For all the newly generated mutants, we confirmed that two independent clones of the same mutant receptor cDNA showed identical properties.
Transient Transfection of Wild Type and Mutant Receptors in
HEK-293 Cells--
For transfection, a given amount of the plasmid DNA
was diluted in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (DMEM) (BioFluids
Inc., Rockville, MD), mixed with diluted LipofectAMINE, and the mixture was incubated at room temperature for 30 min. The DNA-LipofectAMINE complex was further diluted in serum-free DMEM, and 8-15 µg of DNA
was added to 80-90% confluent HEK-293 cells plated in
75-cm2 flasks. For 6-well plates, transfections were
performed using 2 µg of DNA for single plasmid transfection or 1 µg
of DNA of each of two different plasmids in cotransfection experiments, with 25 µl of LipofectAMINE per well at dilutions described above. After 5 h of incubation, equal volume of DMEM containing 20%
fetal bovine serum (FBS) (BioFluids Inc., Rockville, MD) was added, and
the media were replaced 24 h after transfection with complete DMEM
containing 10% FBS. Membrane protein extraction for immunoblotting, whole cell enzyme-linked immunoassay, or PI hydrolysis assay were performed 48 h after transfection.
Biotinylation of the Cell Surface hCaR--
48 h after
transfection, cell surface proteins of the intact HEK-293 cells were
labeled with membrane-impermeant Biotin-7-NHS using the cellular
labeling kit (Roche Molecular Biochemicals). Briefly, adherent cells
were washed once with ice-cold phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) and
treated with 50 µg/ml Biotin-7-NHS in biotinylation buffer (50 mM sodium borate, 150 mM NaCl) for 15 min at
room temperature to biotinylate cell surface proteins. The reaction was
stopped by adding 50 mM NH4Cl for 15 min on
ice. The cells were washed twice with ice-cold PBS and solubilized with
1 ml of buffer B per well containing 1% Triton X-100, 20 mM Tris-HCl (pH 6.8), 150 mM NaCl, 10 mM EDTA, 1 mM EGTA with freshly added protease inhibitor mixture.
Immunoprecipitation of hCaR Receptors--
300 µl
(approximately 600 µg of total protein) of the whole cell lysate
prepared by scraping cells from 6-well plates in buffer B as described
above was further diluted with 300 µl of buffer B and incubated with
either 5 µl of 7F8 mouse monoclonal hCaR-specific antibody (made
against the purified hCaR ECD (12); 1 mg/ml stock) or 7 µl of
affinity purified rabbit polyclonal hCaR-specific antibody GGD (made
against a synthetic peptide corresponding to amino acids 1037-1050 of
the hCaR protein; 1 mg/ml stock) for 1-2 h at 4 °C. Subsequently,
25 µl of protein A/G (for 7F8) or protein A (for GGD)-agarose (Santa
Cruz Biotechnology, Santa Cruz, CA) was added, and the incubation was
continued for an additional 1-2 h. The protein A/G- or A-agarose was
washed three times with buffer B containing 0.5% SDS, and the
immunoreactive proteins were eluted in 120 µl of 1× sample buffer
containing either no
-mercaptoethanol or 300 mM
-mercaptoethanol at room temperature for 5 min. 50 µl of sample
was loaded per lane, and immunoblotting was performed as described below.
Immunoblotting Analyses with Detergent-solubilized Whole Cell
Extracts--
Confluent cells in 75-cm2 or 6-well plates
were rinsed with ice-cold PBS and scraped on ice in buffer B containing
20 mM Tris-HCl (pH 6.8), 150 mM NaCl, 10 mM EDTA, 1 mM EGTA, 1% Triton X-100 with
freshly added protease inhibitors mixture. The protein content of each
sample was determined by the modified Bradford method (Bio-Rad), and
40-60 µg of protein per lane was separated on 5% SDS-PAGE. The
proteins on the gel were electrotransferred to nitrocellulose membrane
and incubated with 0.1 µg/ml protein A-purified mouse monoclonal
anti-hCaR antibody ADD (raised against a synthetic peptide
corresponding to residues 214-235 of hCaR protein (25)). Subsequently,
the membrane was incubated with a secondary goat anti-mouse antibody
conjugated to horseradish peroxidase (Kirkegaard and Perry
Laboratories, Gaithersburg, MD) at a dilution of 1:5000. The hCaR
protein was detected with an enhanced chemiluminescence system
(Amersham Pharmacia Biotech Corp.). Biotinylated proteins were detected
using peroxidase-conjugated streptavidin followed by visualization of
the biotinylated bands using BM chemiluminescence kit (Roche Molecular Biochemicals).
Treatment of Detergent-solubilized Crude Cell Membrane Extracts
with Endoglycosidase H--
For cleavage with endoglycosidase H
(Endo-H) (Roche Molecular Biochemicals), cell extracts (20 µl) were
diluted in 20 µl of 50 mM sodium acetate (pH 4.8).
Samples were incubated with 0.5 milliunits of Endo-H for 2 h at
37 °C.
Intact Cell Enzyme-linked Immunoassay to Determine Cell Surface
Expression--
This method has been described (26). Briefly, intact
transfected HEK-293 cells in 75-cm2 flasks were detached
with 1 mM EDTA in PBS containing 0.5% bovine serum albumin
and incubated with 0.5 ml of DMEM containing 10% FBS and 1 µg/ml
monoclonal anti-hCaR antibody 7F8 at 4 °C for 2 h. After
incubation in peroxidase-conjugated anti-mouse secondary antibody,
cells were washed and, after adding peroxidase substrate, precipitated
by centrifugation; absorbance of the supernatant was measured at 405 nm
using a Thermomax microtiter plate reader (Molecular
Devices, Sunnyvale, CA).
PI Hydrolysis Assay--
PI hydrolysis assay has been described
(26, 27). Briefly, 24 h after transfection, transfected cells from
a confluent 75-cm2 flask were replated in two 12-well
plates in medium containing 3.0 µCi/ml [3H]myoinositol
(NEN Life Science Products) in complete DMEM for another 24 h,
followed by 1-h incubation with 1× PI buffer (120 mM NaCl,
0.5 mM CaCl2, 5 mM KCl, 5.6 mM glucose, 0.4 mM MgCl2, 20 mM LiCl in 25 mM PIPES buffer, pH 7.2). After
removal of PI buffer, cells were incubated for an additional 1 h
with different concentrations of [Ca2+]o in PI
buffer. The reactions were terminated by addition of 1 ml of
acid/methanol (1:1000 v/v) per well. Total inositol phosphates were
purified by chromatography on Dowex 1-X8 columns.
Molecular Modeling--
The amino acid sequence for the hCaR ECD
(20) was aligned with that of the rat mGluR1 (20) and the 344-residue
E. coli leucine/isoleucine/valine periplasmic binding
protein (LIVBP) based on the original alignment performed by O'Hara
et al. (11). A model for the three-dimensional structure of
this portion of the hCaR ECD was generated using the SEGMOD algorithm
(28) of the program LOOK-version 3.5 (29) using the LIVBP coordinates as a template from the Brookhaven Protein Data base. The modeled coordinates were oriented in RASMOL (30) and depicted using MOLSCRIPT
(31) and RASTER3D (32).
 |
RESULTS |
Intermolecular Disulfide Bridge Involves ECD of the hCaR--
To
determine the role of the ECD in dimer formation of the membrane-bound
hCaR, a mutant construct (TM1) containing the whole ECD and first
transmembrane domain of hCaR and truncated at lysine 644 in the first
intracellular loop was prepared and transiently expressed in HEK-293
cells. Cell surface proteins were labeled with membrane-impermeant
Biotin-7-NHS prior to lysing the cells as described before (33). To
prevent nonspecific disulfide bond formation during protein extraction,
the intact cells were incubated and washed in PBS containing 50 mM iodoacetamide, and 10 mM iodoacetamide was
included in the lysis buffer. Both the wild type hCaR and TM1 were then
immunoprecipitated with receptor-specific 7F8 monoclonal antibody and
eluted with gel loading sample buffer either containing
-mercaptoethanol as reducing agent or with no
-mercaptoethanol. Immunoprecipitates were run on SDS-PAGE and analyzed on immunoblots stained either with streptavidin to detect biotinylated cell surface proteins or with anti-hCaR monoclonal antibody ADD to detect total hCaR
immunoreactive species.
As shown in Fig. 1 (ADD blot,
1st lane), under nonreducing conditions, ADD
antibody detected two major dimeric bands of hCaR ~260-300 kDa in
size; ~150- and 130-kDa monomeric forms appeared only after reducing
the samples (ADD blot, 3rd lane).
Previous studies have shown that the monomeric ~150-kDa band
represents hCaR forms expressed at the cell surface and modified with
N-linked, complex carbohydrates; the ~130-kDa band
represents high mannose-modified forms, trapped intracellularly and
sensitive to Endo-H digestion (26, 33, 34). In accord with this,
streptavidin identified only the upper 150-kDa monomeric form under
reducing conditions; under nonreducing conditions, only the upper
dimeric form is stained by streptavidin indicating that only the upper
dimeric form is expressed at the cell surface (Fig. 1,
Biotin-Strep blot, 1st and 3rd lanes).
Similarly, under nonreducing conditions (ADD blot, 2nd lane), ADD antibody identified two TM1 mutant
dimeric bands of ~160-180 kDa. These forms were largely reduced to
two bands of ~85 and 95 kDa (ADD blot, 4th
lane). Streptavidin detected only the upper form of the
non-reduced or reduced TM1 bands (Biotin-Strep blot,
2nd and 4th lanes) showing that only
the upper form of TM1 is expressed at the cell surface, as with the
wild type receptor. These results indicate that TM1 is capable of
forming a dimer expressed at the cell surface like the wild type hCaR
but lacking the full seven transmembrane domain does not stimulate PI
hydrolysis in response to [Ca2+]o (data not
shown). The ability of TM1 to form dimers, together with our previous
observation that the secreted, purified ECD of the hCaR is a
disulfide-linked dimer (12), indicates that the determinants including
the cysteines important for dimer formation are present in the ECD of
the hCaR.

View larger version (46K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Determination of cell surface expression of
WT hCaR and TM1 mutant. HEK-293 cells were transfected with either
WT hCaR or with TM1 mutant, and cell surface proteins were labeled with
Biotin-7-NHS as described under "Materials and Methods." The cell
lysate was immunoprecipitated with anti-hCaR 7F8 monoclonal antibody.
Immunoreactive proteins eluted with SDS-PAGE loading sample buffer
containing either -mercaptoethanol (reducing, R) or no
-mercaptoethanol (non-reducing, NR) were separated by
SDS-PAGE. All forms of the WT and TM1 mutant receptors were detected
with anti-hCaR ADD monoclonal antibody (blot labeled ADD).
Biotinylated forms of WT and TM1 mutant receptors were detected with
peroxidase-conjugated streptavidin (labeled Biotin-Strep) in
a duplicate blot of the same samples. The positions of molecular mass
standards are indicated on the right.
|
|
Screening of Single Cysteine Mutants for Their Ability to Form
Homodimers or Heterodimers with TM1--
We previously generated
single Cys
Ser mutants of all 19 cysteines in the hCaR ECD (18). We
now coexpressed each of these Cys
Ser mutants and the wild type
hCaR with the TM1 mutant and tested for their ability to heterodimerize
with TM1 in a coimmunoprecipitation assay. A polyclonal antibody
"GGD" made against a peptide from the carboxyl-terminal tail region
of the hCaR is able to immunoprecipitate full-length wild type hCaR and
full-length Cys
Ser mutants but not TM1 because TM1 lacks the GGD
epitope. After immunoprecipitation with GGD antibody, samples were run
on SDS-PAGE under reducing conditions and immunoblotting performed with
ADD antibody whose epitope within the ECD is contained in both TM1 and
full-length forms of hCaR. GGD antibody fails to immunoprecipitate TM1
when it is transfected by itself, as no immunoreactivity is detected on
ADD immunoblots of such immunoprecipitates (data not shown). Fig.
2A shows the results for wild
type and seven of these mutants. When coexpressed with wild type hCaR,
TM1 immunoreactivity is detected with ADD on blots of the
immunoprecipitate. Both the 95- and 85-kDa bands of TM1 were detected
under reducing conditions as were the 150- and 130-kDa forms of the
wild type hCaR (Fig. 2A, 1st lane). These results indicate
that TM1 and wild type hCaR heterodimerize, allowing TM1 to be
coprecipitated with wild type hCaR by GGD antibody. We suggest that the
upper forms of TM1 and wild type detected on ADD blot reflect
heterodimers expressed at the cell surface and the lower forms,
heterodimers of the respective incompletely processed, intracellular
forms of TM1 and wild type hCaR. Similarly, with C129S and C131S
mutants, both 95- and 85-kDa forms of TM1 were coimmunoprecipitated
along with 150- and 130-kDa forms of the C129S and C131S mutant
receptors. C236S mutant expressed primarily as the 130-kDa form and
coimmunoprecipitated mainly with the lower 85-kDa form of TM1. A small
amount of the upper 95-kDa TM1 monomeric band was detected
corresponding to the faint 150-kDa band detected for C236S (Fig.
2A, 6th lane). In contrast, C60S, C101S, C358S, and C395S
failed to immunoprecipitate the 95-kDa form of the TM1 mutant and
little if any of the 85-kDa form. Each of these mutants was expressed
primarily as the incompletely processed, 130-kDa form.

View larger version (49K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
A, cotransfection of WT, C60S, C101S,
C129S, C131S, C236S, C358S, and C395S mutant receptors with TM1 mutant
receptor followed by immunoprecipitation to detect heterodimerization.
HEK-293 cells were cotransfected with WT or different cysteine mutants
along with TM1 as indicated in the figure. Cells were lysed and
immunoprecipitation with anti-hCaR polyclonal antibody GGD performed as
described under "Materials and Methods." Immunoreactive proteins
were eluted with SDS-PAGE sample buffer containing -mercaptoethanol
(R, reducing) and separated on 5% SDS-PAGE. Immunoblot was
developed with anti-hCaR monoclonal antibody ADD. This blot is
representative of several similar experiments. B, immunoblot
analysis under non-reducing (NR) condition to detect
homodimeric expression patterns of the WT, C60S, C101S, C129S, C131S,
C236S, C358S, and C395S mutant receptors. Whole cell extracts obtained
from HEK-293 cells transiently transfected with wild type hCaR or
different cysteine mutants were fractionated on 5% SDS-PAGE under
non-reducing condition. Immunoblotting was performed with anti-hCaR
monoclonal antibody ADD. Molecular mass standards are indicated at the
right of the blots.
|
|
The Cys
Ser mutants were further analyzed by determining their
homodimerization patterns on ADD immunoblots run under nonreducing conditions. Cells were treated with iodoacetamide as described under
"Materials and Methods" to prevent aggregates forming secondary to
nonspecific disulfide bond formation. Fig. 2B shows that
C60S, C101S, C358S, and C395S mutant receptors remained mostly as a 130-kDa monomeric form and showed very little or no dimeric forms. In
contrast, wild type hCaR, C129S, and C131S mutant receptors formed two
homodimeric bands with little or no monomeric forms visible on
immunoblot. C236S mutant receptor showed a strong dimeric band with
mobility differing from either wild type hCaR, C129S, or C131S mutant
receptors. Taken together, the results suggest that substituting serine
(or alanine; data not shown) for cysteines 60, 101, 358, or 395 may
directly or indirectly block dimerization, whereas serine substitution
for either Cys-129 or Cys-131 has minimal effect on dimer formation.
Substitution of serine for cysteine 236 does not block dimer formation,
but the conformation of the C236S dimeric forms based on different
mobility on SDS-PAGE appear to differ from those of wild type hCaR. Of
the other Cys
Ser mutants, C447S, C449S, and C482S showed
essentially the same pattern of hetero- and homodimerization as the
wild type hCaR. The C542S, C546S, C561S, C562S, C565S, C568S, C582S,
C585S, and C595S mutant receptors showed similar heterodimerization
patterns with TM1 as the C236S mutant; their homodimerization patterns also resembled C236S with variable degrees of dimer mobility
differences from wild type hCaR on non-reducing SDS-PAGE (data not shown).
Cys
Ser Mutation of Both Cys-129 and Cys-131 Blocks Functional
Dimer Formation and Generates a Monomeric Form of hCaR Expressed at the
Cell Surface--
The first 17 kDa of the mGluR5 was shown to be
critical for dimer formation (13). The mGluRs all have three conserved
cysteines within this region. Two correspond to Cys-60 and Cys-101 of
the hCaR, but the hCaR has two cysteines, 129 and 131, in the position corresponding to the third mGluR-conserved cysteine (20). This led us
to examine the possibility that the lack of effect of serine substitution for either Cys-129 or Cys-131 on hCaR dimer formation could be due to the ability of the remaining, nearby cysteine to
substitute in a putative intermolecular disulfide bond for that mutated
to serine. We therefore created a C129S/C131S double mutant and
compared its expression and dimer formation pattern with wild type,
C129S, and C131S mutant receptors. As seen in Fig.
3A (ADD blot),
under nonreducing conditions, a pair of immunoreactive bands in the
>200-kDa size range is detected for the C129S/C131S double mutant as
for the wild type and C129S and C131S mutants. The mobility of these
bands, however, differs from that of the two major dimeric bands of the
wild type hCaR or C129S or C131S mutant receptors. Moreover, whereas
wild type hCaR showed no monomeric forms and C129S and C131S showed
only a small amount of the intracellular 130-kDa monomeric form under
nonreducing conditions, the C129S/C131S double mutant generated
significant amounts of both 150- and 130-kDa monomeric forms.
Streptavidin blot under nonreducing conditions (Fig. 3A,
Biotin-Strep) showed that the wild type hCaR, C129S, and
C131S mutants are expressed at the cell surface as the ~300-kDa upper
dimer form. In contrast, the C129S/C131S double mutant was expressed at
the cell surface only as the monomeric 150-kDa form. Importantly,
neither of the apparent dimeric forms detected for the C129S/C131S
double mutant with ADD appear to be expressed at the cell surface as
judged by lack of streptavidin staining.

View larger version (28K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
A, determination of cell surface
expression of the C129S/C131S double mutant. HEK-293 cells were
transfected with WT hCaR, C129S, or C131S single cysteine mutants or
C129S/C131S double cysteine mutant, and cell surface proteins were
labeled with Biotin-7-NHS. The cell lysate was immunoprecipitated with
anti-hCaR monoclonal antibody 7F8; immunoreactive proteins were eluted
with loading sample buffer containing no -mercaptoethanol
(non-reducing, NR) and subjected to SDS-PAGE. All CaR forms
were detected with anti-hCaR monoclonal antibody ADD (blot labeled
ADD). Biotinylated forms of WT and mutant receptors were
detected with peroxidase-conjugated streptavidin (blot labeled
Biotin-Strep) in a duplicate blot of the same samples.
B, enzymatic deglycosylation studies to determine Endo-H
sensitivity of dimeric/monomeric forms of the WT and C129S/C131S double
mutant receptors. 40 µg of whole cell extracts of cells transfected
with wild type (WT) or C129S/C131S double mutant hCaR
cDNAs were incubated without ( ) or with (+) Endo-H for 2 h
at 37 °C as described under "Materials and Methods." The
extracts after digestion were mixed with sample buffer either
containing (R) or not containing (NR) 300 mM -mercaptoethanol and subjected to 5% SDS-PAGE. After
transfer to nitrocellulose membranes immunoblot was developed with
monoclonal antibody ADD. C, cotransfection of the
C129S/C131S double mutant receptor or WT receptor with TM1 mutant
receptor followed by immunoprecipitation to detect heterodimerization.
HEK-293 cells were cotransfected with C129S/C131S double mutant or WT
hCaR and TM1 mutant. Whole cell extracts were immunoprecipitated with
anti-hCaR polyclonal antibody GGD. Immunoreactive proteins were eluted
and separated in sample buffer containing 300 mM
-mercaptoethanol (R, reducing) on 5% SDS-PAGE.
Immunoblot was detected with anti-hCaR monoclonal antibody ADD. The
positions of molecular mass standards are shown on the right
side of each figure.
|
|
This suggested that the dimeric forms detected for the C129S/C131S
double mutant could represent an aggregate of improperly processed
forms that do not reach the cell surface. To determine further the
biochemical identity of the ~300-kDa dimeric band of the C129S/C131S
double mutant, we tested for sensitivity to Endo-H digestion to
distinguish between the fully processed hCaR forms that are modified
with complex carbohydrates (Endo-H-resistant) and high mannose-modified
forms (Endo-H-sensitive) that have not trafficked from the endoplasmic
reticulum to the Golgi (26, 33, 34). As shown in Fig. 3B,
for samples run under nonreducing conditions, digestion with Endo-H
caused a decrease in the size of the lower dimeric form of the wild
type hCaR, and the upper form remained mostly resistant to Endo-H
digestion. For the C129S/C131S double mutant, however, the ~300-kDa
dimeric and 130-kDa monomeric forms were sensitive to Endo-H digestion,
whereas the 150-kDa form was resistant. When these samples are analyzed
under reducing conditions, the upper, monomeric 150-kDa band of both
the wild type hCaR and C129S/C131S double mutant is Endo-H-resistant,
whereas the respective 130-kDa monomeric forms are Endo-H-sensitive.
These data strongly suggest that the ~300-kDa band of the C129S/C131S double mutant represents an aggregate that remains intracellularly trapped.
To assess further the ability of the C129S/C131S double mutant to form
dimers, the double mutant and TM1 mutant receptors were coexpressed in
HEK-293 cells, and coimmunoprecipitation was performed with GGD
antibody as described above. As shown in Fig. 3C, as for
wild type hCaR, both the 150- and 130-kDa monomeric forms of the
C129S/C131S double mutant were detected by ADD after GGD
immunoprecipitation. Unlike for the wild type hCaR, however, the 95-kDa
form of TM1 fails to coprecipitate with the double mutant receptor, and
only a small amount of the lower monomeric 85-kDa form of TM1
coprecipitates. This result indicates that despite the fact that the
monomeric 150-kDa form of the C129S/C131S double mutant is fully
processed and resistant to Endo-H digestion (Fig. 3B) and
expressed at the cell surface (Fig. 3A), it is incapable of
forming a heterodimer with the fully processed 95-kDa form of TM1. The
small amount of the 85-kDa intracellular form of TM1 that does
coprecipitate with the C129S/C131S double mutant presumably reflects
interaction (aggregation?) with the form of the double mutant that
remains intracellularly trapped and is seen as an ~300-kDa band under
nonreducing conditions. A C129A/C131A double mutant showed the same
changes seen with the C129S/C131S double mutant (data not shown)
indicating that loss of cysteine rather than specifically serine
substitution was responsible for the changes observed.
The inability of the C129S/C131S double mutant to dimerize compared
with the relatively unimpaired ability of either C129S or C131S mutants
to dimerize suggested that a cysteine residue in either position is
sufficient to form an intermolecular disulfide bond critical for
dimerization. To explore further the requirements for CaR dimerization,
we constructed a triple mutant receptor, C129S/C131S/S132C, in which
the serine normally found at amino acid position 132 is changed to a
cysteine in the context of the C129S/C131S double mutant. Fig.
4 shows that under nonreducing conditions, ADD antibody detects two major dimeric bands of the C129S/C131S/S132C triple mutant receptor like the wild type hCaR, and
both triple mutant receptor and wild type show little or no monomeric
forms in contrast to the C129S/C131S double mutant which generates
significant amounts of both the 150- and 130-kDa monomeric forms. The
streptavidin blot (Fig. 4) also shows that like the wild type hCaR, the
upper dimeric form of the C129S/C131S/S132C triple mutant is expressed
at the cell surface. This contrasts with the C129S/C131S double mutant
which shows the 150-kDa monomer form but not the dimeric form expressed
at the cell surface.

View larger version (46K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Determination of cell surface expression
pattern of the C129S/C131S/S132C triple mutant receptor. HEK-293
cells were transiently transfected with wild type hCaR or
C129S/C131S/S132C mutant receptor DNA, and cell surface proteins were
biotinylated. Whole cell extracts were immunoprecipitated with
monoclonal antibody 7F8 and then fractionated on 5% SDS-PAGE under
non-reducing conditions (NR). Total hCaR immunoreactivity
was detected by immunoblot with ADD antibody and cell surface-expressed
forms by streptavidin blot. Molecular mass standards are indicated at
the right of the blots.
|
|
Function of Cysteine Mutants in PI Hydrolysis Assay--
Because
the monomeric form of the C129S/C131S double mutant reaches the cell
surface, we tested whether the mutant receptor is capable of signal
transduction using the intact cell
[Ca2+]o-stimulated PI hydrolysis assay. Since we
sought to compare the signaling properties of the single cysteine
mutants, C129S and C131S, and the C129S/C131S double mutant at similar expression levels as the wild type receptor, we first determined the
levels of cell surface expression for each receptor by whole cell
enzyme-linked immunoassay after transfecting HEK-293 cells with equal
amounts of plasmid DNA. We found that for a given amount of plasmid DNA
transfected, the C129S/C131S double mutant showed a reduced cell
surface expression compared with wild type hCaR or other mutants used
in this study (data not shown). To assess comparable levels of
expression, we varied the amount of plasmid DNA used for transfection,
and we achieved comparable levels of expression by transfecting HEK-293
cells with 12 µg of C129S/C131S double mutant receptor DNA and 8 µg
of wild type hCaR or other mutant hCaR DNA. Intact cell enzyme-linked
assay (Fig. 5, lower inset)
showed that cell surface expression was comparable for wild type and
mutant receptors transfected with these DNA amounts. Streptavidin blot
(Fig. 5, upper inset) confirmed that all the mutants
expressed at the cell surface as dimers except for the monomeric
C129S/C131S double mutant. We then compared the PI hydrolysis response
to [Ca2+]o of all the mutant receptors, including
an S132C mutant, with the wild type hCaR (Fig. 5). All the mutant
receptors showed a significant left shift in dose-dependent
[Ca2+]o response compared with the wild type
hCaR, but the C129S/C131S double mutant was most significantly
left-shifted. EC50 values (mean ± S.E.;
n = 3-6) averaged: WT, 3.8 ± 0.2 mM; C129S, 2.1 ± 0.3; C131S, 1.6 ± 0.1; C129S/C131S, 1.0 ± 0.2; C129S/C131S/S132C, 2.2 ± 0.2; S132C, 1.9 ± 0.1.

View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Concentration dependence for
[Ca2+]o stimulation of PI hydrolysis in
transiently transfected HEK-293 cells expressing wild type
(WT), C129S, C131S, C129S/C131S, C129S/C131S/S132C,
and S132C mutant hCaR cDNAs. Each 75-cm2 flask of
HEK-293 cells was transfected with 8 µg of wild type or mutant hCaR
plasmid DNA except for C129S/C131S for which 12 µg of DNA was used.
After 24 h, cells from two identically transfected flasks for each
plasmid DNA were combined and divided into two 6-well plates for PI
assay, one 75-cm2 flask for intact cell enzyme-linked
assay, and in a well of a 6-well plate for
biotinylation-immunoprecipitation of the whole cell extract.
Lower inset shows intact cell enzyme-linked immunoassay
results; upper inset shows the corresponding dimeric or
monomeric cell surface forms of each receptor under non-reducing
conditions on streptavidin blot.
[Ca2+]o-stimulated PI hydrolysis assay was done
using cells from the same transfection. Data (mean ± S.E.) are
from one of three experiments, all of which were performed in
triplicate. When not shown, S.E. values fall within the symbols.
Results (cpm of labeled total inositol phosphates generated) are
expressed as a percent of the response at 10 mM
[Ca2+]o of the wild type hCaR.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
The major reduction in size observed on SDS-PAGE following
disulfide reduction for both the CaR and mGluRs suggests that these receptors are dimers linked by one or more intermolecular disulfide bonds (13, 16-18). The cysteine(s) involved in the relevant
intermolecular disulfide bond(s) are localized to the ECD of the CaR
and mGluRs (12, 14, 15), and in mGluR5 are localized within the
amino-terminal 17 kDa of the ECD (13). To identify the specific
cysteine(s) in the CaR ECD involved in intermolecular disulfide
linkage, we tested the ability of a series of cysteine mutants to
homodimerize and to heterodimerize with a truncation mutant, TM1.
TM1, truncated within the first intracellular loop, was found to
express well at the cell surface, in contrast to mutants truncated
within the second or third intracellular loops which we previously
showed fail to be processed normally and fail to reach the cell surface
(26). This difference suggests that the number of transmembrane domains
in a given CaR construct (one and seven for TM1 and wild type,
respectively; three and five for second and third intracellular loop
truncation mutants, respectively) is critical for folding and normal
processing. TM1 also was able to homodimerize, in agreement with
recently reported results for a similar truncation mutant (19), and to
heterodimerize with wild type CaR. The dimerization ability of TM1 is
further evidence for the importance of the ECD in CaR dimer formation.
Only C60S, C101S, C358S, and C395S of the single cysteine to serine
mutants we tested showed substantial reduction in homodimerization and
in heterodimerization with TM1. Because these cysteine mutant receptors
are expressed primarily as incompletely processed 130-kDa monomers, it
is possible that mutation of these cysteines blocks dimerization by
causing misfolding of the protein rather than because such cysteines
are directly involved in intermolecular disulfide-linked dimer
formation. Our results are similar to those recently reported in
another study (19) for C131S (similar to wild type) and C101S (reduced
total expression and reduced ability to dimerize) but differ
importantly for several other cysteine mutants. Unlike our results,
that study reported that the C60S was similar in all respects to wild
type and that the C236S mutant was largely unable to dimerize. These
authors also reported that a C101S/C236S double mutant was well
expressed and appeared exclusively as a monomer. Since we did not study
a C101S/C236S double mutant, we cannot comment on the results with that
mutant. We are unable to explain the differences seen for mutants such
as C60S and C236S examined in both studies except that the other study,
unlike ours, involved green fluorescent protein-tagged CaR constructs
and did not directly assess cell surface expression as we did with the biotinylation method.
Given the similarity between the CaR and mGluRs and the evidence for
mGluR5 that the first 17 kDa of the ECD is the region critical for
dimerization, we decided to test the effect of substituting serine for
both Cys-129 and Cys-131. The resultant double mutant failed to
dimerize, like C60S, C101S, C358S and C395S mutants, but unlike these,
C129S/C131S formed a monomer that was normally processed (Endo-H
resistance) and expressed at the cell surface (biotinylation
experiment). These results strongly suggest that mutation of both
Cys-129 and Cys-131 does not block dimerization by causing misfolding
and abnormal processing of the receptor but rather by disrupting
intermolecular disulfide linkage. The results do not allow us to
distinguish between three possibilities as follows: (a)
dimer formation involves intermolecular disulfide linkage between both
Cys-129 and Cys-131 on respective monomers; mutation of either cysteine
fails to block dimer formation because the intermolecular disulfide
bond between the remaining cysteines is sufficient to maintain
dimerization; (b and c) dimer formation normally
involves a single intermolecular disulfide bond between either Cys-129
or Cys-131 and their counterparts on the other monomer; mutation of
either cysteine fails to block dimer formation either because that
cysteine is ordinarily uninvolved in intermolecular disulfide linkage
or because the nearby, unmutated cysteine substitutes for the mutated
one in disulfide bond formation. It is interesting in this respect that
creation of a cysteine at adjacent position 132, normally a serine,
restores normal dimer formation to the monomeric C129S/C131S mutant.
This suggests that residues 129, 131, and 132 are all located within a
putative dimer interface that permits intermolecular disulfide bond formation.
Mutations at these positions, singly or in combination, cause a
significant left shift in receptor sensitivity (Fig. 5). The EC50 for [Ca2+]o is reduced by a
factor of 2 compared with wild type in each of the mutants except for
the C129S/C131S double mutant whose EC50 is reduced nearly
4-fold. In our previous study of individual C129S and C131S mutants
(18), we failed to discern a clear left shift in comparison with wild
type in part because we did not measure response at several
[Ca2+]o concentrations <2.0 mM. The
left shift in sensitivity seen with the mutants is not due to lack of
dimer formation since only the C129S/C131S double mutant fails to
dimerize. Interestingly, five mutations in the hCaR (A116T, N118K,
L125P, E127A, and F128L) shown to cause a left shift in receptor
sensitivity and identified in subjects with the disease autosomal
dominant hypocalcemia (3) are located close to Cys-129 and Cys-131 in
the putative dimer interface. None of these mutations disrupted dimer
formation (data not shown). The ability of so many different missense
mutations involving residues between 116 and 132 of the hCaR to enhance sensitivity to [Ca2+]o suggests that this region
is involved in some critical but as yet undefined way in receptor
activation. The more profound increase in sensitivity seen with the
monomeric C129S/C131S double mutant may be a result of an inability to
form the dimer. Note also (Fig. 5) that despite its enhanced
sensitivity to [Ca2+]o, the C129S/C131S double
mutant fails to reach wild type levels of activation even at the
highest concentrations tested.
A recent study (35) provided functional evidence for the importance of
CaR dimer formation in that coexpression of inactive but cell
surface-expressed mutants led to heterodimer formation and some
reconstitution of activity. The present results show that dimer
formation is not essential for CaR function per se but may
be essential for normal activation. The differences in activity between
wild type dimer and the C129S/C131S mutant monomer lead us to speculate
that dimer formation may constrain activation by low
[Ca2+]o concentrations. Missense mutations at a
number of residues within the dimer interface reduce this constraint
resulting in receptor activation at "inappropriately" low agonist
concentrations, as observed in subjects with autosomal dominant
hypocalcemia. Complete loss of dimer formation in the C129S/C131S
mutant causes an even more extreme left shift in receptor sensitivity
but appears to compromise the maximum level of signal transduction achieved.
It is instructive to consider the present results in the context of a
model of the three-dimensional structure of the hCaR ECD (Fig.
6). This model is based on the original
alignment of mGluRs with bacterial periplasmic binding proteins by
O'Hara et al. (11), a reasonable extrapolation given the
high sequence identity between CaR and mGluRs (2, 20). The alignment
(Fig. 6A) places glycine 36 of the hCaR at residue 1 of
LIVBP and ends with valine 513 of the hCaR. There are four insertions
in both the CaR and the mGluR sequence (labeled I-IV in
Fig. 6) that cannot be aligned with the LIVBP, and hence their
structure cannot be modeled. The model shows the hCaR ECD monomer as a
bilobed, venus flytrap-like structure with three strands connecting the
two globular lobes each of which consists of
sheets flanked by
helices (Fig. 6B). The four insertions are all contained in
the amino-terminal lobe 1 as in the mGluR model (11).

View larger version (51K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
A, alignment of a portion of the amino
acid sequence of the CaR ECD and mGluR1 ECD with that of the LIVBP. The
entire 344-residue LIVBP sequence is shown aligned with a portion of
the sequence of the rat mGluR1 ECD and the human CaR ECD. Amino acid
numbering on the right refers to the full-length LIVBP,
mGluR1 and hCaR. Identical amino acid residues are shown in
bold. The alignment places Gly-36 of the hCaR at residue
Glu-1 of LIVBP and ends with Val-513 of the hCaR. Four insertions in
the mGluR1 and CaR sequences that do not align with LIVBP are labeled
I-IV. In the largest of these insertions, III, the hCaR
sequence from Phe-347 to Ser-403 has been omitted. The secondary
structure (arrows, sheet; cylinders, helix; thin lines, turns and loops) is superimposed above
the alignment and is based on the three-dimensional structure of LIVBP.
B, venus flytrap model of the three-dimensional structure of
part of the ECD of the hCaR monomer. A ribbon diagram of the hCaR ECD
model is shown with helices in red, sheets in
yellow, and loops and turns in cyan. N
represents the amino-terminal amino acid Gly-36, and C represents the carboxyl-terminal amino
acid Val-513. I-IV designate the four regions of the hCaR
ECD that do not align with LIVBP (see A). These
"insertions" in the hCaR ECD sequence are shown in the model as
purple loops, except for III in which only the first
(His-338) and last (Asp-410) residues colored beige and
golden, respectively, are shown. The positions of individual
cysteines found in the model are shown in green (numbered
according to hCaR sequence), and the putative dimer interface is
indicated.
|
|
The carboxyl terminus in the model corresponds to a part of the ECD
just before the cysteine-rich region that contains 9 of the 19 cysteines in the CaR ECD. Interestingly, the GABAB receptor ECD that completely lacks the cysteine-rich region found in other GPCR
family 3 members including CaR, mGluRs, TR, and VNR has recently also
been modeled as a venus flytrap-like structure, consistent with the
idea that the cysteine-rich region represents a separate domain of the
ECD (10). Mutation of any of the nine cysteines of the hCaR
cysteine-rich region did not block dimer formation but led to
intracellularly trapped proteins that were incompletely processed. We
speculate that mutation of these cysteines likely causes misfolding of
the receptor, perhaps by disrupting intramolecular disulfide bond
formation, but this occurs only after dimers involving the venus
flytrap-like portion of the ECD have already been formed.
Of the remaining 10 cysteines within the ECD, only Cys-236 is located
within the carboxyl-terminal lobe 2 of the flytrap model (Fig.
6B). Mutation of this residue does not impair dimer
formation but causes expression of an intracellularly trapped,
presumptively misfolded protein. On the basis of the model, in which
Cys-236 is remote from other cysteines in the venus flytrap structure, it appears unlikely that Cys-236 is involved in intramolecular disulfide bond formation with other cysteines in the venus flytrap. We
cannot, however, exclude its involvement in formation of a disulfide
with one of the nine cysteines of the cysteine rich-region. Thus
misfolding caused by mutation of Cys-236 could either be due to
disruption of an intramolecular disulfide or to a more subtle effect of
substitution of serine for this cysteine.
In contrast to Cys-236, Cys-60, Cys-101, Cys-358, Cys-395, Cys-437,
Cys-449, and Cys-482 are all located within the amino-terminal lobe 1 of the flytrap. Mutation of the first four of these residues does block
dimer formation. We speculate that this is due to misfolding of lobe 1 and prevention of formation of the dimer interface region (region II in
the model) that normally protrudes from this lobe. These residues may
be involved in intramolecular disulfide bonds critical for achieving
the correct tertiary structure of lobe 1, but verification of this
speculation awaits direct biochemical evidence. In the model (Fig.
6B), Cys-60 and Cys-101 are in close proximity suggesting
that they may indeed form a disulfide. Whether Cys-358 and Cys-395 are
likewise in close proximity cannot be predicted from the model since
both of these cysteines are located in the large insertion III which
cannot be modeled. Interestingly, mutation of any of the other three
cysteines located in lobe 1 (Fig. 6B), Cys-437, Cys-449, and
Cys-482, neither disrupts dimerization nor normal processing of the
receptor. This suggests that none of these cysteines is critical in
terms of disulfide bond formation.
The putative dimer interface containing cysteines 129 and 131 corresponds to region II in the model (Fig. 6B). Because
this insertion cannot be modeled on the basis of the three-dimensional structure of LIVBP, we cannot predict accurately the location of these
two cysteines in relation to the rest of the protein. Indirect
evidence, however, suggests that they are located at the surface of the
protein, since we have shown previously that the intervening residue,
Asn-130, is glycosylated (33). This region, in addition to containing
the cysteine(s) involved in intermolecular disulfide bond formation,
may be involved in specific recognition of homodimerization partners.
Alignment of this region in CaR and mGluR shows substantial sequence
diversity, far greater in particular than in the regions of the ECD
encompassed in the venus flytrap model. The mGluR5 was shown to
homodimerize but not to heterodimerize with mGluR1 (13), reflecting the
importance of specific recognition sequences in addition to the
conserved cysteine necessary for dimerization. If our model is correct, we predict that chimeras of a given mGluR containing region II of a
different mGluR may be able to heterodimerize with that other mGluR. We
cannot, of course, exclude the involvement of additional parts of the
ECD, for example region IV, in forming the dimer interface.
An alignment of the ECD of family 3 GPCR shows that all mGluR subtypes
have a single cysteine corresponding to cysteines 129 and 131 of the
hCaR. Our data would suggest that mutation of this single cysteine
would disrupt dimer formation and result in a cell surface-expressed
monomer. Several VNR (6) also have a single cysteine in this position
and are therefore predicted to be dimers. TR, lacking this cysteine,
may either be monomers or may have another basis for dimer formation.
The GABAB receptor is interesting in this respect in that
it lacks not only this cysteine but others conserved in the ECD of
family 3 GPCR. Indeed, a recent modeling and mutagenesis study shows a
lack of intermolecular disulfides in the GABAB receptor ECD
(10). The native receptor, however, forms a heterodimer formed by a
coiled-coil interaction involving a region within the intracellular
carboxyl terminus of two GABAB receptor subtypes (4).
There is evidence for dimerization for members of other subfamilies of
the GPCR superfamily (see Ref. 4 for review), but the region
responsible for dimerization may be within the seven transmembrane
domain in those cases, and the functional significance for the
respective native receptors is as yet unclear. The present results
identify two specific cysteines within a specific region necessary for
CaR dimerization and provide evidence for the functional importance of
this dimerization. Further biochemical and structural studies are
needed to assess the present model of the CaR ECD and of the cysteines
contained therein. Also important will be studies directed at
identifying the site(s) of Ca2+ binding to the receptor and
the differences if any in binding between receptor dimers and monomers.
Unlike for mGluRs (11, 14, 15) and GABAB receptor (10),
where ligand binding assays are available and putative binding sites
within the respective ECDs have been identified, ligand binding to the
ECD has not been demonstrated for the CaR. Only very indirect evidence
(36, 37) and analogy to mGluRs and bacterial periplasmic binding
proteins suggests binding within the ECD.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We are grateful to Gao-Feng Fan who performed
cysteine mutagenesis in the earlier phase of these studies, to Robert
Pearlstein who helped generate the molecular model, and to Regina
Collins for outstanding assistance with cell culture.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
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.
§
To whom correspondence should be addressed: NIDDK, National
Institutes of Health, 10/9N-222, Bethesda, MD 20892. Fax: 301-496-9943; E-mail: allens@amb.niddk, nih.gov.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
CaR, Ca2+ receptor;
hCaR, human Ca2+ receptor;
GPCR, G-protein-coupled receptor;
[Ca2+]o, extracellular calcium ion;
PI, phosphoinositide;
mGluRs, metabotropic
glutamate receptors;
VNR, vomeronasal organ receptors;
TR, taste
receptors;
ECD, extracellular domain;
TM1, hCaR truncation mutant
containing ECD and 1st transmembrane domain;
LIVBP, leucine/isoleucine/valine bacterial periplasmic binding protein;
N-linked, asparagine-linked;
HEK-293 cells, human embryonic
kidney-293 cells;
DMEM, Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium;
FBS, fetal bovine serum;
PBS, phosphate-buffered saline;
PAGE, polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis;
Endo-H, endo-
-N-acetylglucosaminidase H;
BSA, bovine serum
albumin;
PIPES, 1,4-piperazinediethanesulfonic acid;
Biotin-7-NHS, D-biotinoyl-
-aminocaproic
acid-N-hydroxysuccinimide ester;
GABAB,
-aminobutyric acid, type B;
WT, wild type.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Brown, E. M.,
Pollak, M.,
Seidman, C. E.,
Seidman, J. G.,
Chou, Y. H.,
Riccardi, D.,
and Hebert, S. C.
(1995)
N. Engl. J. Med.
333,
234-240[Free Full Text]
|
| 2.
|
Brown, E. M.,
Gamba, G.,
Riccardi, D.,
Lombardi, M.,
Butters, R.,
Kifor, O.,
Sun, A.,
Hediger, M. A.,
Lytton, J.,
and Hebert, S. C.
(1993)
Nature
366,
575-580[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 3.
|
Brown, E. M.
(1999)
Am. J. Med.
106,
238-253[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 4.
|
Bockaert, J.,
and Pin, J. P.
(1999)
EMBO J.
18,
1723-1729[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 5.
|
Okamoto, N.,
Hori, S.,
Akazawa, C.,
Hayashi, Y.,
Shigemoto, R.,
Mizuno, N.,
and Nakanishi, S.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
1231-1236[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 6.
|
Ryba, N. J.,
and Tirindelli, R.
(1997)
Neuron
19,
371-379[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 7.
|
Herrada, G.,
and Dulac, C.
(1997)
Cell
90,
763-773[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 8.
|
Matsunami, H.,
and Buck, L. B.
(1997)
Cell
90,
775-784[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 9.
|
Hoon, M. A.,
Adler, E.,
Lindemeier, J.,
Battey, J. F.,
Ryba, N. J. P.,
and Zuker, C. S.
(1999)
Cell
96,
541-551[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 10.
|
Galvez, T.,
Parmentier, M. L.,
Joly, C.,
Malitschek, B.,
Kaupmann, K.,
Kuhn, R.,
Bittiger, H.,
Froestl, W.,
Bettler, B.,
and Pin, J. P.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
13362-13369[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 11.
|
O'Hara, P. J.,
Sheppard, P. O.,
Thogersen, H.,
Venezia, D.,
Haldeman, B. A.,
McGrane, V.,
Houamed, K. M.,
Thomsen, C.,
Gilbert, T. L.,
and Mulvihill, E. R.
(1993)
Neuron
11,
41-52[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 12.
|
Goldsmith, P. K.,
Fan, G. F.,
Ray, K.,
Shiloach, J.,
McPhie, P.,
Rogers, K. V.,
and Spiegel, A. M.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
11303-11309[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 13.
|
Romano, C.,
Yang, W. L.,
and O'Malley, K. L.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
28612-28616[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 14.
|
Okamoto, T.,
Sekiyama, N.,
Otsu, M.,
Shimada, Y.,
Sato, A.,
Nakanishi, S.,
and Jingami, H.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
13089-13096[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 15.
|
Han, G.,
and Hampson, D. R.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
10008-10013[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 16.
|
Ward, D. T.,
Brown, E. M.,
and Harris, H. W.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
14476-14483[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 17.
|
Bai, M.,
Trivedi, S.,
and Brown, E. M.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
23605-23610[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 18.
|
Fan, G. F.,
Ray, K.,
Zhao, X. M.,
Goldsmith, P. K.,
and Spiegel, A. M.
(1998)
FEBS Lett.
436,
353-356[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 19.
|
Pace, A. J.,
Gama, L.,
and Breitweiser, G. E.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
11629-11634[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 20.
|
Garrett, J. E.,
Capuano, I. V.,
Hammerland, L. G.,
Hung, B. C.,
Brown, E. M.,
Hebert, S. C.,
Nemeth, E. F.,
and Fuller, F.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
12919-12925[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 21.
|
Riccardi, D.,
Park, J.,
Lee, W. S.,
Gamba, G.,
Brown, E. M.,
and Hebert, S. C.
(1995)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
92,
131-135[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 22.
|
Ruat, M.,
Molliver, M. E.,
Snowman, A. M.,
and Snyder, S. H.
(1995)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
92,
3161-3165[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 23.
|
Butters, R. R., Jr.,
Chattophadhyay, N.,
Nielsen, P.,
Smith, C. P.,
Mithal, A.,
Kifor, O.,
Bai, M.,
Quinn, S.,
Goldsmith, P.,
Hurwitz, S.,
Krapcho, K.,
Busby, J.,
and Brown, E. M.
(1997)
J. Bone Miner. Res.
12,
568-579[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 24.
|
Diaz, R.,
Hurwitz, S.,
Chattopadhyay, N.,
Pines, M.,
Yang, Y.,
Kifor, O.,
Einat, M. S.,
Butters, R.,
Hebert, S. C.,
and Brown, E. M.
(1997)
Am. J. Physiol.
273,
R1008-R1016[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 25.
|
Goldsmith, P. K.,
Fan, G.,
Miller, J. L.,
Rogers, K. V.,
and Spiegel, A. M.
(1997)
J. Bone Miner. Res.
12,
1780-1788[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 26.
|
Ray, K.,
Fan, G. F.,
Goldsmith, P. K.,
and Spiegel, A. M.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
31355-31361[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 27.
|
Fan, G.,
Goldsmith, P. K.,
Collins, R.,
Dunn, C. K.,
Krapcho, K. J.,
Rogers, K. V.,
and Spiegel, A. M.
(1997)
Endocrinology
138,
1916-1922[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 28.
|
Levitt, M.
(1992)
J. Mol. Biol.
226,
507-533[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 29.
|
Sack, J. S.,
Saper, M. A.,
and Quiocho, F. A
(1989)
J. Mol. Biol.
206,
171-191[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 30.
|
Sayle, R. A.,
and Milner-White, E. J.
(1995)
Trends Biochem. Sci.
20,
374[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 31.
|
Kraulis, P. J.
(1991)
J. Appl. Crystallogr.
24,
946-950[CrossRef]
|
| 32.
|
Merritt, E. A.,
and Bacon, D. J.
(1998)
Methods Enzymol.
277,
505-524
|
| 33.
|
Ray, K.,
Clapp, P.,
Goldsmith, P. K.,
and Spiegel, A. M.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
34558-34567[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 34.
|
Bai, M.,
Quinn, S.,
Trivedi, S.,
Kifor, O.,
Pearce, S. H. S.,
Pollak, M. R.,
Krapcho, K.,
Hebert, S. C.,
and Brown, E. M.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
19537-19545[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 35.
|
Bai, M.,
Trivedi, S.,
Kifor, O.,
Quinn, S. J.,
and Brown, E. M.
(1999)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
96,
2834-2839[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 36.
|
Zhao, X. M.,
Hauache, O.,
Goldsmith, P. K.,
Collins, R.,
and Spiegel, A. M.
(1999)
FEBS Lett.
448,
180-184[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 37.
|
Hammerland, L. G.,
Krapcho, K. J.,
Garrett, J. E.,
Alasti, N.,
Hung, B. C. P.,
Simin, R. T.,
Levinthal, C.,
Nemeth, E. F.,
and Fuller, F. H.
(1999)
Mol. Pharmacol.
77,
642-648
|
Copyright © 1999 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.