J Biol Chem, Vol. 274, Issue 44, 31515-31523, October 29, 1999
Properties of Secretin Receptor Internalization Differ from
Those of the
2-Adrenergic Receptor*
Julia K. L.
Walker
,
Richard T.
Premont,
Larry S.
Barak,
Marc G.
Caron§, and
Michael A.
Shetzline
From the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Departments of Cell
Biology and Medicine, Divisions of Gastroenterology and Cardiology,
Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 27710
 |
ABSTRACT |
The endocytic pathway of the secretin receptor, a
class II GPCR, is unknown. Some class I G protein-coupled receptors
(GPCRs), such as the
2-adrenergic receptor
(
2-AR), internalize in clathrin-coated vesicles and this
process is mediated by G protein-coupled receptor kinases (GRKs),
-arrestin, and dynamin. However, other class I GPCRs, for example,
the angiotensin II type 1A receptor (AT1AR), exhibit
different internalization properties than the
2-AR. The secretin receptor, a class II GPCR, is a GRK substrate, suggesting that
like the
2-AR, it may internalize via a
-arrestin and
dynamin directed process. In this paper we characterize the
internalization of a wild-type and carboxyl-terminal (COOH-terminal)
truncated secretin receptor using flow cytometry and fluorescence
imaging, and compare the properties of secretin receptor
internalization to that of the
2-AR. In HEK 293 cells,
sequestration of both the wild-type and COOH-terminal truncated
secretin receptors was unaffected by GRK phosphorylation, whereas
inhibition of cAMP-dependent protein kinase mediated
phosphorylation markedly decreased sequestration. Addition of secretin
to cells resulted in a rapid translocation of
-arrestin to plasma
membrane localized receptors; however, secretin receptor
internalization was not reduced by expression of dominant negative
-arrestin. Thus, like the AT1AR, secretin receptor
internalization is not inhibited by reagents that interfere with
clathrin-coated vesicle-mediated internalization and in accordance with
these results, we show that secretin and AT1A receptors
colocalize in endocytic vesicles. This study demonstrates that the
ability of secretin receptor to undergo GRK phosphorylation and
-arrestin binding is not sufficient to facilitate or mediate its
internalization. These results suggest that other receptors may undergo
endocytosis by mechanisms used by the secretin and AT1A
receptors and that kinases other than GRKs may play a greater role in
GPCR endocytosis than previously appreciated.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The importance of phosphorylation as a regulatory mechanism for
desensitizing receptor signaling has been well established for class I
G protein-coupled receptors
(GPCRs),1 such as the
2-adrenergic receptor (
2-AR) (1, 2), as
well as for class II GPCRs such as the secretin receptor (3). The role
of phosphorylation in restoring GPCR signaling ability is less clear.
GPCR phosphorylation is predominantly directed by two different classes
of kinases, the G protein-coupled receptor kinases (GRKs) and the
second messenger-dependent protein kinases. GPCR
phosphorylation by cAMP-dependent protein kinase (PKA)
appears to directly diminish the ability of the receptor to signal. In contrast, GRK phosphorylation increases receptor affinity for arrestin
proteins, and it is this interaction of the receptor with arrestin that
uncouples the receptor from the G protein (4). Additionally, arrestin
directs some class I GPCRs, like the
2-AR, to a
clathrin-mediated endocytic pathway in which receptors are internalized, dephosphorylated, and subsequently recycled to the plasma
membrane as competent receptors (5, 6). However, whether arrestins are
required for endocytosis or resensitization of class II GPCRs has not
been examined.
-Arrestin 1 and 2 are members of the arrestin protein family that
regulate both the signaling and trafficking of GPCRs.
-Arrestin translocates from the cytosol to agonist-activated GPCRs where it
subsequently targets the GPCR·
-arrestin complex to clathrin-coated pits (CCPs), presumably by its ability to bind the clathrin heavy chain
and the
-adaptin subunit of the AP2 clathrin adaptor protein complex
(7, 8). The roles of
-arrestin and CCPs in GPCR endocytosis have
been established by fluorescence colocalization studies and through
functional cellular assays that employ mutants of
-arrestin and
dynamin (9-11). These studies demonstrate that endocytosis through
CCPs is dependent upon the ability of dynamin, a GTPase, to catalyze
the pinching off of the CCP (12). This process is blocked by a dominant
negative mutant, dynamin K44A, that is defective in GTP binding.
Similarly,
-arrestin mutants that have lost the ability to support
GPCR trafficking to CCPs also function as dominant negative inhibitors
of sequestration. In a series of experiments, Zhang et al.
(9) demonstrated that expression of either dynamin K44A or
-arrestin
V53D prevented endocytosis of the
2-AR but not the
angiotensin II type 1A receptor (AT1AR), despite the
ability of the AT1AR (also a class I GPCR) to interact with
-arrestin. Thus, class I GPCRs that desensitize by
-arrestin
binding can internalize with distinct properties.
Secretin receptors internalize following agonist stimulation (13, 14),
but the endocytic pathway utilized remains uncharacterized. The ability
of secretin receptors to robustly desensitize in the presence of GRKs
suggests that they may internalize through a mechanism similar to that
of the
2-AR. In this study we investigate the role of
receptor kinases and
-arrestins in the regulation of secretin
receptor endocytosis. The internalization of wild-type and
COOH-terminal truncated secretin receptors was measured in the presence
of exogenously overexpressed GRKs, dominant negative mutants of dynamin
and
-arrestin, or in the presence of PKA inhibitors. Our results
demonstrate that, unlike the
2-AR, secretin receptor internalization is not inhibited by
-arrestin-V53D or dynamin-K44A. Moreover, they suggest a dependence of secretin receptor
internalization on PKA activity. These results imply that
-arrestin-mediated desensitization is separable from its GPCR
trafficking function and that kinases other than GRKs may regulate GPCR endocytosis.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Materials--
General chemicals and reagents were from Sigma.
Secretin was obtained from Peninsula Labs. Human embryonic kidney cells
(HEK 293 cells) were obtained from the American Tissue Culture
Collection. Tissue culture supplies were obtained from Life
Technologies. Labeled secretin (125iodine) was prepared and
purified by high performance liquid chromatography (3, 15).
[2,8-3H]Adenine, [3H]cAMP,
[8-14C]cAMP, [
-35S]deoxyadenosine
5'-(
-thiol)triphosphate, and [32P]orthophosphate were
obtained from NEN Life Science Products Inc. Restriction enzymes were
from Promega. Sequencing supplies were from U. S. Biochemical
Corp./Amersham Pharmacia Biotech. Polymerase chain reaction materials
were from Perkin-Elmer (Roche Molecular Systems).
Plasmid Preparation--
The FLAG epitope-tagged rat secretin
receptor, the HA epitope-tagged
2-AR, and
-arrestin-green fluorescent protein (
-arrestin-GFP) have been
described previously (3, 16, 17). The COOH-terminal truncated secretin
receptor was prepared from the NH2-terminal, FLAG-tagged
secretin receptor by polymerase chain reaction to include amino acids
1-398. The cDNAs were inserted into the pcDNA 1/Amp plasmid
(Invitrogen) using HindIII and BamHI. Fidelity
was demonstrated by dideoxy sequencing. GRK cDNAs were produced as described previously: GRK 2 (18) and GRK 5 (19). Plasmid purification was performed with Qiagen reagents.
Secretin receptor-green fluorescent protein (secretinR/GFP) was
prepared by inserting the rat secretin receptor into pEGFP-N3 vector
(CLONTECH) via BamHI and XhoI
restriction sites by the method previously described (17). Fidelity was
demonstrated by dideoxy sequencing and function was confirmed by cAMP
accumulation in response to agonist (secretin) by whole cell cyclase
(see methods below). AT1AR/GFP was prepared in a manner
similar to that described by Barak et al. (17).
Cell Culture--
HEK 293 cells were grown in modified Eagle's
medium (modified Eagle's medium: 10% fetal bovine serum, 50 mg/liter
gentamicin) at 37 °C in 95% air, 5% CO2. One day
after transfection cells were split into appropriate plates following
trypsin dissociation. Experiments were performed 24-48 h after transfection.
Transfection--
Transient transfections were performed with
calcium phosphate co-precipitation. One to 10 µg of vector DNA was
transferred into a 6-ml Falcon tube with 450 µl of sterile water and
50 µl of 2.5 M CaCl2. Then 500 µl of 2 × HEPES-buffered saline (0.28 M NaCl, 0.05 M
HEPES, 1.5 mM Na3PO4, pH 7.1) was
added to the tube and mixed well. This mixture was added dropwise to
the 100-mm dish of cells. Cells were plated to a density of
approximately 2-3 × 105 cells to each well for cAMP
accumulation experiments and 1-1.5 × 106 cells per
well for phosphorylation and sequestration experiments.
Membrane Preparation/Binding--
All steps were performed at
4 °C. Plates were placed on ice, media was aspirated, and the cells
were washed with 10 ml of ice-cold PBS. Five to 10 ml of lysis buffer
(10 mM Tris, 5 mM EDTA with protease
inhibitors: 10 µg/ml aprotinin, 5 µg/ml leupeptin, 0.7 µg/ml
pepstatin A, 10 µg/ml benzamidine, 0.2 mM
phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride) were added to each plate. With a cell
lifter, cells were scraped off the plate and placed in 15-ml conical
tubes on ice. Cell fragments were homogenized with a Polytron PT 3000 for 20-30 s at 14,000-16,000 cps. Material was centrifuged at
300-400 × g for 10 min to remove unlysed cells and
nuclei. Supernatant was transferred to 13 × 100-mm tubes on ice
and centrifuged at 18,000 rpm (40,000 × g) (Sorval
SM24 rotor) for 30 min at 4 °C. Supernatant was discarded and the
membrane pellet was resuspended in binding buffer, for immediate
assay, or lysis buffer and stored at
80 °C.
Membrane binding was performed as published (3). Briefly, using a
constant amount of HEK 293 cell membrane protein, competition displacement (porcine secretin, Peninsula Labs) of
125I-porcine secretin binding was performed in triplicate
tubes. Nonspecific binding was defined in the presence of 1 µM unlabeled porcine secretin. Data was analyzed using
Graph Pad-Prism and LIGAND software as described (3, 15).
Adenylyl Cyclase Assays--
The accumulation of cAMP in intact
cells was quantitated chromatographically by the method of Salomon
(20). Cells were labeled with [3H]adenine (1 µCi/ml) in
modified Eagle's medium, 5% fetal bovine serum, 50 mg/liter
gentamicin (1 ml/well) 12 to 16 h prior to experimentation. To
assay the accumulation of cAMP, labeling media was aspirated, cells
were washed with 1 ml of PBS, and preincubated in 1 ml of media per
well (modified Eagle's medium, 0% fetal bovine serum, 10 mM HEPES, 1 mM IBMX; assay medium) for 15-30
min. Cells were stimulated with appropriate agonist, and at the end of
the experimental duration, media was aspirated and 1 ml of ice-cold stop solution (0.1 mM cAMP, 4 nCi/ml
[14C]cAMP, 2.5% perchloric acid) was placed in each
well. Plates remained on ice for 20-30 min, after which solution was
transferred to 12 × 75 tubes containing 100 µl of 4.2 M KOH. Tubes were vortexed and stored overnight, at
4 °C, prior to cAMP determination by column chromatography (20).
Data is normalized for total cellular uptake using
[14C]cAMP as described previously (20).
Western Blotting--
Cellular proteins were resolved by sodium
dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis. Protein was
transferred to nitrocellulose and then subjected to immunoblotting with
appropriate GRK (21), dynamin (22), and
-arrestin antisera (23).
Receptor Expression--
In plasmid co-transfection experiments,
receptor expression was determined by flow cytometry analysis of a
sample from each transfection group (3). The fluorescence was
determined by incubation for 1 h at 4 °C with monoclonal
IgG-M2-FLAG (1:600 dilution, Kodak), three washes with PBS, and
detection with Fc-specific, fluorescein-labeled goat anti-mouse (1:200
dilution, Sigma). Cells were then washed, removed from the plate with
10 mM Tris, pH 7.4, 5 mM EDTA and fixed with
3.6% formaldehyde. Samples were analyzed on a Becton-Dickson flow
cytometer. Baseline fluorescence was determined from a sample of HEK
293 cells untransfected and/or a sample of HEK 293 cells transfected
with the secretin receptor not exposed to primary antibody
(IgG-M2-FLAG). Baseline fluorescence was subtracted from each sample.
Receptor Internalization/Sequestration--
Sequestration is
defined as the number of receptors removed from the cell surface after
agonist exposure, as determined by flow cytometry. Cells are incubated
with agonist for the appropriate time. After washing with iced PBS,
cells on ice are exposed for 1 h at 4 °C to monoclonal
IgG-M2-FLAG (1:600 dilution, Kodak) or 12CA5 (1:500 dilution, Roche
Molecular Biochemicals), three washes with PBS, and detection with
Fc-specific, fluorescein-labeled goat anti-mouse (1:200 dilution,
Sigma). Cells were then washed, removed from the plate with 10 mM Tris, pH 7.4, 5 mM EDTA and fixed with 3.6%
formaldehyde. Samples were analyzed on a Becton-Dickson flow cytometer.
Baseline fluorescence was determined from a sample of HEK 293 cells
transfected with the secretin receptor not exposed to agonist and
another sample not exposed to primary antibody (IgG-M2-FLAG). Baseline
fluorescence was subtracted from each sample.
Secretin Receptor Internalization by Immunofluorescence--
HEK
293 cells transiently transfected with 2.5 µg of cDNA for
secretin wild-type receptor or 3.5 µg of cDNA for COOH-terminal truncated secretin receptor were plated onto 35-mm dishes containing a
central glass well as described (16). Cells were maintained at 4 °C
to prevent receptor internalization while incubating with agonist (100 nM porcine secretin), primary antibody (IgG-M2-FLAG, Kodak,
Inc), and secondary antibody (Fabs conjugated with fluorescein isothiocyanate, Organo Teknica). Incubations were 30 min in duration and occurred in the sequence listed. Cells were washed 3 times with
cold PBS after each antibody application. Immediately following the
last PBS wash, cells were viewed using confocal microscopy (basal time
point), while a second plate of identically treated cells was warmed at
37 °C for 1 h prior to imaging (60 min treatment).
Immunofluorescent Colocalization of Secretin Receptor with
Angiotensin Receptors,
-Arrestin-GFP, or
2-ARs--
HEK 293 cells transiently transfected with
3.0 µg of cDNA for secretin wild-type receptor and 4.8 µg of
cDNA for angiotensin II type 1A-GFP receptor
(AT1AR/GFP) were plated onto glass coverslips contained in
6-well plates. After an initial wash, cells were stimulated with 100 nM secretin and 100 nM angiotensin II in a 37 °C incubator. After 30 and 60 min, cells were fixed in 4%
paraformaldehyde for 25 min. Cells were successively incubated for
1 h at room temperature, with primary antibody (IgG-M2-FLAG) and
secondary antibody (Texas Red conjugated goat anti-mouse, Molecular
Probes Inc.) dissolved in solubilization buffer consisting of 0.2%
Triton X-100 and 1% bovine serum albumin in phosphate-buffered saline. Cells were washed for 20 min in solubilization buffer after each antibody incubation. Immediately following the last wash, glass coverslips containing the cells were mounted onto glass slides for
viewing using a Zeiss laser scanning confocal microscope.
-Arrestin-GFP (1.7 µg of cDNA) was coexpressed with secretin wild-type receptor (2.4 µg of cDNA) and an identical protocol was
followed except that cells were stimulated with secretin alone for only
2 min. SecretinR/GFP (250 ng of cDNA) and HA epitope-tagged
2-ARs (4 µg of cDNA) were coexpressed in HEK 293 cells, stimulated with 100 nM secretin and 10 µM
isoproterenol and treated according to the protocol above with the
exception that IgG-12CA5-HA was the primary antibody used.
-Arrestin-GFP Translocation--
Transfected HEK-293 cells
were plated onto 35-mm dishes containing a central glass well as
described (16). Cells in Dulbecco's modified medium buffered with 20 mM HEPES were stimulated with 1 µM agonist
and viewed using a Zeiss laser scanning confocal microscope.
 |
RESULTS |
Characterization of Secretin Receptor Constructs--
In order to
demonstrate receptor movement from the plasma membrane to intracellular
compartments, epitope-tagged wild-type and COOH-terminal truncated
secretin receptor cDNAs were prepared. Quantifying cell surface
epitopes has been used with other receptors and represents a
non-radioactive method of monitoring receptor sequestration (9, 16,
18). The truncated receptor contains amino acids 1-398, and is devoid
of 10 serines and threonines in the COOH-terminal tail, which
eliminates over 50% of the total intracellular sites for potential
serine/threonine kinase-mediated phosphorylation. Binding studies were
performed on cell membranes prepared from HEK 293 cells overexpressing
the NH2-terminal FLAG epitope-tagged wild-type and
COOH-terminal truncated secretin receptors. When compared with the
membranes prepared from cells transfected with native (non-epitope
tagged) secretin receptor, competition binding resulted in similar
KD values. KD values ranged from
2.5 nM for the FLAG-truncated secretin receptor to 5.3 nM for the native receptor (Fig.
1A).

View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Binding, signaling, and desensitization of
the NH2-terminal FLAG epitope-tagged wild-type and
COOH-terminal truncated secretin receptors in HEK 293 cells.
A, binding of 125I-secretin to HEK
293 cell membranes transiently transfected with native, FLAG-tagged
wild-type, or COOH-terminal truncated FLAG-tagged secretin receptor
cDNA demonstrated similar KD for secretin (5.3, 3.6, and 2.5 nM respectively). Membrane binding was
performed as described under "Experimental Procedures."
B, signaling was determined by whole cell cAMP assays of
transiently transfected HEK 293 cells as described under
"Experimental Procedures." Dose responses were performed on cells
exposed to indicated concentrations of porcine secretin for 10 min.
Each point for wild-type and truncated receptor is the mean of five and
three independent experiments, respectively, each with triplicate
samples per dose. Data represent the mean ± S.E. for each point.
Maximal response was defined as the cAMP accumulation in response to 1 µM secretin; Vmax ± S.E. was
4 ± 0.4 for the wild-type and 5 ± 0.2 for the truncated
secretin receptors. EC50 for the wild-type and truncated
receptors were 0.1 and 0.05 nM, respectively. C,
desensitization of secretin-stimulated signal transduction. Time course
of cAMP accumulation in transiently transfected HEK 293 cells
expressing the wild-type or truncated secretin receptor. Maximal cAMP
accumulation was defined as the cAMP accumulation in response to 0.1 µM secretin. The half-time for complete desensitization
of wild-type or truncated receptor signaling was 5.7 or 7.8 min,
respectively (range 4.9 to 6.8 and 6.9 to 9.0 min, respectively, data analyzed by Graph-Pad Prism,
one phase exponential association, R2 = 0.94 and
0.97, respectively). Each point in the wild-type or
COOH-terminal truncated curve is the mean of four or three,
respectively, independent experiments, each done in triplicate for each
time point. The curve was generated using nonlinear regression analysis
with Graph-Pad Prism.
|
|
In order to investigate the signaling of these receptor constructs,
dose-response and time course of cAMP production were studied.
Signaling experiments did not demonstrate any significant difference
between the wild-type and truncated secretin receptors (Fig.
1B). The EC50 for cAMP accumulation was
approximately 0.1 nM for both the wild-type and the
truncated receptors. Our previous data for the native receptor
(non-epitope tagged) revealed an EC50 of 0.4 nM. Truncation of the COOH terminus did not produce any
difference in the kinetics of cAMP accumulation compared with the
wild-type (Fig. 1C). Having demonstrated that the addition of an NH2-terminal FLAG or the truncation of the
COOH-terminal tail did not appreciably alter the binding or the
signaling of the secretin receptor, we employed these FLAG
epitope-tagged receptor tools to investigate the mechanism of secretin
receptor internalization.
Secretin Receptor Sequestration--
Fluorescence and
corresponding interference and fluorescence overlay micrographs (Fig.
2, A and B)
demonstrate that the FLAG epitope-tag on the secretin receptor does not
hinder endocytosis of the wild-type receptor, or the COOH-terminal
truncated receptor, into vesicles. As measured by flow cytometry, the
wild-type secretin receptor sequestered to a maximum of 58 ± 4%
after 20 to 30 min. The half-time of sequestration was 8 min (Fig.
3A). In order to determine the
role of the COOH-terminal portion of the secretin receptor on
sequestration, we studied the sequestration of the truncated secretin
receptor during a 1-h period. Truncation did not appear to alter the
kinetics of receptor sequestration, however, total surface receptor
internalization at all time points beyond 30 min (Fig. 3A)
was decreased 10-15% compared with wild-type (p < 0.02, nine experiments, each done in duplicate). The COOH-terminal region of the secretin receptor contains multiple potential
phosphorylation sites. Others have shown an association between
receptor phosphorylation and receptor internalization (18). We next
investigated the effect of truncation (loss of COOH-terminal
phosphorylation sites) on secretin receptor phosphorylation and
internalization.

View larger version (69K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Internalization of the wild-type and
COOH-terminal truncated secretin receptors. Transiently
transfected HEK 293 cells, overexpressing secretin wild-type
(A) or truncated receptor (B), were sequentially
incubated for 30 min at 4 °C with 100 nM porcine
secretin, mouse monoclonal IgG-M2-FLAG, and goat anti-mouse
Fab-fluorescein. Live cells were immediately viewed by confocal
microscopy or incubated 1 h at 37 °C prior to imaging.
Upper panels in A and B are
fluorescence micrographs; lower panels are corresponding
interference and fluorescence overlay micrographs. Left
panels show secretin receptors localized at the cell membrane in
representative cells maintained at 4 °C. Right panels
show secretin receptors internalized into vesicles in a representative
cell incubated at 37 °C for 1 h.
|
|

View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Influence of GRKs on the agonist-promoted
sequestration kinetics of secretin wild-type and COOH-terminal
truncated receptors as assessed by flow cytometry.
A, secretin wild-type or truncated receptors were
transiently transfected in HEK 293 cells. Cells were exposed to 0.1 µM porcine secretin for the times indicated on the
x axis. The half-time for complete sequestration of
wild-type and truncated receptors was 7.6 min (range 5.6 to 12.2) and
8.2 min (range 5.6 to 15.3), respectively. The data was analyzed by
Graph-Pad Prism, one phase exponential association,
R2 = 0.74 for wild-type and
R2 = 0.64 for truncated receptors. The data
represent the mean ± S.E. of four independent experiments done in
duplicate. Cells expressing the wild-type (B) or truncated
(C) secretin receptor, in conjunction with either GRK2 or
GRK5, were exposed to 0.1 µM porcine secretin for the
times indicated on the x axis. The half-time for complete
sequestration of wild-type receptors with GRK2 or GRK5 were 6.4 min
(range 4.7 to 10.2) and 8.1 min (range 6.1 to 12.2), respectively. The
half-time for complete sequestration of truncated receptors with GRK2 or GRK5
were 7.6 min (range 5.6 to 12.1) and 11.8 min (range 8.8 to 18.1),
respectively. The data was analyzed by Graph-Pad Prism, one phase
exponential association, R2 = 0.74 for wild-type
receptors with GRK2, R2 = 0.79 for wild-type
receptors with GRK5, R2 = 0.75 for truncated
receptors with GRK2, and R2 = 0.83 for truncated
receptors with GRK5. The data represent the mean ± S.E. of four
independent experiments done in duplicate.
|
|
Effect of GRK-mediated Phosphorylation on Secretin Receptor
Sequestration--
Secretin receptor phosphorylation is increased by
specific GRKs (3). In order to investigate the effect of increased
receptor phosphorylation on receptor sequestration, we overexpressed
GRK 2 and GRK 5 in HEK 293 cells. As shown in Fig. 3, B (for
wild-type receptor) and C (for C-terminal truncated
receptor), kinases known to augment phosphorylation of the secretin
receptor did not increase receptor internalization for either the
wild-type or truncated receptor. Although overexpression of GRKs
enhances secretin receptor desensitization (3), it does not alter
receptor sequestration. At all time points studied (up to 60 min), no
significant effect of overexpressed GRKs on sequestration was observed.
Expression of GRKs was documented by Western blotting using GRK
specific antisera (not shown) as described under "Experimental
Procedures." Thus, enhanced GRK-mediated phosphorylation of the
secretin receptor, unlike the
2-AR (18), does not appear
to augment receptor sequestration.
Effect of the PKA Inhibitors, H89 and Staurosporin, on Secretin
Receptor Sequestration--
G protein-coupled receptor desensitization
can be mediated by PKA and/or PKC. We have shown that PKA inhibitors
reduce phosphorylation of the secretin receptor (3). However, these
inhibitors had no effect on secretin receptor signaling in HEK 293 cells (3). Therefore, we tested the effect of PKA inhibition on
secretin receptor sequestration. The PKA inhibitors, H89 and
staurosporin, significantly decreased sequestration of both the
wild-type and truncated secretin receptors (Fig.
4). Interestingly, sequestration of the
COOH-terminal truncated secretin receptor was more profoundly affected
by H89 than the wild-type receptor. Staurosporin (1 µM) blocks the activity of both PKA and PKC (24). However, compared with
the inhibition of sequestration by H89, additional PKC inhibition did
not promote further inhibition of sequestration. These data suggest
that there may be an association between cAMP-dependent protein kinase phosphorylation and sequestration of the secretin receptor.

View larger version (31K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Effect of protein kinase A inhibition (H89
and staurosporin) and sucrose on the agonist-promoted sequestration of
secretin and 2-ARs. Secretin
wild-type or truncated receptors or 2-ARs were
transiently transfected in HEK 293 cells and then preincubated with
either 30 µM H89 or 1 µM staurosporin for
15 min, or 0.45M sucrose for 30 min. Cells expressing wild-type or
truncated secretin, or 2-ARs, were then stimulated for
30 min with 0.1 µM porcine secretin or 10 µM isoproterenol, respectively. Sequestration was
assessed by flow cytometry using the anti-FLAG (M2) and anti-12CA5
monoclonal antibodies. The data represent the mean ± S.E. of
three independent experiments each performed in duplicate.
|
|
Effect of
-Arrestin and GRK-dependent
Phosphorylation on Sequestration of the COOH-terminal Truncated
Receptor in the Presence of PKA Inhibition--
Given that inhibition
of PKA activity inhibits secretin receptor internalization, we
attempted to reverse this by overexpressing
-arrestin, GRK 2, or
-arrestin and GRK 2 combined. Overexpression of either
-arrestin
or GRK 2 increased receptor internalization (Fig.
5) in the presence of H89 but the effects
were not additive. This result demonstrates that
-arrestin and GRK 2 can enhance secretin receptor sequestration; however, their involvement
only becomes apparent when PKA dependent phosphorylation is
prevented.

View larger version (22K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Effect of overexpressed
-arrestin, GRK 2, or both
-arrestin and GRK 2 on the agonist-promoted
sequestration of the COOH-terminal truncated secretin receptor
pretreated with the PKA inhibitor H89. HEK 293 cells transiently
expressing truncated secretin receptor alone, or in combination with
-arrestin, GRK 2, or -arrestin and GRK2 were preincubated with 30 µM H89 for 15 min. Cells were then stimulated for 30 min
with 0.1 µM porcine secretin. Sequestration was assessed
by flow cytometry using the anti-FLAG (M2) monoclonal antibody. The
data represent the mean ± S.E. of three independent experiments
each performed in duplicate.
|
|
Effect of Hypertonic Sucrose on Secretin Receptor
Sequestration--
Hypertonic medium reduces the clustering of surface
receptors into endosomes (25). Hypertonic sucrose similarly inhibited sequestration of the
2-AR, the secretin wild-type, and
the COOH-terminal truncated receptors (Fig. 4) suggesting that, like
other GPCRs, the secretin receptor does internalize by clustering
surface receptors into endosomes.
The Role of
-Arrestin and Dynamin in Secretin Receptor
Sequestration--
-Arrestin translocates to agonist activated
2-AR (26). Using a recently developed
-arrestin
translocation assay (16), we found that agonist activation of wild-type
or truncated secretin receptors initiated rapid movement of
-arrestin-GFP from the cytosol to the plasma membrane and that this
translocation did not require overexpression of GRKs (Fig.
6). Addition of agonist to cells not
overexpressing the secretin receptor caused no translocation of
-arrestin-GFP (micrograph not shown). H89-mediated inhibition of PKA
activity did not alter the translocation of
-arrestin-GFP to the
agonist-activated wild-type or COOH-terminal truncated secretin
receptor (micrograph not shown). Fluorescence micrographs show
co-localization of
-arrestin-GFP and secretin wild-type receptors at
the plasma membrane (Fig. 7). Thus,
-arrestin interacts with the agonist-activated secretin receptor.
However, whether or not
-arrestin plays a role in regulating
sequestration of the secretin receptor is unknown.

View larger version (99K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
-Arrestin-GFP translocation
upon agonist stimulation. HEK 293 cells, overexpressing the
wild-type secretin receptor, -arrestin-GFP, and GRK 5 were
exposed to agonist (0.1 µM secretin) and followed
with confocal microscopy. As early as 60 s after agonist
stimulation, -arrestin-GFP is shown translocating from the cytosol
to the plasma membrane. The times after agonist exposure are indicated
in the top left corner of each panel (s,
seconds). HEK 293 cells expressing the secretin wild-type
receptor without overexpressed GRKs demonstrated similar
-arrestin-GFP translocation (not shown). Comparable -arrestin-GFP
translocation was also observed in cells overexpressing the secretin
COOH-terminal truncated receptor (not shown), whereas no translocation
occurred in cells not overexpressing the secretin receptor (not
shown).
|
|

View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
-Arrestin-green fluorescent
protein co-localization with secretin receptor. HEK 293 cells
overexpressing the secretin wild-type receptor and -arrestin-GFP
protein were exposed to agonist (0.1 µM secretin) and
fixed. Confocal microscopy was used to produce fluorescence
micrographs. Panels A and B show secretin
receptors and -arrestin-GFP, respectively, clustered at the cell
membrane 2 min after addition of agonist. Panel C is an
overlay of panels A and B. The overlay shows many
red and green clusters overlapping to form
yellow clusters; evidence that -arrestin translocates
from the cytosol to secretin receptors. Prior to addition of agonist,
-arrestin-GFP was distributed throughout the cytosol (similar to
Fig. 6, time 0) and not localized at the membrane (not shown).
|
|
-Arrestin helps in directing agonist-activated
2-ARs
to clathrin-coated pits for internalization (7, 9, 10). To determine if
-arrestin also participates in trafficking the secretin receptor
into endosomes, we measured sequestration in cells overexpressing
-arrestin or the functionally impaired
-arrestin mutant, V53D. Overexpressed
-arrestin or V53D did not alter internalization of
wild-type or COOH-terminal truncated secretin receptor, whereas sequestration of the
2-AR was inhibited in the presence
of the sequestration dominant negative
-arrestin mutant (Fig.
8A). Western blot with
specific antiserum documented V53D overexpression in HEK 293 cells
co-expressing the secretin receptor and
2-AR (data not
shown). Although
-arrestin translocates to the agonist-activated secretin receptor, the presence of
-arrestin V53D does not interfere with the trafficking of this receptor to endocytic vesicles.

View larger version (31K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 8.
Effect of overexpression of wild-type and
mutant -arrestin 1 and dynamin on the
agonist-promoted sequestration of secretin and
2-ARs as assessed by flow cytometry
using receptor-specific antiserum. A, wild-type or
truncated secretin receptors, or 2-ARs, were
transiently transfected in HEK 293 cells together with 5 µg of each
of the following: empty pCMV5 vector (control), pCMV rat
-arrestin-1, or pcDNA1-Amp rat -arrestin-1-V53D (10).
Expression of mutant and wild-type -arrestin-1 was monitored by
immunoblot using an antibody for -arrestin-1 (23). The data
represent the mean ± S.E. of five, five, and four independent
experiments done in duplicate for secretin wild-type, secretin
truncated, and 2-ARs, respectively. B,
wild-type or truncated secretin, or 2-ARs were
transiently transfected in HEK 293 cells together with 8 µg of empty
pCMV5 vector (control), 8 µg of pCB1 rat dynamin I, or 8 µg of rat
dynamin I-K44A as indicated. Expression of mutant and wild-type
dynamin was monitored by immunoblot using an antibody for dynamin I
(22). The data represent the mean ± S.E. of four, five, and three
independent experiments done in duplicate for secretin wild-type,
secretin truncated, and 2-ARs, respectively.
|
|
Prior evidence has shown dynamin to be necessary for clathrin-coated
vesicle formation (12), the primary endocytic pathway for
agonist-activated
2-ARs (9). To determine if the
secretin receptor internalizes through a dynamin-dependent
mechanism, we measured sequestration of secretin receptors and
2-ARs in the presence of overexpressed dynamin or its
dominant-negative protein, K44A. In corroboration of previous results
(9) we showed that overexpression of dynamin-K44A inhibits
sequestration of the
2-AR (Fig. 8B). However,
the functionally impaired dynamin-K44A failed to inhibit
internalization of either the wild-type or COOH-terminal truncated
secretin receptors (Fig. 8B). Furthermore, in HEK 293 cells
overexpressing dynamin, no effect on sequestration of the secretin
receptor was evident (Fig. 8B). Western blotting with specific antisera confirmed dynamin and dynamin-K44A overexpression in
HEK 293 cells co-expressing the secretin receptor and
2-AR (data not shown). Thus, the secretin receptor, like
the AT1AR, internalizes via a dynamin-independent
mechanism. We hypothesized that AT1AR and secretin
receptors might utilize the same cellular mechanism for internalization
and should, therefore, co-localize in the same endocytic vesicles.
Co-localization of Secretin Receptor and AT1AR in
Endocytic Vesicles--
HEK 293 cells co-transfected with secretin
wild-type and AT1AR/GFP were stimulated for 30 and 60 min
prior to fixation. Secretin receptors were immunofluorescently stained
with Texas Red for confocal microscope imaging. Fluorescence
micrographs show that secretin wild-type and AT1AR/GFP are
co-localized in endocytic vesicles at 30 min (Fig.
9A) and at 60 min (Fig.
9B). These micrographs show that secretin and
AT1A receptors indeed reside in the same endocytic
vesicles.

View larger version (34K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 9.
Co-localization of secretin receptor and
AT1AR in endocytic vesicles. HEK 293 cells
overexpressing secretin wild-type and AT1AR-GFP were
stimulated and fixed. Secretin receptors were immunostained with Texas
Red. A, secretin receptor and AT1AR were
stimulated for 30 min. The bottom left panel is an overlay
of the fluorescence micrographs of secretin receptor (upper left
panel) and AT1AR-GFP (upper right panel).
Scale bar represents 10 µm. The overlay shows many
red and green vesicles overlapping to form
yellow vesicles; evidence that secretin and
AT1ARs co-localize in vesicles. Panel B shows
60-min stimulation.
|
|
Co-localization of Secretin Receptor and
2-AR in
Endocytic Vesicles--
Unlike
2-ARs, secretin receptor
internalization is not affected by the
-arrestin dominant negative
mutant, V53D, or the dynamin dominant negative protein, K44A. To
determine if the secretin receptor internalizes through an endocytic
mechanism distinct from that of the
2-AR, we
co-transfected secretinR/GFP and
2-AR-HA in HEK 293 cells. Cells were stimulated for 30 and 60 min, fixed, and
2-ARs were immunofluorescently stained for confocal
microscope imaging (Fig. 10,
A and B). Fluorescence micrographs show that the
majority of vesicles observed contain either secretin receptor or
2-AR, but not both. Thus, secretin receptors and
2-ARs do not principally employ the same endocytic
pathway.

View larger version (43K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 10.
Identification of secretin receptor and
2-AR in endocytic vesicles.
A, HEK 293 cells overexpressing SecretinR/GFP and
2-AR-HA were stimulated and fixed.
2-AR-HA receptors were immunostained with Texas Red.
This fluorescence micrograph shows vesicles containing
2-AR-HA (red) or vesicles containing
SecretinR/GFP (green) at 30 min stimulation. B,
inset, shows a 3-fold enlargement of the boxed area in
A. This area shows distinct vesicles containing
2-AR-HA (red) or vesicles containing
SecretinR/GFP (green). Similar images were obtained for
cells stained after 60 min of agonist stimulation. Although there is
some overlap of receptors in vesicles, the majority of vesicles do not
appear to contain both receptors.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
In this paper we provide direct evidence demonstrating
internalization of agonist-activated secretin receptors. Although
agonist-activated secretin and
2-ARs are each
phosphorylated by GRKs and subsequently recruit
-arrestin, secretin
receptors internalize with different properties, implying that the
aforementioned characteristics are not sufficient to predict the
sequestration pathway of a GPCR. Furthermore, the majority of secretin
receptors internalize into endosomes which do not contain
2-ARs, and vice versa. In addition, we demonstrate
co-localization of secretin and AT1ARs in endocytic vesicles, suggesting that the pathway or mechanism used by these two
receptors may also be common to other GPCRs. Finally, we present the
unique finding that PKA activity regulates sequestration of a GPCR.
The role of
-arrestin in GPCR regulation has been extensively
studied, primarily using the prototypical
2-AR (6).
Agonist activation and GRK phosphorylation of the
2-AR
trigger the translocation of
-arrestin from the cytosol to the
plasma membrane where it binds and uncouples the receptor from its
heterotrimeric G protein (1, 2, 16). The receptor is thus desensitized
and must be internalized, processed through endocytic vesicles, and
dephosphorylated before it is returned to the plasma membrane as a
functional receptor (5, 27).
-Arrestin plays a role in regulating
this internalization/resensitization process by directing the
2-AR to CCPs (7, 10).
-Arrestin interacts directly
with clathrin; however, the importance of this reaction for receptor
internalization is not clear, as
-arrestin constructs lacking the
inherent clathrin binding motif can still support
2-AR
internalization (7, 8). The
2-AR·
-arrestin complex
also recruits and binds the
2-adaptin subunit of AP-2 (8). AP-2 is a protein complex which serves as an adaptor between receptors and the clathrin lattice during clathrin-coated pit formation
(28). Through its interaction with AP-2 and clathrin,
-arrestin may
serve as a docking protein which links the
2-AR to the
clathrin lattice.
The clathrin lattice of coated pits contains a uniform distribution of
non-activated dynamin (12). Conformational changes in dynamin,
resulting from GTP-binding, promote dynamin-dynamin interactions that
ultimately lead to constriction of coated pits and their subsequent
release from the plasma membrane (29). Dynamin K44A has reduced
affinity for GTP, rendering its ability to promote clathrin-coated
vesicle fission ineffective (12).
Overexpression of the dominant negative proteins dynamin K44A or
-arrestin V53D, which inhibit sequestration of
2-ARs
(9), did not reduce sequestration of the secretin receptor. Given these results, one might conclude that in contrast to the
2-AR, secretin receptor internalization is not directed
by
-arrestin, nor is it internalized in CCPs. The possibility
remains, however, that secretin receptors may ultimately traffic in
CCPs through a dynamin-independent mechanism or through utilization of
another isoform of dynamin. The ability of
-arrestin to avidly bind
agonist-activated secretin receptors, paired with the recent
observation that
-arrestin can interact with multiple sites on
various GPCRs to affect the characteristics of internalization (26),
precludes inferring that
-arrestin does not play a role in directing
secretin receptors to endocytic vesicles. The possibility remains that
-arrestin, when complexed with secretin receptor, may have a
different conformation than when complexed with the
2-AR. Therefore a
-arrestin·secretin complex may
regulate sequestration through distinct interactions with known adaptor
proteins or with as yet unknown proteins. However, our only evidence
suggesting that
-arrestin enhances sequestration of the secretin
receptor comes from study of a mutant in which phosphorylation of the
receptor is severely compromised through carboxyl-terminal tail
truncation, and after inhibition of PKA-mediated phosphorylation (Fig.
5). The contribution of
-arrestin to secretin receptor sequestration
under normal cellular conditions would likely be minor, given that
-arrestin involvement in receptor trafficking is usually associated
with GRK-mediated phosphorylation, whereas this study shows that
PKA-mediated phosphorylation is more important for secretin receptor
sequestration, at least under the conditions examined.
PKA, a cAMP-dependent serine/threonine kinase,
phosphorylates and uncouples GPCRs from G proteins. To date, research
regarding PKA regulation of GPCRs has focused on GPCR signaling, not
sequestration (30). Perhaps the paucity of studies investigating an
association between second messenger-dependent
phosphorylation and sequestration of GPCRs results from the prominent
role of GRKs in regulating the internalization of prototypical GPCRs,
such as the
2-AR (1, 18). A broader examination of the
role of PKA in vesicular trafficking has shown that PKA regulates
internalization of some non-GPCRs and is involved in cellular vesicular
transport (31). Goretzki and Mueller (31) recently showed that
H-89-mediated inhibition of PKA activity reduced the internalization of
receptors for low density lipoprotein receptor-related protein and
transferrin (non-GPCRs) in a receptor-specific manner. Thus,
there is evidence to indicate that PKA activity regulates receptor
internalization. In addition, our prior study, in which H-89 reduced
the phosphorylation, but not the signaling, of the secretin receptor,
provided the impetus for exploring the possibility that PKA-mediated
phosphorylation may be associated with other functions of the
secretin receptor, such as sequestration.
In this paper, we demonstrate that the PKA inhibitors H-89 and
staurosporin markedly reduced sequestration of the secretin receptor.
These data suggest that, like GRK-mediated phosphorylation of the
2-AR, PKA-mediated phosphorylation of the secretin
receptor may facilitate its sequestration. Although a GRK-mediated
contribution to secretin receptor sequestration cannot be totally
excluded, GRK-mediated enhancement of truncated receptor sequestration
was small when PKA was inhibited (Fig. 5) and overexpressed GRKs had no
effect on wild-type or truncated secretin receptor sequestration under
whole cell conditions.
Given the present results and our previous finding that PKA-mediated
phosphorylation of the secretin receptor does not affect signaling (3),
we suggest that the primary role of PKA-mediated phosphorylation of the
secretin receptor in HEK 293 cells is to promote receptor
sequestration. Further studies delineating PKA phosphorylation sites on
the secretin receptor, followed by mutagenesis studies, should
determine if the effect of PKA activity on receptor sequestration is
direct. Putative PKA phosphorylation sites are located at two sites
within the intracellular regions of the secretin receptor. One
potential site of PKA-mediated phosphorylation is removed by truncation
of the secretin receptor. Presently, though, we cannot rule out the
possibility that PKA may promote sequestration of the secretin
receptor through phosphorylation of some adaptor-like protein
that targets the receptor to endocytic vesicles. Regardless of the
mechanism, the fact that secretin receptor sequestration is associated
with PKA activity raises the possibility that secretin receptor
internalization may be subject to heterologous regulation.
In conclusion, regulation of internalization of the secretin receptor,
a class II GPCR, differs substantially from that of the prototypical
class I
2-AR. Like the AT1AR, the dominant
negative mutants
-arrestin-V53D and dynamin-K44A do not inhibit the
sequestration of the secretin receptor. These results imply that an
endocytic pathway or mechanism alternative to that of the
2-AR is common to other GPCRs and may have unique
implications for receptor recycling and/or down-regulation. The
secretin receptor should represent an important tool for delineating
this mechanism. This study also provides the novel finding that
internalization of secretin receptors is dependent upon PKA activity.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
We thank Jason Holt for technical assistance
in production of the secretin receptor GFP construct, Jie Zhang for the
AT1AR/GFP construct, S. R. Vigna for the gift of labeled
secretin, and Linda Czyzyk and Susan Sutter for cell culture work.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported in part by National Institutes of
Health Grants 5T32DK07568 and DK02544-01 (to M. A. S.),
National Institutes of Health Grant NS19576, Bristol-Myers Squibb, and Zeneca Pharmaceuticals (to M. G. C.).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.
Recipient of an Medical Research Council/Canadian Lung Association
Postdoctoral Fellowship.
§
Investigator of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. To whom
correspondence should be addressed: Duke University Medical Center, Box
3287, Durham, NC 27710. Tel.: 919-684-5433; Fax: 919-681-8641.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
GPCR, G
protein-coupled receptor;
2-AR,
2-adrenergic receptor;
GRK, G protein-coupled receptor
kinase;
PKA, cAMP-dependent protein kinase;
CCP, clathrin-coated pit;
AT1AR, angiotensin II type 1A
receptor;
HEK, human embryonic kidney;
GFP green fluorescent protein, PBS, phosphate-buffered saline;
HA, hemagglutinin.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Lohse, M. J.,
Benovic, J. L.,
Caron, M. G.,
and Lefkowitz, R. J.
(1990)
J. Biol. Chem.
265,
3202-3211[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 2.
|
Hausdorff, W. P.,
Caron, M. G.,
and Lefkowitz, R. J.
(1990)
FASEB J.
4,
2881-2889[Abstract]
|
| 3.
|
Shetzline, M. A.,
Premont, R. T.,
Walker, J. K. L.,
Vigna, S. R.,
and Caron, M. G.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
6756-6762[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 4.
|
Premont, R. T.,
Inglese, J.,
and Lefkowitz, R. J.
(1995)
FASEB J.
9,
175-182[Abstract]
|
| 5.
|
Zhang, J.,
Barak, L. S.,
Winkler, K. E.,
Caron, M. G.,
and Ferguson, S. S. G.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
27005-27014[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 6.
|
Ferguson, S. S. G.,
Barak, L. S.,
Zhang, J.,
and Caron, M. G.
(1996)
Can. J. Physiol. Pharmacol.
74,
1095-1110[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 7.
|
Goodman, O. B., Jr.,
Krupnick, J. G.,
Santini, F.,
Gurevich, V. V.,
Penn, R. B.,
Gagnon, A. W.,
Keen, J. H.,
and Benovic, J. L.
(1996)
Nature
383,
447-450[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 8.
|
Laporte, S. A.,
Oakley, R. H.,
Zhang, J.,
Holt, J. A.,
Ferguson, S. S. G.,
Caron, M. G.,
and Barak, L. S.
(1999)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
96,
3712-3717[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 9.
|
Zhang, J.,
Ferguson, S. S. G.,
Barak, L. S.,
Menard, L.,
and Caron, M. G.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
18302-18305[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 10.
|
Ferguson, S. S. G.,
Downey, W. E., III,
Colapietro, A. M.,
Barak, L. S.,
Menard, L.,
and Caron, M. G.
(1996)
Science
271,
363-366[Abstract]
|
| 11.
|
von Zastrow, M.,
and Kobilka, B. K.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
3530-3538[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 12.
|
Damke, H.,
Baba, T.,
Warnock, D. E.,
and Schmid, S. L.
(1994)
J. Cell Biol.
127,
915-934[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 13.
|
Holtmann, M. H.,
Roettger, B. F.,
Pinon, D. I.,
and Miller, L. J.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
23566-23571[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 14.
|
Mundell, S. J.,
and Kelly, E.
(1998)
Br. J. Pharmacol.
125,
1594-1600[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 15.
|
Farouk, M.,
Vigna, S. R.,
McVey, D. C.,
and Meyers, W. C.
(1992)
Gastroenterology
102,
963-968[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 16.
|
Barak, L. S.,
Ferguson, S. S. G.,
Zhang, J.,
and Caron, M. G.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
27497-27500[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 17.
|
Barak, L. S.,
Ferguson, S. S. G.,
Zhang, J.,
Martenson, C.,
Meyer, T.,
and Caron, M. G.
(1997)
Mol. Pharmacol.
51,
177-184[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 18.
|
Ferguson, S. S. G.,
Menard, L.,
Barak, L. S.,
Koch, W. J.,
Colapietro, A.-M.,
and Caron, M. G.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
24782-24789[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 19.
|
Tiberi, M.,
Nash, S. R.,
Bertrand, L.,
Lefkowitz, R. J.,
and Caron, M. G.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
3771-3778[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 20.
|
Salomon, Y.
(1991)
Methods Enzymol.
195,
22-28[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 21.
|
Premont, R. T.,
Koch, W. J.,
Inglese, J.,
and Lefkowitz, R. J.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
6832-6841[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 22.
|
Sontag, J. M.,
Fykse, E. M.,
Ushkaryov, Y.,
Liu, J. P.,
Robinson, P. J.,
and Sudhof, T. C.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
4547-4554[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 23.
|
Attramadal, H.,
Arriza, J. L.,
Aoki, C.,
Dawson, T. M.,
Codina, J.,
Kwatra, M. M.,
Snyder, S. H.,
Caron, M. G.,
and Lefkowitz, R. J.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
17882-17890[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 24.
|
Hidaka, H.,
and Kobayashi, R.
(1992)
Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol.
32,
377-397[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 25.
|
Daukas, G.,
and Zigmond, S. H.
(1985)
J. Cell Biol.
101,
1673-1679[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 26.
|
Zhang, J.,
Barak, L. S.,
Anborgh, P. H.,
Laporte, S. A.,
Caron, M. G.,
and Ferguson, S. S. G.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
10999-11006[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 27.
|
Krueger, K. M.,
Daaka, Y.,
Pitcher, J. A.,
and Lefkowitz, R. J.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
5-8[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 28.
|
Schmid, S. L.
(1997)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
66,
511-548[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 29.
|
Hinshaw, J. E.,
and Schmid, S. L.
(1995)
Nature
374,
190-192[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 30.
|
Clark, R. B.,
Kunkel, M. W.,
Friedman, J.,
Goka, T. J.,
and Johnson, J. A.
(1988)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
85,
1442-1446[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 31.
|
Goretzki, L.,
and Mueller, B. M.
(1997)
J. Cell Sci.
110,
1395-1402[Abstract]
|
Copyright © 1999 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg