![]()
|
|
||||||||
J Biol Chem, Vol. 275, Issue 13, 9284-9289, March 31, 2000
§¶,
,
,
§
From the
Department of Molecular Pharmacology and
Biological Chemistry and the § Institute for Neuroscience,
Northwestern University Medical School, Chicago, Illinois 60611 and
the ** Ralph and Muriel Roberts Laboratory for Vision Science, Sun
Health Research Institute, Sun City, Arizona 85732
| |
ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Desensitization of G protein-coupled
receptors (GPCRs) involves the binding of members of the family of
arrestins to the receptors. In the model system involving the visual
GPCR rhodopsin, activation and phosphorylation of rhodopsin is thought
to convert arrestin from a low to high affinity binding state.
Phosphorylation of the M2 muscarinic acetylcholine
receptor (mAChR) has been shown to be required for binding of arrestins
2 and 3 in vitro and for arrestin-enhanced internalization
in intact cells (Pals-Rylaarsdam, R., and Hosey, M. M. (1997)
J. Biol. Chem. 272, 14152-14158). For the
M2 mAChR, arrestin binding requires phosphorylation at multiple serine and threonine residues at amino acids 307-311 in the
third intracellular (i3) loop. Here, we have investigated the molecular
basis for the requirement of receptor phosphorylation for arrestin
binding. Constructs of arrestin 2 that can bind to other GPCRs in a
phosphorylation-independent manner were unable to interact with a
mutant M2 mAChR in which the Ser/Thr residues at 307-311
were mutated to alanines. However, although phosphorylation-deficient mutants of the M2 mAChR that lacked 50-157 amino acids
from the i3 loop were unable to undergo agonist-dependent
internalization when expressed alone in tsA201 cells, co-expression of
arrestin 2 or 3 restored agonist-dependent internalization.
Furthermore, a deletion of only 15 amino acids (amino acids 304-319)
was sufficient to allow for phosphorylation-independent
arrestin-receptor interaction. These results indicate that
phosphorylation at residues 307-311 does not appear to be required to
activate arrestin into a high affinity binding state. Instead,
phosphorylation at residues 307-311 appears to facilitate the removal
of an inhibitory constraint that precludes receptor-arrestin
association in the absence of receptor phosphorylation.
G protein-coupled receptors
(GPCRs)1 are membrane
proteins that respond to a wide variety of stimuli, including sensory
signals, hormones, and neurotransmitters. The ability of GPCRs to
initiate signaling cascades decreases over time of exposure to agonist in a process known as desensitization (reviewed in Refs. 1 and 2).
Desensitization has been most extensively studied for the visual GPCR
rhodopsin (3). Within seconds following its activation, rhodopsin is
phosphorylated on its C terminus in an agonist-dependent
manner by rhodopsin kinase (4). This phosphorylation induces proteins
termed arrestins to bind to rhodopsin and preclude the ability of
rhodopsin to interact with the G protein transducin (5, 6).
Arrestins form a highly conserved family of cytosolic proteins.
Arrestins 1 and 4 are found within the visual system (7, 8). Arrestins
2 and 3 are expressed ubiquitously throughout the body (9, 10) and
serve multiple functions, including acting as adapters that target
GPCRs to clathrin-coated pits for internalization (11). The binding of
arrestins to GPCRs is thought to require both the activation and
phosphorylation of the GPCRs (12). Based on evidence from both the
crystal structure and mutagenesis studies on arrestin 1, a mechanism
for arrestin interaction with rhodopsin has been described (12-17). A
highly basic set of residues in arrestin 1, which has been shown to be
responsible for recognition of phosphorylated rhodopsin, forms
intramolecular charge-charge interactions that are disrupted by the
phosphorylated C terminus of rhodopsin. This destabilizes the basal
state of arrestin and causes arrestin to undergo a conformational
change that enables binding to the activated receptor (12, 17, 18).
The events underlying the interaction of arrestins with other GPCRs
have been less well studied. The M2 muscarinic
acetylcholine receptor (mAChR) undergoes agonist-dependent
phosphorylation within its third intracellular (i3) loop (19, 20).
Phosphorylation of the M2 mAChR at multiple Ser/Thr
residues in amino acids 307-311 (the C cluster) is required for
desensitization and for arrestin binding both in vitro and
in intact cells (20, 21), whereas phosphorylation at alternative sites
(residues 286-291, the N cluster) can occur but has no apparent role
in desensitization or arrestin binding (20). In the present study, we
have sought to understand the role of phosphorylation of the
M2 mAChR by using constructs of arrestin 2 that have been
reported to interact with other GPCRs in a phosphorylation-independent
manner. We have also tested whether the role of phosphorylation is to
activate arrestin or change the conformation of the M2
mAChR in order to allow arrestin to bind to and interact with the receptor.
Materials--
Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium and
penicillin-streptomycin were purchased from Mediatech. Fetal bovine
serum was purchased from Life Technologies, Inc. Hepes-buffered
Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium was obtained from Sigma.
N-[3H]Methylscopolamine was purchased from NEN
Life Science Products. Anti-arrestin 2 antibody was a generous gift
from Jeffrey Benovic (Thomas Jefferson University).
Deletion Mutagenesis--
Creation of the N Cell Culture and Transfection--
Human embryonic kidney cells
stably expressing simian virus 40 large T antigen (HEK-tsA201 cells)
were cultured as described (22). HEK-tsA201 cells were transfected
using the calcium phosphate precipitation method followed by a rinse
with 4 ml of culture medium and incubated with fresh culture medium
until cells were utilized for assays 48-72 h posttransfection. Cells
were transfected with 10 µg of receptor cDNAs and 5 µg of
bovine arrestin 2 or 3 cDNA.
Receptor Internalization Assay--
Changes in the number of
mAChRs present on the cell surface as a function of time of agonist
exposure were measured using the hydrophilic radioligand
N-[3H]methylscopolamine as described
previously (22). The cells used in these experiments expressed
approximately 0.5-1 pmol of receptor/mg of protein at the cell
surface. Data analysis was performed using GraphPad Prism software.
Statistical significance was determined using Student's
t test.
Immunoblot Analysis--
The expression of arrestins 2 and 3 from the various constructs used in this study was analyzed by Western
blotting as described previously (22). In brief, 100 µg of protein
from total cellular lysates was loaded onto SDS-acrylamide (8%) gels,
transferred to nitrocellulose, and subjected to immunoblotting using
antibodies raised in rabbit against arrestin 2.
Effect of Phosphorylation-independent Arrestin Constructs on
Internalization of M2 mAChRs--
The ability of the
M2 mAChRs to interact with arrestins is dependent on the
phosphorylation of Ser/Thr residues in the sequence TVSTS in residues
307-311 (the C cluster) (21). Mutation of this sequence to AVAAA (the
C cluster mutant, Fig. 1) results in a
receptor that signals normally (20) and internalizes in an
arrestin-independent pathway similar to that of the wild-type M2 mAChR (20, 21) but has a greatly impaired ability to
interact with arrestins 2 and 3 both in vitro and in intact
cells (21). Based on the model developed for rhodopsin-visual arrestin
1 interactions (16, 17), it was possible that the inability of the C
cluster mutant to interact with arrestins was due to its inability to activate arrestin 2 into a high affinity conformation that could subsequently bind to the receptors. To test this, we utilized arrestin
2 mutants that can interact with other GPCRs in a
phosphorylation-independent but activation-dependent manner
(23). We used internalization assays to measure arrestin-receptor
interaction, as previous studies have shown that the overexpression of
either arrestin 2 or arrestin 3 enhanced the rate and extent of
internalization of the M2 mAChR compared with that observed
when the receptors were expressed alone (21). In HEK293 cells or tsA201
cells, in the absence of overexpression of arrestins, the
M2 mAChR internalizes via an arrestin- and
dynamin-independent pathway, and this pathway of internalization is
facilitated by phosphorylation at either the N or C cluster (20, 21).
Consequently, wild-type and N or C cluster mutants internalize
similarly via the arrestin-independent pathway, whereas mutation of
both the N and C cluster mutants leads to severe disruption of this yet
to be identified internalization pathway (20, 21). If arrestin 2 or 3 is co-expressed with the M2 mAChRs in these cells, the
receptors also can internalize by an arrestin-dependent
pathway (21). This arrestin-dependent component of
internalization requires phosphorylation at the C cluster, whereas
phosphorylation at the N cluster cannot support arrestin-dependent internalization (21). For the studies
described below, it is important to note that it has been demonstrated
previously that the overexpression of arrestins does not redirect all
the receptors to the arrestin-independent pathway and that only the fractional increase in internalization that is observed upon arrestin expression represents the arrestin-dependent pathway
(21).
The internalization of the M2 receptor, when transiently
expressed alone in HEK-tsA201 cells, was maximal within 30 min of agonist exposure and reached an extent of 27 ± 7% (Fig.
2A). Upon co-expression of
wild-type arrestin 2, the extent of internalization was enhanced
approximately 3-fold after 60 min of agonist exposure (Fig.
2A), consistent with previous results (21). The
phosphorylation-independent constructs arrestin 2(R169E) and arrestin
2(1-382) (23) also enhanced the extent of internalization of the
M2 mAChRs to a similar extent as wild-type arrestin 2 (Fig.
2A). In marked contrast, the internalization of the C
cluster mutant was not increased significantly by the overexpression of
wild-type arrestin (Fig. 2B), consistent with previous
results (21). Surprisingly, however, the internalization of the C
cluster mutant was also not increased by the
phosphorylation-independent arrestin constructs at any time point
during the internalization assay (Fig. 2B). If
phosphorylation of the C cluster was required to activate arrestin into
a high affinity conformation, we expected the
phosphorylation-independent arrestin constructs to interact with the C
cluster mutant. These phosphorylation-independent constructs of
arrestin have been previously demonstrated to interact with
phosphorylation-deficient constructs of Role of the M2 mAChR i3 Loop in Promoting
Arrestin-Receptor Interaction--
The i3 loops of the mAChRs play
important roles in arrestin-receptor interactions, because the transfer
of the i3 loop from the arrestin-sensitive M2 mAChR
conferred arrestin sensitivity to the arrestin-insensitive
M3 mAChR (22). We postulated that the ability of the
M3/M2i3 chimera to respond to overexpressed arrestin (22) could be due to the existence of a high affinity arrestin
binding site found within the M2 mAChR i3 loop. Based on
the lack of interaction of the phosphorylation-independent arrestin
constructs with the C cluster mutant, we further hypothesized that the
i3 loop also contained an inhibitory element and that phosphorylation
of the Ser/Thr residues at residues 307-311 was required to reverse
the inhibition to allow arrestin binding.
To further test the role of the i3 loop in arrestin interactions, we
used a mutant containing only a minimal amount of the i3 loop. This
mutant receptor, designated M2
We also examined the ability of a minimal M3 mAChR to
interact with overexpressed arrestin. Transfer of the M3i3
loop to the M2 mAChR is sufficient to inhibit
M2 mAChR-arrestin interaction (22). We wondered whether the
M3i3 loop was precluding the ability of the M3
mAChR to interact with overexpressed arrestin. To examine this
possibility, we used an M3 mAChR that also lacks its i3
loop, M3
To further define the portions of the i3 loop in the M2
mAChR that contain the inhibitory element(s), we prepared and analyzed the ability of additional deletion mutants of the M2 mAChR
to respond to overexpressed arrestins 2 and 3. M2
In order to characterize more specifically which residues within the i3
loop contributed to the proposed inhibitory element, we characterized a
mutant in which the residues immediately surrounding the
phosphorylation sites in the C cluster were deleted. This mutant,
referred to as N
The present results provide novel insights into the interaction of
GPCRs and arrestins. In the well studied model of arrestin 1 interaction with visual rhodopsin, it has been proposed that arrestin 1 exists in an inactive state and that receptor activation and the
subsequent phosphorylation of the C terminus of rhodopsin is required
to disrupt this closed state (16, 17). This leads to a reorientation of
the arrestin molecule that can now bind to phosphorylated and activated
rhodopsin (26-29). Interestingly, studies have shown that C-terminally
truncated rhodopsin mutants that lack phosphorylation sites can also
bind to arrestin, but this requires prior "activation" of arrestin
(30). Thus, if arrestin has been released from its inactive state by
the binding of a phosphorylated synthetic peptide of the C terminus of
rhodopsin (30) or by an appropriate mutation of arrestin that renders it phosphorylation-independent (16), binding to activated rhodopsin can
occur. However, in the absence of permutations that cause activation of
arrestin 1, nonphosphorylated but activated mutants of rhodopsin are
unable to bind to arrestin 1 (16, 30).
Our data suggest that very different mechanisms govern the interaction
of the M2 mAChRs with nonvisual arrestins 2 and 3. First,
we found that two mutant arrestins that are able to interact with
Second, we demonstrated that phosphorylation-deficient mutants of the
M2 mAChR can bind to arrestins 2 and 3 and, importantly, that this occurred in the absence of any prior conversion of these arrestins from an inactive to active state. Thus, mutants of the M2 mAChR that lack significant amounts of the i3 loop, as
well as the N
Although phosphorylation of specific residues was necessary for
arrestins 2 and 3 to interact with the wild-type M2 mAChR, we report here the surprising finding that the i3 loop of the M2 mAChR was not necessary for the receptor-arrestin
interaction. This result was unexpected given previous results that
indicated that the M2i3 loop was sufficient to confer
arrestin sensitivity to the arrestin-insensitive M3 mAChR
(22). This latter finding indicated that there are sufficient arrestin
interaction domains located within the M2i3 loop to promote
arrestin binding to the M3 mAChR. However, the present
results with mutants that lack most of the i3 loop suggest that the
M2 mAChRs must also contain binding sites within other
intracellular loops that can support binding to overexpressed arrestin
(Fig. 2). These results also suggested that the M3i3 loop
inhibits the ability of these other M2 mAChR binding sites
from interacting with overexpressed arrestin because transfer of the
M3i3 loop to the M2 mAChR results in an arrestin-insensitive receptor (22). Our results, taken together with
others, indicate that there are likely to be multiple molecular events
that regulate the interactions of GPCRs and arrestins (31, 32). Future
experiments will be performed to investigate the specific amino acids
that contribute to the inhibitory element that impedes
arrestin-M2 mAChR interaction in the absence of
phosphorylation and the domains of the M2 mAChR that are
able to interact with arrestin 2 in an intact cell.
![]()
INTRODUCTION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
![]()
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
DENDEN receptor
mutant was performed by deleting residues 304-319 in the vector
construct of the N cluster mutant (M2 NAla-4
mAChR pCR3 (20) using the QuickChange site-directed mutagenesis kit
(Stratagene) as described by the manufacturer's instructions.
![]()
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
TOP
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
REFERENCES

View larger version (34K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 1.
Schematic models of M2 mAChR
constructs used. A, diagram of the i3 loop of the
M2 mAChR highlighting the domains analyzed in the present
study. The positions of the N cluster, C cluster, and DENDEN
elements are depicted by boldface lines. B, the
M2 mAChR i3 loop extends from residue 208 to residue 387 (33). The N cluster mutant has the STSVS at residues 286-291 mutated
to AAAVA, whereas the C cluster mutant has the TVSTS at residues
307-311 mutated to AVAAA (20). M2
PP is a receptor
missing residues 223-380.2 The M2
2 mutant
receptor is missing residues 250-323, and the M2
1
mutant receptor is missing residues 282-323 (19). The N
DENDEN
contains a mutation of the N cluster and the DENDEN deletion of amino
acids 304-319. TM5 and TM6 refer to
transmembrane domains 5 and 6, which surround the i3 loop.
2-adrenergic and
-opioid receptors (23). As these arrestin constructs did not
interact with the C cluster mutant of the M2 mAChRs, the
results suggested that phosphorylation at the C cluster may be playing
a previously unappreciated role.

View larger version (22K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 2.
Effect of phosphorylation-independent
arrestin constructs on internalization of the wild-type and C cluster
mutant M2 mAChR. TsA201 cells were transiently
transfected as described under "Experimental Procedures."
Internalization was measured as the loss of
N-[3H]methylscopolamine binding to the cell
surface as a function of time (minutes) in the presence of 1 mM carbachol (CCh). A, effect of
arrestin 2 (arr2), arrestin 2(R169E), and arrestin 2(1-382)
overexpression on the agonist-induced internalization of wild-type
M2 mAChR. B, effect of arrestin 2, arrestin
2(R169E), arrestin 2(1-382) overexpression on internalization of the C
cluster mutant M2 mAChR. The expression of each arrestin 2 construct was verified by Western blotting (data not shown). Results
are from 5-8 independent experiments. *, p < 0.05 using Student's t test.
PP, is able to couple to G
proteins and signals
normally,2 even though it
lacks most of the i3 loop, specifically residues 223-380 (Fig. 1).
This "minimal" receptor has lost all of the known phosphorylation
sites within the i3 loop (19, 20). We anticipated that either 1) this
receptor would be unable to interact with arrestin because it was
phosphorylation-deficient and lacked most of the i3 loop, which
appeared to be important for conferring arrestin sensitivity (22); or
2) if an inhibitory element exists in the i3 loop whose inhibitory
influence is reversed upon phosphorylation exists in the i3 loop, then
removal of the i3 loop might remove both the inhibitory element and the
phosphorylation sites and thus create a receptor that can interact with
overexpressed arrestin, independently of the phosphorylation state of
the receptor. The M2
PP receptor, like other
phosphorylation-deficient receptors (20, 21), was unable to internalize
when transiently expressed alone in tsA201 cells (Fig.
3A). However, upon
co-expression with arrestin 2 or arrestin 3, this receptor internalized
to an extent of approximately 50% (Fig. 3A), in a manner
that was very similar to that seen with the WT M2 mAChR in
the presence of arrestin 2 or 3 (compare Fig. 3A with Fig.
2A). These results indicated that the i3 loop of the
M2 mAChR was not absolutely necessary for arrestin
interaction with the M2 mAChR and suggested that the i3
loop may contain an inhibitory element that precludes receptor-arrestin interaction in the absence of phosphorylation of the C cluster.

View larger version (21K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 3.
Internalization of mutant M2 or
M3 mAChR that contain minimal portions of the i3
loops. TsA201 cells were transfected and treated as described
under "Experimental Procedures." A, effect of arrestin 2 (arr2) or arrestin 3 (arr3) overexpression on the
internalization of M2
PP mutant mAChR. B,
effect of arrestin 2 or 3 overexpression on internalization of the
M3
LM. Data are from 5-8 experiments. *,
p < 0.05 using Student's t test.
LM, (24). However, this receptor was unable to
interact with overexpressed arrestins 2 or 3 (Fig. 3B)
suggesting that other factors contribute to the arrestin
insensitivity of this receptor (22, 25). Arrestin 3 actually appeared
to inhibit the internalization of the M3
LM receptor;
however, this inhibition was not statistically significant.
2 is a
mutant containing a deletion of residues 250-323 of the i3 loop,
whereas M2
1 is a slightly smaller deletion mutant with a
deletion of residues 282-323 (Fig. 1) (19). These mutant receptors are
both unable to undergo agonist-dependent phosphorylation
(19). Like the M2
PP mAChR, both of these receptors were
unable to internalize in tsA201 cells when transiently expressed alone
(Fig. 4, A and B).
However, these deletion mutants were arrestin-sensitive, as both
receptors exhibited appreciable internalization when co-expressed with
either arrestin 2 or 3 (Fig. 4, A and B). Thus,
the results obtained with these receptors that contain smaller i3 loop
deletions than the minimal mutant also suggested that the removal of an inhibitory element in the i3 loop allowed for
phosphorylation-independent interaction with arrestins.

View larger version (20K):
[in a new window]
Fig. 4.
Effect of arrestins 2 and 3 on the
internalization of M2 mAChR mutants that contain smaller
deletions within their i3 loops. Experiments were performed as in
Figs. 2 and 3. A, internalization of an M2 mAChR
missing residues 250-323 (M2
2) in the absence and
presence of overexpressed arrestin 2 (arr2) and arrestin 3 (arr3). B, internalization of an M2
mAChR missing residues 282-323 (M2
1) in the absence and
presence of overexpressed arrestins 2 and 3. C,
internalization of an N cluster mutant M2 mAChR missing
residues 304-319 (N
DENDEN) in the absence and presence of
overexpressed arrestins 2 and 3. Data are from 4-11 experiments. *,
p < 0.05 using Student's t test.
DENDEN, lacks residues 304-319 of the wild-type
M2 mAChR (Fig. 1), which removes the C cluster and several negative amino acid residues surrounding the C cluster (Fig.
1A). In addition, this mutant has its Ser/Thr residues at
the N cluster (residues 286-291) mutated to alanines to remove any
effect of phosphorylation (20). We chose to make the DENDEN mutant in the context of the N cluster mutant so that the receptor would be
phosphorylation-deficient and not internalize via the
arrestin-independent pathway. We anticipated that this would allow for
a "cleaner" interpretation of any effects of arrestins. We
postulated that the N
DENDEN mutant would only be able to respond to
arrestin if the deletion of residues 304-319 removed the
inhibitory element. The N
DENDEN mutant, when expressed alone, did
not undergo agonist-dependent internalization (Fig.
4C), which was similar to other phosphorylation-deficient receptor mutants. However, the N
DENDEN deletion mutant showed extensive and rapid internalization when co-expressed with arrestin 2 and 3 (Fig. 4C). These results indicated that residues
304-319 contained an inhibitory element that precludes
arrestin-receptor interaction in the absence of phosphorylation at
residues 307-311. When the Ser/Thr residues in the C cluster are
intact and phosphorylated, we hypothesize that this leads to a
functional neutralization of the inhibitory constraints. Future studies
will resolve how the Ser/Thr residues and/or the surrounding amino
acids contribute to the inhibition of receptor-arrestin interaction.
2-adrenergic and
-opioid receptors, regardless of the
phosphorylation state of these GPCRs (23), do not bind to the
M2 mAChRs unless the receptors are phosphorylated on
Ser/Thr residues in the C cluster. Therefore, even though the
phosphorylation-independent mutants of arrestin 2 are thought to exist
in a more activated state than the wild-type arrestin 2 (23), these
arrestin constructs were unable to bind to the M2 mAChR in
the absence of specific phosphorylation at the C cluster.
DENDEN mutant, which lacks the C cluster and
surrounding amino acids, can efficiently interact with arrestins 2 and
3 in intact cells. These results suggested that an inhibitory element contained within the DENDEN sequence normally functions to suppress interaction with arrestins. Deletion of this fragment in the context of
the N cluster mutant yielded a receptor that was
phosphorylation-deficient but interacted well with arrestins 2 and 3. We propose that in the wild-type receptor, upon phosphorylation of the
residues in the C cluster within the DENDEN sequence, the inhibitory
constraints are relieved to allow for functional interaction with
arrestin 2 or 3. We cannot exclude that there may be other
"activating" domains in other cytoplasmic portions of the
M2 mAChR that serve to convert arrestin 2 or 3 from
inactive to active forms. If, however, such activating domains exist
within the M2 mAChR, they are not dependent upon
phosphorylation for their function.
| |
FOOTNOTES |
|---|
* This work was supported by National Institutes of Health Grants HL 50121 (to M. M. H.) and EY 11500 (to V. V. G.).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.
¶ Supported by National Service Research Award Training Grant T32GM08061.
Present address: Children's Memorial Inst. for Education and
Research, Chicago, IL 60614. Supported by a Howard Hughes Medical Institute Predoctoral Fellowship.

To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of Molecular
Pharmacology and Biological Chemistry, Northwestern University Medical
School, 303 E. Chicago Ave., S215, Chicago, IL 60611. Tel.:
312-503-3692; Fax: 312-503-5349; E-mail: mhosey@nwu.edu.
2 Mark Dell'Acqua, personal communication.
| |
ABBREVIATIONS |
|---|
The abbreviations used are: GPCR, G protein-coupled receptor; mAChR, muscarinic acetylcholine receptor; i3 loop, third intracellular loop; HEK, human embryonic kidney.
| |
REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| 1. | Bunemann, M., Lee, K. B., Pals-Rylaarsdam, R., Roseberry, A. G., and Hosey, M. M. (1999) Annu. Rev. Physiol. 61, 169-192[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 2. |
Lefkowitz, R. J.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
18677-18680 |
| 3. | Molday, R. S. (1998) Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 39, 2491-2513[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 4. | Kuhn, H. (1978) Biochemistry 17, 4389-4395[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 5. | Kuhn, H., Hall, S. W., and Wilden, U. (1984) FEBS Lett. 176, 473-478[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 6. | Wilden, U., Wust, E., Weyand, I., and Kuhn, H. (1986) FEBS Lett. 207, 292-295[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 7. | Yamaki, K., Takahashi, Y., Sakuragi, S., and Matsubara, K. (1987) Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 142, 904-910[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 8. |
Craft, C. M.,
Whitmore, D. H.,
and Wiechmann, A. F.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
4613-4619 |
| 9. |
Lohse, M. J.,
Benovic, J. L.,
Codina, J.,
Caron, M. G.,
and Lefkowitz, R. J.
(1990)
Science
248,
1547-1550 |
| 10. |
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 |
| 11. | 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] |
| 12. |
Gurevich, V. V.,
and Benovic, J. L.
(1993)
J. Biol. Chem.
268,
11628-11638 |
| 13. |
Gurevich, V. V.,
Chen, C. Y.,
Kim, C. M.,
and Benovic, J. L.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
8721-8727 |
| 14. |
Gurevich, V. V.,
and Benovic, J. L.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
6010-6016 |
| 15. |
Gurevich, V. V.,
Dion, S. B.,
Onorato, J. J.,
Ptasienski, J.,
Kim, C. M.,
Sterne-Marr, R.,
Hosey, M. M.,
and Benovic, J. L.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
720-731 |
| 16. |
Gurevich, V. V.,
and Benovic, J. L.
(1997)
Mol Pharmacol
51,
161-169 |
| 17. | Hirsch, J. A., Schubert, C., Gurevich, V. V., and Sigler, P. B. (1999) Cell 97, 257-269[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 18. | Schleicher, A., Kuhn, H., and Hofmann, K. P. (1989) Biochemistry 28, 1770-1775[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 19. |
Pals-Rylaarsdam, R.,
Xu, Y.,
Witt-Enderby, P.,
Benovic, J. L.,
and Hosey, M. M.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
29004-29011 |
| 20. |
Pals-Rylaarsdam, R.,
and Hosey, M. M.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
14152-14158 |
| 21. |
Pals-Rylaarsdam, R.,
Gurevich, V. V.,
Lee, K. B.,
Ptasienski, J. A.,
Benovic, J. L.,
and Hosey, M. M.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
23682-23689 |
| 22. |
Lee, K. B.,
Pals-Rylaarsdam, R.,
Benovic, J. L.,
and Hosey, M. M.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
12967-12972 |
| 23. |
Kovoor, A.,
Celver, J.,
Abdryashitov, R. I.,
Chavkin, C.,
and Gurevich, V. V.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
6831-6834 |
| 24. | Kunkel, M. T., and Peralta, E. G. (1993) EMBO J. 12, 3809-3815[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 25. | Mundell, S. J., Loudon, R. P., and Benovic, J. L. (1999) Biochemistry 38, 8723-8732[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 26. | Hargrave, P. A., and McDowell, J. H. (1992) FASEB J 6, 2323-2331[Abstract] |
| 27. |
Palczewski, K.,
Buczylko, J.,
Imami, N. R.,
McDowell, J. H.,
and Hargrave, P. A.
(1991)
J. Biol. Chem.
266,
15334-15339 |
| 28. | Palczewski, K., Rispoli, G., and Detwiler, P. B. (1992) Neuron 8, 117-126[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 29. |
Vishnivetskiy, S. A.,
Paz, C. L.,
Schubert, C.,
Hirsch, J. A.,
Sigler, P. B.,
and Gurevich, V. V.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
11451-11454 |
| 30. | McDowell, J. H., Smith, W. C., Miller, R. L., Popp, M. P., Arendt, A., Abdulaeva, G., and Hargrave, P. A. (1999) Biochemistry 38, 6119-6125[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
| 31. |
Mukherjee, S.,
Palczewski, K.,
Gurevich, V. V.,
and Hunzicker-Dunn, M.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
12984-12989 |
| 32. |
Mukherjee, S.,
Palczewski, K.,
Gurevich, V.,
Benovic, J. L.,
Banga, J. P.,
and Hunzicker-Dunn, M.
(1999)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
96,
493-498 |
| 33. | Peralta, E. G., Ashkenazi, A., Winslow, J. W., Smith, D. H., Ramachandran, J., and Capon, D. J. (1987) EMBO J. 6, 3923-3929[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve] |
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
V. V. Gurevich and E. V. Gurevich Rich Tapestry of G Protein-Coupled Receptor Signaling and Regulatory Mechanisms Mol. Pharmacol., August 1, 2008; 74(2): 312 - 316. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
R. H. Oakley, J. A. Olivares-Reyes, C. C. Hudson, F. Flores-Vega, F. M. Dautzenberg, and R. L. Hauger Carboxyl-terminal and intracellular loop sites for CRF1 receptor phosphorylation and beta-arrestin-2 recruitment: a mechanism regulating stress and anxiety responses Am J Physiol Regulatory Integrative Comp Physiol, July 1, 2007; 293(1): R209 - R222. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
A. Bisello, M. Chorev, M. Rosenblatt, L. Monticelli, D. F. Mierke, and S. L. Ferrari Selective Ligand-induced Stabilization of Active and Desensitized Parathyroid Hormone Type 1 Receptor Conformations J. Biol. Chem., October 4, 2002; 277(41): 38524 - 38530. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
Z. Chen, D. J. Dupre, C. Le Gouill, M. Rola-Pleszczynski, and J. Stankova Agonist-induced Internalization of the Platelet-activating Factor Receptor Is Dependent on Arrestins but Independent of G-protein Activation. ROLE OF THE C TERMINUS AND THE (D/N)PXXY MOTIF J. Biol. Chem., February 22, 2002; 277(9): 7356 - 7362. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
J. N. Hislop, H. M. Everest, A. Flynn, T. Harding, J. B. Uney, B. E. Troskie, R. P. Millar, and C. A. McArdle Differential Internalization of Mammalian and Non-mammalian Gonadotropin-releasing Hormone Receptors. UNCOUPLING OF DYNAMIN-DEPENDENT INTERNALIZATION FROM MITOGEN-ACTIVATED PROTEIN KINASE SIGNALING J. Biol. Chem., October 19, 2001; 276(43): 39685 - 39694. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
S. S. G. Ferguson Evolving Concepts in G Protein-Coupled Receptor Endocytosis: The Role in Receptor Desensitization and Signaling Pharmacol. Rev., March 1, 2001; 53(1): 1 - 24. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. B. Lee, J. A. Ptasienski, M. Bunemann, and M. M. Hosey Acidic Amino Acids Flanking Phosphorylation Sites in the M2 Muscarinic Receptor Regulate Receptor Phosphorylation, Internalization, and Interaction with Arrestins J. Biol. Chem., November 10, 2000; 275(46): 35767 - 35777. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Kishi and M. Ascoli Multiple Distant Amino Acid Residues Present in the Serpentine Region of the Follitropin Receptor Modulate the Rate of Agonist-induced Internalization J. Biol. Chem., September 29, 2000; 275(40): 31030 - 31037. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| All ASBMB Journals | Molecular and Cellular Proteomics |
| Journal of Lipid Research | ASBMB Today |