|
J Biol Chem, Vol. 275, Issue 19, 14198-14204, May 12, 2000
Tyrosine 62 of the -Aminobutyric Acid Type A Receptor 2
Subunit Is an Important Determinant of High Affinity Agonist
Binding*
J. Glen
Newell §,
Martin
Davies ,
Alan N.
Bateson ¶ **, and
Susan M. J.
Dunn ¶§§
From the Department of Pharmacology, ¶ Division
of Neuroscience, and the Department of Psychiatry, 9-70 Medical
Sciences Building, University of Alberta, Edmonton,
Alberta T6G 2H7, Canada
 |
ABSTRACT |
The -aminobutyric acid type A receptor
(GABAAR) carries both high
(KD = 10-30 nM) and low
(KD = 0.1-1.0 µM) affinity
binding sites for agonists. We have used site-directed mutagenesis to identify a specific residue in the rat 2 subunit that is involved in
high affinity agonist binding. Tyrosine residues at positions 62 and 74 were mutated to either phenylalanine or serine and the effects on
ligand binding and ion channel activation were investigated after the
expression of mutant subunits with wild-type 1 and 2 subunits in
tsA201 cells or in Xenopus oocytes. None of the mutations
affected [3H]Ro15-4513 binding or impaired allosteric
interactions between the low affinity GABA and benzodiazepine sites.
Although mutations at position 74 had little effect on
[3H]muscimol binding, the Y62F mutation decreased the
affinity of the high affinity [3H]muscimol binding sites
by ~6-fold, and the Y62S mutation led to a loss of detectable high
affinity binding sites. After expression in oocytes, the
EC50 values for both muscimol and GABA-induced activation
of Y62F and Y62S receptors were increased by 2- and 6-fold compared
with the wild-type. We conclude that Tyr-62 of the subunit is an
important determinant for high affinity agonist binding to the
GABAA receptor.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
The GABAAR1
is a member of a superfamily of ligand-gated ion channels that includes
the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (nAChR), the glycine receptor, and
the serotonin type 3 receptor (1). The GABAAR carries
binding sites for a number of therapeutic agents including the
benzodiazepines, barbiturates, neurosteroids, some general anesthetics,
and possibly also alcohol (1). In brain membranes, there are at least
two classes of binding sites for the endogenous neurotransmitter, which
differ by more than an order of magnitude in their affinity for GABA or
its structural analogues (2-4). This heterogeneity in binding was
originally thought to reflect the diversity of GABAAR
subtypes in brain tissue. However, the presence of both classes of
sites in a stable cell line expressing a specific subtype (5) suggests
that both exist in a single receptor molecule. On the basis of
biochemical studies, the reasonable correlation between the
concentration of agonist required to elicit ion flux and to potentiate
the binding of benzodiazepine ligands suggested that the low affinity
sites are important for channel gating (see Ref. 6). However, the
role(s) of the high affinity binding sites in receptor function remains unclear.
All members of this receptor family are believed to be pentameric
complexes formed by homologous subunits assembled to form a central ion
channel (7). Recent models (see Ref. 8) predict that ligand binding
sites occur at subunit-subunit interfaces. This was first demonstrated
in the nAChR in which the - and - interfaces were
implicated in forming nonequivalent binding sites for d-tubocurarine
(9). In the GABAAR, low affinity GABA sites
(i.e. those that have been implicated in channel activation) are thought to be located at the interfaces between the and subunits (10-13), whereas the benzodiazepine binding site is predicted
to occur at the homologous - interface (14-19). More detailed
analyses of the properties of these sites have led to a "loop
model" of ligand binding sites (see Ref. 20) in which amino
acid residues from at least three discontinuous regions (denoted
"loops" A-C) of one subunit together with residues from at least
one region of the adjacent subunit ("loop" D) form the binding
pocket (see Fig. 1A).
In the GABAAR, evidence for the location of the high
affinity agonist site(s) is derived from a number of experimental
approaches. Photoaffinity labeling studies first suggested that the subunit is a major determinant of high affinity binding, because this was the principle site of photoincorporation of
[3H]muscimol (21-23), although another report has given
some indication that the subunit can also be labeled (10).
Heterologous expression of different GABAAR subunit
combinations indicates that coexpression of and subunits is
required for high affinity binding, and the 1 3, 1 3 2,
1 2, and 1 2 2 combinations have all been shown to
form high affinity binding sites for [3H]muscimol (24,
25). Furthermore, expression of a tandem construct in which the C
terminus of 6 was covalently linked to the N terminus of the
2 subunit produced high affinity binding sites (26), although
the receptors were nonfunctional.
Based on the above observations and homology considerations, we
speculated that a high affinity agonist site in the GABAAR may be located at the - subunit interface, in which the subunit would contribute residues in loop D according to the model
described above (see Fig. 1A). Candidate tyrosine residues
(at positions 62 and 74) of the 2 subunit were identified by amino
acid sequence alignment (Fig.
1B) based on previous work
that residues in the homologous positions to Tyr-62 in the and subunits have been implicated in (low affinity) GABA and benzodiazepine
binding, respectively (10, 12, 18). Both tyrosine residues were mutated to phenylalanine and to serine to evaluate the relative contributions of the aromatic rings and hydroxyl groups of these tyrosine residues to
high affinity muscimol binding.

View larger version (31K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
A, model of a recombinant
GABAAR showing putative stoichiometry and subunit
arrangement, in addition to the binding sites for GABA and BZD. In the
model (see Ref. 20), one subunit carries loops A-C, whereas the
adjacent subunit carries loop D to form a recognition site. The N
terminus to C terminus arrangement of the subunits is indicated by the
arrows. Note that loop A of the subunit has not been
implicated in GABA binding to date. B, partial amino acid
sequence alignment for the rat 1, 2, and 2 subunits of the
GABAAR, and subunits of the nAChR subunits, subunit of the glycine receptor (GlyR), and A subunit of the
serotonin type 3 receptor (5HT3R) from loop D of
the amino acid sequence of these ligand-gated ion channels (8). The
numbering shown is for the mature 2 subunit. The shaded
amino acid residues have been implicated in GABA (Phe-64
(GABAAR 1)) (10, 12), benzodiazepine (Phe-77
(GABAAR 2)) (17), d-tubocurarine (Trp-55/Trp-57 (nAChR
/ )) (9), and granisetron (Trp-66 (serotonin type 3 receptor, A)
57) binding. An asterisk denotes the position of the
tyrosine residue of the 2 subunit that forms part of the high
affinity agonist binding site.
|
|
In this report, we demonstrate that Tyr-62 of the subunit is an
important determinant of high affinity muscimol binding. Substitution
of phenylalanine at this position decreased the affinity for both
mucimol and GABA, whereas substitution by serine led to a loss of
detectable high affinity binding sites. In functional assays, both
mutations increased the EC50 for channel activation. These
results suggest that Tyr-62 of the subunit is an important determinant for high affinity agonist binding and that although this
residue may play some role in receptor activation, high affinity binding per se is not a requirement for channel gating.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Site-directed Mutagenesis--
The 2 mutants were generated
using the Altered Sites® II in vitro
mutagenesis system from the Promega Corp. (Madison, WI). The protocol
for this system has been described (27). Single point mutants are named
according to their position in the mature 2 subunit (Fig.
1B), which was determined by the calculation of the signal
peptide cleavage site according to the algorithm of Nielsen et
al. (28). The following oligonucleotides were designed for the
mutagenesis procedure and were purified by polyacrylamide gel
electrophoresis according to the method previously described (29):
Y62F, 5'-TACACCTTGACCATGTTTTTCCAGCAAGCTTGGAGAGATAAGAGA-3'; Y62S,
5'-TACACCTTGACCATGTCTTTCCAGCAAGCTTGGAGAGATAAGAGA-3'; Y74F, 5'-TATTTCCAGCAAGCTTGGAGAGATAAGAGACTGTCCTTCAATGTAATCCCTTTA-3'; Y74S,
5'-TATTTCCAGCAAGCTTGGAGAGATAAGAGACTGTCCTCCAATGTAATCCCTTTA-3'; ampicillin repair, 5'-CACCACGATGCCTGCAGCAATGGCAAC-3'. The
incorporation of silent HindIII restriction sites into the
mutagenic oligonucleotides facilitated rapid screening of putative
mutants, and the presence of the mutations was subsequently verified by
DNA sequencing. For heterologous expression, all subunit cDNAs were
subcloned into the pcDNA3.1(±) expression vectors (Invitrogen).
Transient Transfection and Cell Membrane Preparation--
tsA201
cells (30), derivatives of the human embryonic kidney (HEK-293) cell
line, were maintained in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium
supplemented with 10% (v/v) fetal bovine serum (Life Technologies,
Inc.) or Fetal Clone III (HyClone) and 100 units/ml
penicillin-streptomycin solution. Transient transfection was carried
out using the calcium phosphate method as described in Ref. 31 and as
modified in Ref. 32. Cultures were grown to 70% confluency and
transfected with 10 µg each of the 1, 2, and 2
GABAA receptor cDNA constructs. The cDNA constructs
were mixed in 250 mM CaCl2 solution before an
equal volume of BES buffer (pH 7.02) was slowly added. The solutions
were mixed well and allowed to stand (22 °C) for 15 min before
dropwise addition to the cells that had been fed fresh medium. Cells
were maintained in a 3% CO2 incubator for 48 h prior
to harvesting. Cell membranes were prepared as described (32).
Equilibrium Binding Assays--
[3H]Ro15-4513
(23.06 Ci/mmol, NEN Life Science Products) binding measurements were
carried out using a Hoefer manual filtration apparatus as described
(32). In brief, aliquots (200 µl) of cell membranes were incubated
with various concentrations (0-70 nM) of
[3H]Ro15-4513 at 4 °C for 60 min. Nonspecific binding
was determined in the presence of 100 µM diazepam (0.07%
(v/v) Me2SO final). [3H]Muscimol (20.0 Ci/mmol, NEN Life Science Products) binding was performed using a
Biologic® rapid filtration system (33) and carried out
according to the method as described previously (4). Use of this
system, in which the filter washing step was reduced to 0.5 s,
permits better resolution of the lower affinity (faster dissociating)
binding sites (see Ref. 4). Nonspecific binding was determined in the presence of 300 µM muscimol. Data for
[3H]muscimol saturation were fit to a two-site saturation
model and compared with a one-site hyperbola using GraphPad Software. All KD values reported were obtained from
nonlinear regression analysis using saturation data. Representative
Scatchard plots are included for display only (e.g. Figs. 3
and 4). For competition experiments, [3H]muscimol (10-40
nM) was incubated with a 200-µl aliquot of cell membranes
and various concentrations of unlabeled GABA (0.1 nM to 1 mM), muscimol (0.1 nM to 100 µM),
or bicuculline methochloride (1 nM to 1 mM) for
60-90 min at 4 °C. Nonspecific binding was determined in the
presence of 100 µM GABA or muscimol. Experiments to
measure the potentiation of [3H]flunitrazepam (FNZ)
binding were also conducted using the rapid filtration system.
[3H]FNZ (84.5 Ci/mmol, NEN Life Science Products) was
incubated with cell membranes and various concentrations of unlabeled
GABA (0.01-100 µM) for 90 min at 4 °C.
Expression in Oocytes and Two-electrode Voltage Clamp
Analysis--
Oocytes from Xenopus laevis were prepared as
described (34). GABAA receptor containing 1, 2 (or
mutant 2), and 2L subunits was expressed by injection
of 50 nl (50 ng) of cRNA (35) into oocytes at ratios of 1:1:1. The
oocytes were maintained in Barth's solution: 88 mM NaCl, 1 mM KCl, 0.5 mM CaCl2, 0.5 mM Ca(NO3)2, 1 mM
MgSO4, 2.4 mM NaHCO3, 15 mM HEPES, pH 7.4, for 2-7 days and used for
electrophysiological recordings. Oocytes under two-electrode voltage
clamp (Vhold = 60 mV) were perfused
continuously (at a flow rate of ~5 ml/min) with frog Ringer's
solution: 120 mM NaCl, 5 mM HEPES, 2 mM KCl, 1.8 mM CaCl2. GABA (Sigma)
or muscimol (Sigma) was dissolved in frog Ringer's, and standard
two-electrode voltage clamp procedures were carried out using a
GeneClamp 500 amplifier (Axon Intruments Inc.). To measure the
sensitivity to agonists, GABA (0.001-1 mM) or muscimol
(0.0001-1 mM) was applied via the perfusion system with a
3-15-min wash out period between applications to ensure full recovery
from desensitization. Agonist-activated chloride currents were recorded
using pClamp 6 software (Axon Instruments Inc.). Electrodes were filled
with 3 M KCl and had resistances of 0.5-2.0 M in frog
Ringer's.
Data and Statistical Analyses--
Saturation, competition, and
concentration-response curves for both radioligand binding and
electrophysiological experiments were analyzed by nonlinear regression
techniques using GraphPad Prism Software (www.graphpad.com).
KI values from competition experiments were
calculated from the IC50 values using the Cheng-Prussof correction (36). All data were statistically analyzed using a one-way
analysis of variance (ANOVA) followed by a post hoc Dunnett's test to compare mutant and wild-type receptors.
 |
RESULTS |
Equilibrium Binding Assays--
The binding of
[3H]Ro15-4513 to wild-type and mutant receptors (Fig.
2) was measured to ensure that the
observed effects of the 2 subunit mutations were specific for the
high affinity muscimol/GABA site and that the amino acid substitutions
had not compromised the overall structure of the recombinant
GABAAR. In all mutant receptors,
[3H]Ro15-4513 recognizes a single class of high affinity
benzodiazepine sites with KD values that are not
significantly different from control values.

View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Saturation curves for
[3H]Ro15-4513. Data represent the mean ± S.E.
of four independent experiments performed in duplicate. The
KD values (nM) for WT ( , 6.8 ± 0.8),
Y62F ( , 8.1 ± 0.7), Y62S ( , 4.9 ± 0.9), Y74F ( ,
5.2 ± 1.0), and Y74S ( , 3.9 ± 0.2) were not
significantly different.
|
|
Cells transfected with cDNA constructs encoding the wild-type 1,
2, and 2L subunits revealed a heterogeneity in
equilibrium [3H]muscimol binding, which is consistent
with the presence of two classes of independent sites for this ligand
(Fig. 3A). The
KD values for [3H]muscimol in
receptors containing mutations at position 74 were not significantly
different from controls (Table I and Fig.
3, B and C). In each case, a two-site binding
model provided a statistically better fit than a one-site model with
p values for these comparisons ranging from
p < 0.05 to p < 0.005 (data not
shown). In contrast, the binding data for receptors carrying Y62F and
Y62S are adequately described by a one-site binding isotherm, with no
evidence for two classes of sites. For the Y62F mutant, a single class
of sites was observed with a KD of 57.4 ± 11.1 nM (Fig. 4), which is
significantly (p < 0.01) increased compared with the
WT high affinity control (8.9 ± 0.5 nM). The
intermediate affinity (as shown by the linear Scatchard plot, Fig. 4)
does not permit resolution of high affinity sites and any low affinity
sites that may be present (see the legend to Fig. 4). However, as
described below, this mutant retained allosteric coupling between the
low affinity GABA sites and the benzodiazepine site. No specific high
affinity binding was measurable in the Y62S mutant but low affinity
binding was retained (Table I and Fig. 4). This may be explained by a
complete loss of high affinity sites as a consequence of the mutation.
However, we cannot exclude the possibility that the sites remain
present but that their affinity is reduced to an extent that they
cannot be distinguished from the low affinity component. In this
respect, it should be noted that technical restraints preclude an
accurate determination of the number of low affinity sites in different
preparations. Furthermore, KD values obtained
for low affinity binding are subject to large error, because the
maximum concentration of [3H]muscimol that can reasonably
be used in these experiments is about 500 nM (see Ref. 4)
beyond which the measure of nonspecific binding exceeds that of
specific binding (2, 37).

View larger version (24K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Equilibrium binding data for
[3H]muscimol. Shown are representative saturation
curves for each mutant (in the concentration range of 0-150
nM) and representative Scatchard plots to illustrate the
shape of the curves. Data were fit by nonlinear regression using
GraphPad Prism Software. A, WT ( ); B, Y74F
( ); C, Y74S ( ). The shallow nature of the saturation
curves and the curvilinear Scatchard plots are indicative of two
classes of binding sites. KD values for muscimol
saturation are summarized in Table II.
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table I
The effects of amino acid substitutions in the 2 subunit of
1 2 2 recombinant GABAA receptors on high (H) and low
(L) affinity [3H]muscimol binding
Data represent the mean ± S.E. of two to three independent
experiments performed in duplicate using a Biologic® rapid filtration
system. n represents the number of independent experiments.
Curves were fit by nonlinear regression to one-site and two-site
binding models using GraphPad Prism software. KD
values were compared using a one-way ANOVA followed by a Dunnett's
test to determine the levels of significance (**, p < 0.01; #, p < 0.01 when compared to
KD(H), but not KD(L)). No
significant difference was observed for the KD
values of low affinity sites.
|
|

View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Equilibrium data for
[3H]muscimol binding to Y62F ( ) and Y62S ( )
mutant receptors. Shown are representative saturation curves (in
the 0-150 nM concentration range) and representative
Scatchard plots. The binding of [3H]muscimol to receptors
expressing these mutants was described by a one-site binding isotherm.
For the purposes of illustration, a theoretical curve describing two
classes of sites (KD(H) = 54.5 nM and KD(L) = 400 nM) of equivalent receptor density is shown by the
dashed line for Y62F. Note that the two-site model did not
describe the data better than a one-site model
(KD = 50.8 nM) within the limits of
error of curve fitting by nonlinear regression. The
KD values for muscimol saturation are summarized
in Table II.
|
|
The effects of the Y62F mutation on the high affinity binding sites
were further confirmed by carrying out competition experiments with
unlabeled GABA, muscimol, and bicuculline methochloride. These
experiments were designed to avoid significant occupancy of low
affinity sites ([3H]muscimol 40 nM),
thereby allowing examination of the high affinity sites without
complications from the second class of sites. These experiments were
not possible with the Y62S mutant, which lacked measurable binding in
the high nanomolar range. The Y62F mutation resulted in a 2.8- and
2.6-fold decrease in affinity for muscimol and GABA, respectively
(Table II). The KI
value for muscimol-induced displacement of [3H]muscimol
from the Y62F receptor is in excellent agreement with the directly
measured KD(H) value (Table I), confirming that the mutation significantly reduced the affinity of
these binding sites. Two classes of sites for bicuculline methochloride were measured in muscimol displacement experiments using the WT and
Y62F receptors, but only one class of sites was seen in the Y74F and
Y74S mutants (Table II). This apparent heterogeneity suggests a
nonequivalence in bicuculline binding and that Tyr-74 of the subunit may play a role in this. However, this observation has not been
further explored.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table II
The effects of amino acid substitutions in the 2 subunit of
1 2 2 recombinant GABAA receptors on the displacement of
[3H]muscimol by a number of GABAAR ligands
Data represent the mean KI ± S.E. of three to four
independent experiments performed in duplicate. Competition experiments
were not carried out for Y62S as no specific high affinity binding was
observed (Table 1 and Fig. 4). The number of independent experiments is
shown in parentheses. log KI values were analyzed
using a one-way ANOVA followed by a Dunnett's test to determine the
levels of significance (*, p < 0.05). N.D. represents
no detectable bicuculline displacement. KI(H) and
KI(L) represent high and low affinity bicuculline
sites.
|
|
It has been established that agonist occupancy of their low affinity
sites allosterically modulates the binding of benzodiazepine site
ligands (38). The ability of GABA to potentiate [3H]FNZ
binding therefore provides an independent measurement of the presence
of these sites and of the integrity of coupling properties. Micromolar
concentrations of GABA significantly potentiated 2 nM
[3H]FNZ binding in all mutants (Table
III), and neither the
Emax nor EC50 value for any
recombinant receptor was significantly different from the control
values (Table III). Fig. 5 shows the potentiation of [3H]FNZ binding by GABA in the wild-type
receptor (Fig. 5A) and in the Y62F (Fig. 5B) and
Y62S (Fig. 5C) mutants. These data indicate that the subunit mutations do not compromise low affinity agonist binding, and
this provides further evidence for the presence of distinct high and
low affinity binding domains in these receptors.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table III
Potentiation of [3H]FNZ (2 nM) binding by GABA
Data represent the mean ± S.E. of four to five independent
experiments (n) performed in duplicate.
Emax values and log EC50 values were
analyzed using a one-way ANOVA followed by a Dunnett's test. No
significant differences were observed for maximum potentiation or
EC50 values.
|
|

View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
Concentration-response curve for potentiation
of 2 nM [3H]flunitrazepam binding to
1 2 2 receptors. A, WT ( );
B, Y62F ( ); C, Y62S ( ). The data represent
the mean ± S.E. of four to five experiments performed in
duplicate for multiple concentrations of GABA. The maximum potentiation
and the EC50 values of Y62F ( ) and Y62S ( ) are not
significantly different from controls. Data for WT and mutant receptors
are summarized in Table III.
|
|
Two-electrode Voltage Clamp Analysis--
The functional effects
of all mutations were investigated using two-electrode voltage clamp
analysis of receptors expressed in Xenopus oocytes.
Concentration-response data for GABA and muscimol are presented in
Table IV and Fig.
6. For all receptors, muscimol was, as
expected, more potent than GABA in receptor activation (11). The
changes observed in potency paralleled the changes seen in binding
affinity. Neither of the Tyr-74 mutations affected the concentration
dependence of either agonist. However, significant rightward shifts in
activation were observed in both Tyr-62 mutants, with the phenylalanine
substitution producing a 2-fold shift in EC50 values for
GABA and muscimol and serine giving a more pronounced rightward shift
(~6-fold). The Hill slopes (nH) are not
significantly different from the wild-type, with the exception of Y74F,
in which the value is significantly decreased for GABA. The
significance of this change in nH is difficult
to interpret because the Hill slope is a function of both ligand
binding and channel gating (11). However, it is possible that this
amino acid substitution shifted the conformation of the receptor such
that the observed cooperativity for GABA activation of the channel is
lost, the implication of which may be that these putative high affinity agonist binding sites are coupled, in some fashion, to other GABA binding domains that are essential for gating.
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table IV
Concentration-response data for GABA and muscimol activation of wild
type and mutant receptors expressed in Xenopus oocytes
Data represent the mean EC50 ± S.E. of three to five
independent experiments performed in duplicate. Values for EC50
and Hill slope (nH) were determined from
concentration-response data using Graph Pad Prism Software. The number
of independent experiments is shown in parentheses. Hill slope values
and log EC50 values were analyzed using a one-way ANOVA
followed by a Dunnett's test to determine the levels of significance
(**, p < 0.01).
|
|

View larger version (21K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Concentration dependence of agonist activated
Cl conductances for WT ( ), Y62F ( ), and Y62S ( )
receptors expressed in Xenopus oocytes shows responses
to GABA (A) and muscimol (B).
The data represent the mean ± S.E. of at least three independent
experiments performed in duplicate. Data were analyzed using one-way
ANOVA followed by the Dunnett's test to determine levels of
significance. The shift in EC50 for Y62F containing mutants
is ~2-fold for GABA and muscimol. The rightward shifts (~6-fold)
are more pronounced for Y62S mutants. Data for all mutants are
presented in Table IV.
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
The elucidation of the mechanisms underlying GABAAR
function is important for the understanding of inhibitory synaptic
transmission in the central nervous system. The aim of the present
study was to identify residues within a specific domain of the 2
subunit of the GABAAR that contribute to high affinity
muscimol binding and to define, in part, potential roles of this site
in receptor function. Although the subunit stoichiometry of native
receptors is unknown, most recent evidence indicates that the
recombinant 1 2 2 GABAAR contains 2 , 2 , and
1 subunits (39, 40, 41). One likely arrangement of these subunits
within the pentamer has been suggested to be - - - - (40,
42). This arrangement (see Fig. 1A) provides one -
interface where the benzodiazepine site is thought to be located and
two - interfaces, each of which may carry a low affinity agonist
site (11, 12). The presence of two low affinity sites would be
consistent with a Hill coefficient of ~2 for channel activation (43).
This leaves two additional interfaces ( - and - ), which
could potentially form high affinity muscimol/GABA sites. According to
the popular loop model (see Introduction), loop D contributing to these
sites would be found in the N-terminal domain of the 2 subunit.
Previous work has shown that residues within this domain of the and
subunits are determinants of benzodiazepine (17) and low affinity GABA (10, 12) binding, respectively. This provided the rationale for
targeting homologous residues in the 2 subunit (Tyr-62 and Tyr-74)
to investigate their role in high affinity muscimol binding.
The major finding reported here is that Tyr-62 of the 2 subunit is a
determinant of high affinity agonist binding. Its substitution by
phenylalanine reduced the affinity for both muscimol and GABA (6-fold),
whereas its substitution by serine resulted in a dramatic reduction in
affinity (>30-fold) such that no high affinity binding was measurable
in this mutant. However, receptors containing the Y62S mutation were
still functional, albeit with an increased EC50 for channel
activation by about 6-fold. Thus high affinity agonist binding does not
appear to be obligatory for receptor activation.
In a previous study, Sigel et al. (12) also mutated residue
Tyr-62 of the 2 subunit. Although these authors did not investigate receptor binding properties, they found that the Y62L mutation reduced
the maximum current elicited by GABA by ~5-fold, leading to the
conclusion that the mutation had disrupted receptor assembly. In the
present study, we did not observe any reduction of the maximum current
as a result of either phenylalanine or serine substitution at this
position, suggesting that there were no major effects on receptor
synthesis and expression.
There is no general consensus as to the number of agonist binding sites
on a single GABAAR (44). There is, however, abundant evidence for the presence of high affinity sites in addition to one or
more classes of sites having lower affinity (see Refs. 1 and 6).
Previous studies have demonstrated that there are approximately twice
as many high affinity sites for muscimol as for flunitrazepam (45),
suggesting that there are two high affinity sites/receptor. As
described above, we predict that these sites are located at the -
and - interfaces, which by their nature are nonequivalent.
Although we have detected no heterogeneity in high affinity
[3H]muscimol binding, the bicuculline displacement
experiments (Table II) suggest that in the wild type receptor, this
antagonist may discriminate between the two putative high affinity
agonist sites. Although the Y62F mutation caused a significant decrease
in affinity for the agonist, bicuculline binding was apparently
unaltered. This result is in agreement with the previous observation
that the Y62L mutation did not affect the IC50 values for
functional antagonism of GABA-mediated chloride conductance by
bicuculline (12). Conversely, neither of the Tyr-74 mutations reported
here affected agonist binding, but they did alter the characteristics of [3H]muscimol displacement by bicuculline. These
observations suggest that although muscimol and bicuculline compete for
the same binding sites, different subsets of amino acids may be
involved in the recognition of the different ligands. Alternatively,
the Tyr-74 mutations may have produced changes in the conformation of
the receptor, which indirectly affect the binding of bicuculline. Further complexity arises from the apparent preference of bicuculline for binding to the low affinity agonist sites (46-49). Further studies
to explore this novel observation will be required to identify the
specific residues with which bicuculline interacts.
The presence of multiple agonist binding sites in the
GABAA receptor raises the question of their roles in
receptor function. Discrepancies between the concentrations of agonists
that are required to activate the receptor and agonist affinities that are measured in equilibrium binding assays are generally thought to
reflect differences in receptor conformation (i.e. between the activated and desensitized states). In this and many other studies
(11-13) it has been found that micromolar concentrations of GABA and
muscimol are required to open the ion channel (Fig. 6), suggesting that
the sites involved in channel activation are of intrinsically low
affinity, indeed lower than can be measured in direct equilibrium
binding studies. In recent functional studies, we have found that the
concentrations of GABA and muscimol that induce receptor
desensitization are in good agreement with the lower affinity binding
component measured directly.2
The role of the high affinity sites, however, is less clear.
The Tyr-62 mutations disrupted high affinity agonist binding and also
increased the EC50 values for channel activation. It is
likely, therefore, that the high affinity binding sites may play a role
in the efficiency of channel activation. The EC50 value is
a macroscopic constant that depends on several microscopic processes,
including ligand binding and channel gating (50). It is, therefore,
difficult to discriminate among the various contributing factors on the
basis of concentration-response curves alone. This is particularly true
when complications arising from multiple classes of agonist sites are
introduced. One possibility is that the high affinity sites are
allosterically coupled to other domains intimately involved in channel
activation and that their occupancy at low concentrations of agonists
increases the affinity of the latter sites to enhance the efficiency of
synaptic transmission. It has been theorized that two nonequivalent
sites, in nAChR, provide an ideal kinetic mechanism to enhance and
potentially accelerate receptor activation, which may satisfy
physiological requirements for rapid activation and termination of
response (51).
In the present study, substitution of the tyrosine residue at position
62 by serine had a more dramatic effect than the phenylalanine substitution. Although we have not made multiple amino acid
substitutions at this position, the aromaticity of the residue in this
position appears to be particularly important in agonist binding.
As has been previously reported for agonist binding to the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor (52) and for benzodiazepine binding to the
GABAAR (32), aromatic residues may be involved in a - stacking interaction with the ligand.
Detailed analyses of structure-function relationships without knowledge
of the crystal structure of the protein should be interpreted with
caution (53). As with all site-directed mutagenesis studies, the major
limitation of the present study is that we cannot state with any degree
of certainty that implicated residues are directly or indirectly
involved in ligand binding. However, the mutations do appear to be
specific for the high affinity agonist site and this study provides the
first evidence for the structural basis of high affinity binding that
has been noted for more than 20 years.
In conclusion, we have identified residue Tyr-62 of the 2 subunit as
a determinant of high affinity [3H]muscimol binding in
the recombinant 1 2 2 GABAAR. Further, we have shown
that the reduction in affinity of high affinity binding site(s) does
not have a large effect on receptor activation (54). It has previously
been suggested that the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor carries sites
of low and high affinity, and although the former are involved in
channel activation, the latter may be important in mediating receptor
desensitization (55). By analogy to the nAChR, the high affinity
site(s) of GABAAR may fulfill the same role. Other
investigators have likewise suggested that two molecules of GABA are
required for activation, and two independent molecules of
neurotransmitter are required for desensitization (56). Experiments to
examine the consequences of the above mutations on the desensitization
of GABAAR are currently in progress.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS |
The rat 1, 2, and 2L
cDNA clones were generous gifts from Dr. David Weiss. We thank
Eugene Chomey for his excellent preparation of Xenopus oocytes.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported by the Medical Research Council of
Canada and the Alberta Heritage Foundation Medical Research.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.
§
Holds a Postgraduate Scholarship from the Natural Sciences and
Engineering Research Council of Canada and an award from the Neuroscience Canada Foundation.
**
An Alberta Heritage Foundation Medical Research Scholar.
§§
Held a Medical Research Council Scientist award. To whom
correspondence and reprint requests should be addressed. Tel.:
780-492-3414; Fax: 780-492-4325; E-mail: susan.dunn@ualberta.ca.
2
J. G. Newell and S. M. J. Dunn,
unpublished observations.
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
GABA, -aminobutyric acid;
nAChR, nicotinic acetylcholine receptor;
BES, N,N-bis(2-hydroxyethyl)-2-aminoethanesulfonic acid;
FNZ, flunitrazepam;
WT, wild type;
ANOVA, analysis of variance.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Dunn, S. M. J.,
Bateson, A. N.,
and Martin, I. L.
(1994)
in
International Review of Neurobiology
(Bradley, R. C.
, and Harris, R. A., eds), Vol. 35
, pp. 51-96, Academic Press, San Diego, CA
|
| 2.
|
Olsen, R. W.,
Bergman, M. O.,
Van Ness, P. C.,
Lummis, S. C.,
Watkins, A. E.,
Napias, C.,
and Greenlee, D. V.
(1981)
Mol. Pharmacol.
19,
217-227[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 3.
|
Olsen, R. W.,
Yang, J.,
King, R. G.,
Dilber, A.,
Stauber, G.,
and Ransom, R. W.
(1986)
Life Sci.
39,
1969-1976[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 4.
|
Agey, M. W.,
and Dunn, S. M. J.
(1989)
Biochemistry
28,
4200-4208[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 5.
|
Davies, M.,
Steele, J.,
Hadingham, K. L.,
Whiting, P. J.,
and Dunn, S. M. J.
(1994)
Can. J. Physiol. Pharmacol.
72,
337
|
| 6.
|
Sieghart, W.
(1995)
Pharmacol. Rev.
47,
181-233[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 7.
|
Nayeem, N.,
Green, T. P.,
Martin, I. L.,
and Barnard, E. A.
(1994)
J. Neurochem.
62,
815-818[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 8.
|
Changeux, J.-P.,
and Edelstein, S. J.
(1998)
Neuron
21,
959-980[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 9.
|
Pedersen, S. E.,
and Cohen, J. B.
(1990)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
87,
2785-2789[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 10.
|
Smith, G. B.,
and Olsen, R. W.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
20380-20387[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 11.
|
Amin, J.,
and Weiss, D. S.
(1993)
Nature
366,
565-569[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 12.
|
Sigel, E.,
Baur, R.,
Kellenberger, S.,
and Malherbe, P.
(1992)
EMBO J.
11,
2017-2023[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 13.
|
Boileau, A. J.,
Evers, A. R.,
Davis, A. F.,
and Czajkowski, C.
(1999)
J. Neurosci.
19,
4847-4854[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 14.
|
Duncalfe, L. L.,
Carpenter, M. R.,
Smillie, L. B.,
Martin, I. L.,
and Dunn, S. M. J.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
9209-9214[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 15.
|
Wieland, H. A.,
Luddens, H.,
and Seeburg, P. H.
(1992)
J. Biol. Chem.
267,
1426-1429[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 16.
|
Davies, M.,
Martin, I. L.,
Bateson, A. N.,
Hadingham, K. L.,
Whiting, P. J.,
and Dunn, S. M. J.
(1996)
Neuropharmacology
35,
1199-1208[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 17.
|
Buhr, A.,
Baur, R.,
Malherbe, P.,
and Sigel, E.
(1996)
Mol. Pharmacol.
49,
1080-1084[Abstract]
|
| 18.
|
Buhr, A.,
Schaerer, M. T.,
and Sigel, E.
(1997)
Mol. Pharmacol.
52,
676-686[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 19.
|
Amin, J.,
Brooks-Kayal, A.,
and Weiss, D. S.
(1997)
Mol. Pharmacol.
51,
833-841[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 20.
|
Smith, G. B.,
and Olsen, R. W.
(1995)
Trends Pharmacol. Sci.
16,
162-168[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 21.
|
Deng, L.,
Ransom, R. W.,
and Olsen, R. W.
(1986)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Comm.
138,
1308-1314[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 22.
|
Casalotti, S. O.,
Stephenson, F. A.,
and Barnard, E. A.
(1986)
J. Biol. Chem.
261,
15013-15016[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 23.
|
Bureau, M.,
and Olsen, R. W.
(1988)
Biochem. Biophys. Res. Comm.
153,
1006-1011[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 24.
|
Zezula, J.,
Slany, A.,
and Sieghart, W.
(1996)
Eur. J. Pharmacol.
301,
207-214[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 25.
|
Pregenzer, J. F.,
Im, W. B.,
Carter, D. B.,
and Thomsen, D. R.
(1993)
Mol. Pharmacol.
43,
801-806[Abstract]
|
| 26.
|
Im, W. B.,
Pregenzer, J. F.,
Binder, J. A.,
Dillon, G. H.,
and Alberts, G. L.
(1995)
J. Biol. Chem.
270,
26063-26066[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 27.
| Newell, J. G., Davies, M., and Bateson, A. N. (2000)
Mol. Biotech., in press
|
| 28.
|
Nielsen, H.,
Engelbrecht, J.,
Burnak, S.,
and von Heijne, G.
(1997)
Protein Eng.
10,
1-6[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 29.
|
Tanay, V. A.-M. I.,
Tancowny, B. P.,
Glencorse, T. A.,
and Bateson, A. N.
(1997)
Mol. Biotech.
7,
217-229[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 30.
|
DuBridge, R. P.,
Tang, P.,
Hsia, H. C.,
Leong, P.-M.,
Miller, J. H.,
and Calos, M. P.
(1987)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
7,
379-387[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 31.
|
Chen, C. A.,
and Okayama, H.
(1987)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
7,
2745-2742[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 32.
|
Davies, M.,
Bateson, A. N.,
and Dunn, S. M. J.
(1998)
J. Neurochem.
70,
2188-2194[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 33.
|
Dupont, Y.
(1984)
Anal. Biochem.
142,
504-510[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 34.
|
Goldin, A.
(1992)
Methods Enzymol.
207,
266-279[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 35.
|
Goldin, A.,
and Sumikawa, K.
(1992)
Methods Enzymol.
207,
279-297[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 36.
|
Cheng, Y.-C.,
and Prussof, W. H.
(1973)
Biochem. Pharmacol.
22,
3099-3108[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 37.
|
Shank, R. P.,
Baldy, W. J.,
Mattucci, L. C.,
and Villani, F. J., Jr.
(1990)
J. Neurochem.
54,
2007-2015[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 38.
|
Tallman, J. F.,
Thomas, J. W.,
and Gallager, D. W.
(1978)
Nature
264,
383-385
|
| 39.
|
Farrar, S. J.,
Whiting, P. J.,
Bonnert, T. P.,
and McKernan, R. M.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
10100-10104[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 40.
|
Tretter, V.,
Ehya, N.,
Fuchs, K.,
and Sieghart, W.
(1997)
J. Neurosci.
17,
2728-2737[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 41.
|
Chang, Y.,
Wang, R.,
Barot, S.,
and Weiss, D. S.
(1996)
J. Neurosci
16,
5415-5424[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 42.
|
Sigel, E.,
and Buhr, A.
(1997)
Trends Pharmacol. Sci.
18,
425-429[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 43.
|
Macdonald, R. L.,
and Olsen, R. W.
(1994)
Annu. Rev. Neurosci.
17,
569-602[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 44.
|
Hevers, W.,
and Lüddens, H.
(1998)
Mol. Neurobiol.
18,
35-86[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 45.
|
Sigel, E.,
and Barnard, E. A.
(1984)
J. Biol. Chem.
259,
7219-7223[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 46.
|
Möhler, H,
and Okada, T.
(1978)
Mol. Pharmacol.
14,
256-265[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 47.
|
Enna, S. J.,
and Snyder, S. H.
(1977)
Mol. Pharmacol.
13,
442-453[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 48.
|
Olsen, R. W.,
and Snowman, A. M.
(1983)
J. Neurochem.
41,
1653-1663[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 49.
|
Maksay, G.
(1994)
Mol. Pharmacol.
46,
386-390[Abstract]
|
| 50.
|
Colquhoun, D.
(1998)
Br. J. Pharmacol.
125,
924-947[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 51.
|
Jackson, M. B.
(1989)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
86,
2199-2203[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 52.
|
Dougherty, D. A.,
and Stauffer, D. A.
(1990)
Science
250,
1558-1560[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 53.
|
Ward, W. H. J.,
Timms, D.,
and Fresht, A. R.
(1990)
Trends Pharmacol. Sci.
11,
280-284[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 54.
|
Im, W. B.,
Pregenzer, J. P.,
Binder, J. A.,
Alberts, G. L.,
and Im, H. K.
(1997)
Br. J. Pharmacol.
120,
559-564[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 55.
|
Dunn, S. M. J.,
Conti-Tronconi, B. M.,
and Raftery, M. A.
(1983)
Biochemistry
22,
2512-2518[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 56.
|
Cash, D. J.,
and Subbarao, K.
(1987)
Biochemistry
26,
7526-7270
|
| 57.
|
Yan, D.,
Schulte, M. K.,
Bloom, K. E.,
and White, M. M.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
5537-5541[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
Copyright © 2000 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.

CiteULike Complore Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
R.-Q. Huang, Z. Chen, and G. H. Dillon
Molecular Basis for Modulation of Recombinant {alpha}1{beta}2{gamma}2 GABAA Receptors by Protons
J Neurophysiol,
August 1, 2004;
92(2):
883 - 894.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. W. Baumann, R. Baur, and E. Sigel
Individual Properties of the Two Functional Agonist Sites in GABAA Receptors
J. Neurosci.,
December 3, 2003;
23(35):
11158 - 11166.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
K. Bollan, D. King, L. A. Robertson, K. Brown, P. M. Taylor, S. J. Moss, and C. N. Connolly
GABAA Receptor Composition Is Determined by Distinct Assembly Signals within alpha and beta Subunits
J. Biol. Chem.,
February 7, 2003;
278(7):
4747 - 4755.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. W. Baumann, R. Baur, and E. Sigel
Forced Subunit Assembly in alpha 1beta 2gamma 2 GABAA Receptors. INSIGHT INTO THE ABSOLUTE ARRANGEMENT
J. Biol. Chem.,
November 22, 2002;
277(48):
46020 - 46025.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
V. I. Torres and D. S. Weiss
Identification of a Tyrosine in the Agonist Binding Site of the Homomeric rho 1 gamma -Aminobutyric Acid (GABA) Receptor That, When Mutated, Produces Spontaneous Opening
J. Biol. Chem.,
November 8, 2002;
277(46):
43741 - 43748.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. G. Newell and S. M. J. Dunn
Functional Consequences of the Loss of High Affinity Agonist Binding to gamma -Aminobutyric Acid Type A Receptors. IMPLICATIONS FOR RECEPTOR DESENSITIZATION
J. Biol. Chem.,
June 7, 2002;
277(24):
21423 - 21430.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 2000 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
|