|
Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M204089200 on June 10, 2002
J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 277, Issue 34, 30581-30590, August 23, 2002
Residues in the First Extracellular Loop of a G Protein-coupled
Receptor Play a Role in Signal Transduction*
Ayça
Akal-Strader ,
Sanjay
Khare§,
Dong
Xu¶ **,
Fred
Naider§ , and
Jeffrey M.
Becker ¶§§
From the Department of Biochemistry, Cellular and
Molecular Biology, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee 37996, the § Department of Chemistry, The College of Staten Island
of The City University of New York, Staten Island, New York 10314, the
¶ Genome Science & Technology Graduate School of The University of
Tennessee, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee
37830, and the  Ph.D Program in Biochemistry
and Chemistry, The Graduate School and University Center of The City
University of New York, New York, New York 10016
Received for publication, April 29, 2002, and in revised form, May 28, 2002
 |
ABSTRACT |
The Saccharomyces cerevisiae
pheromone, -factor (WHWLQLKPGQPMY), and Ste2p, its G protein-coupled
receptor, were used as a model system to study ligand-receptor
interaction. Cys-scanning mutagenesis on each residue of EL1, the first
extracellular loop of Ste2p, was used to generate a library of 36 mutants with a single Cys residue substitution. Mutation of most
residues of EL1 had only negligible effects on ligand affinity and
biological activity of the mutant receptors. However, five mutants were
identified that were either partially (L102C and T114C) or severely
(N105C, S108C, and Y111C) compromised in signaling but retained binding affinities similar to those of wild-type receptor. Three-dimensional modeling, secondary structure predictions, and subsequent circular dichroism studies on a synthetic peptide with amino acid sequence corresponding to EL1 suggested the presence of a helix corresponding to
EL1 residues 106 to 114 followed by two short -strands (residues 126 to 135). The distinctive periodicity of the five residues with a
signal-deficient phenotype combined with biophysical studies suggested
a functional involvement in receptor activation of a face on a
310 helix in this region of EL1. These studies indicate that EL1 plays an important role in the conformational switch that
activates the Ste2p receptor to initiate the mating pheromone signal
transduction pathway.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Intercellular communication is often mediated by interactions of
peptide hormones secreted by cells with receptors at the plasma
membrane of target cells. Association of several human diseases to
hormone receptor pathology highlights the importance of understanding
the mechanisms behind hormone-receptor interactions and the concurrent
triggering of the signal transduction events (1-4). As a model to
study such systems, we have focused our attention on the
Saccharomyces cerevisiae -factor pheromone receptor Ste2p, which belongs to the seven-transmembrane G protein-coupled receptor family.
G protein-coupled receptors
(GPCRs)1 represent a widely
distributed family of membrane proteins, ranging in size from 400 to 1000 amino acid residues in a heptahelical topological arrangement that
mediates cellular responses to a variety of extracellular signals, such
as light, ions, hormones, neurotransmitters, growth factors, and
odorants. GPCRs are believed to exist in several interchangeable
conformations including resting and active states (5). The most widely
accepted model to account for hormone action involves stabilization of
the active (activated) conformation of the receptor as an outcome of
ligand binding (6, 7). The transition into the active conformation
results in changes in the physical state of the associated
heterotrimeric G protein thereby activating diverse pathways such as
protein kinases, adenylate cyclases, phospholipases, and ion channels
and culminating in differential gene transcription and characteristic
phenotypic changes in cellular physiology (8-11). In S. cerevisiae, binding of the -factor to Ste2p, its cognate GPCR,
initiates a protein kinase-mediated signal transduction cascade that
leads to a change in cell morphology, growth arrest, and activation of
a number of pheromone-responsive genes in preparation for cellular
mating (12-16).
Given the overall common structural features among GPCRs, a detailed
structural analysis using x-ray crystallography should bring insights
into determinants of ligand binding and mechanisms of receptor
activation. However, because of inherent difficulties in solubilizing
and obtaining well diffracting crystals of the large, membrane-bound,
lipid-associated GPCRs, such studies have been severely impeded. A
noted exception is rhodopsin for which a high-resolution
crystallographic structure has been determined (17). A crystal
structure of the extracellular ligand-binding domain of the
metabotropic glutamate receptor with and without the ligand has also
been reported (18). An alternative to detailed crystallographic
information on GPCRs has been the analysis of mutant receptors for
structure-function studies. One area of intense study has been to
determine the ligand-binding site as a means to understanding different
states of receptors and how the occupation by ligand may initiate
signal transduction.
Detailed analysis of GPCRs has suggested that for larger ligands, such
as glycoproteins and peptide hormones, extracellular domains contribute
binding determinants (19-22), whereas for smaller ligands, such as
catecholamines, the ligand binding pocket is formed by transmembrane
domains (19, 23). More than one extracellular region was found to
participate in ligand binding to secretin, human P2Y1,
protease-activated thrombin receptor 1, human prostaglandin E-prostanoid 2, and cholecystokinin-A receptors (24-29). An
extracellular loop was proposed to provide determinants for ligand
binding and/or ligand selectivity to prostaglandin E-prostanoid 2, lutropin luteinizing hormone/choriogonadotropin, human
follicle-stimulating hormone, human prostaglandin E-prostanoid 2 and
prostaglandin E-prostanoid 4, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1
receptor 2, opioid receptor-like 1, and aminergic receptors (30-36).
Involvement of extracellular loops in ligand binding has been
demonstrated directly by labeling of loops with photoaffinity peptide
probes (37-39). The NH2 terminus of secretin receptor and
corticotropin-releasing factor receptor 1 were found to play an
important role in interaction with ligand (40-42). In addition,
extracellular loops have been the focus for structural studies and
modeling in several GPCRs (29, 43-46). Finally, GPCRs have been
identified in which large chimeric replacements of extracellular
regions have caused dissociation of high affinity binding from receptor
activation (24).
A number of experiments have attempted to identify Ste2p residues or
regions involved in ligand binding. Chimeric receptors between the
closely related S. cerevisiae and
Saccharomyces kluyveri -factor
receptors implicated the involvement of portions of EL1 (extracellular
loop one), EL3, and the NH2-terminal extracellular region
of TM1 (transmembrane 1) in the specificity of ligand recognition (47,
48). Studies with random mutagenesis of Ste2p and screening for
receptors responding to antagonists proposed an important role for F55
in TM1 in both ligand binding and signal transduction (49). Using
site-directed mutagenesis of Ste2p and different -factor analogues,
Lee et al. (50) suggested that the tenth residue of
-factor was in close proximity to Ser47 and
Thr48 in TM1 of Ste2p. Measurement of biophysical
properties of fluorescent -factors bound to Ste2p indicated that the
binding pocket was formed by both hydrophobic and hydrophilic regions,
suggesting contributions to ligand binding from both extracellular and
transmembrane regions of the receptor (51). Mutational analysis of the
putative glycosylation sites in the NH2 terminus and on EL1
indicated that glycosylation was not required for pheromone binding and
receptor activation (52). Finally, a recent photoaffinity labeling
study identified a region of Ste2p spanning portions of TM6, EL3, and TM7 as the site of cross-linking to the side chain of position 1 of
-factor (53). Despite all of these studies, no previous analysis has
discriminated specific residues in the extracellular loops involved in
binding and/or receptor activation.
Here we report our studies on residues of EL1, the first extracellular
loop of Ste2p. Cysteine-scanning mutagenesis of these residues revealed
a region (residues 102-114) of the receptor that appears to be
involved in signaling but that is not critical for ligand binding.
Moreover, the key residues (102, 105, 108, 111, and 114) required for
receptor activation exhibit a periodicity consistent with their spatial
presentation on one face of a 310 helix.
 |
EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURES |
Strains and Plasmids--
LM102 and LM23-3az yeast strains
described by Sen and Marsh (47) were used in these studies. The
genotype for the LM102 strain is: MATa, bar1,
his4, leu2, trp1, met1, ura3, FUS1-lacZ::URA3, ste2-dl (deleted for the region coding for the -factor
receptor). LM23-3az has the same genotype as LM102 except that it
contains an intact chromosomal STE2 gene coding for the
-factor receptor. LM23-3az was used only to study dominant negative
effects of certain mutant receptors on the function of wild-type (WT)
STE2 (see "Results"). The LM102 strain was used as the
recipient for the transformation with WT and the site-directed mutant
STE2. Measurement of the pheromone-induced growth arrest
(halo assay), pheromone-induced gene expression (FUS1-lacZ
assay), and determination of pheromone binding were done in the LM102
host strain. Both LM102 and LM23-3az strains carried the
bar1 mutant allele, which inactivated the BAR1
protease responsible for degradation of -factor, and a
FUS1-lacZ gene, which served as a pheromone-inducible
reporter. The WT STE2 gene with a native promoter was cloned
into a yeast/bacterial shuttle vector pGA314.WT (49) and was used as a
template strain for the subcloning of the FLAGTM epitope
and His6 tag and further site-directed mutagenesis of the
-factor receptor gene. This plasmid carries the TRP1 gene as a selectable marker and is a low copy CEN-based plasmid.
Subcloning of the FLAGTM Epitope and His6
Tag--
The first step in generation of the site-directed mutant
STE2 was the creation of a pGA314.WT plasmid coding a
STE2 gene product tagged with the FLAGTM epitope
and His6 affinity sequence at the 3' end of the
STE2 gene. For this, the plasmid pNED described by David
et al. (54) was used as the source of the COOH-terminal
epitope tags. STE2 in pNED contains an 81-bp region at its 3' end that
codes for the 24-bp FLAGTM epitope (DYKDDDDK), the 30-bp
Gly-rich flexible tether (TGVPRGSGSS), the 18-bp His6
affinity tag (HHHHHH), and the 9-bp unrelated sequences (SSG) followed
by a stop codon. The desired region of STE2 containing the
3'-tagged sequences was removed by digestion with SalI and the generated 121-bp fragment was gel purified using the MERmaid kit
(Bio 101, Carlsbad, CA). The pGA314.WT plasmid was digested with
SalI, which produced a 6.272-kb fragment coding for the
STE2 gene that lacked its 3' end sequences. This fragment
was dephosphorylated with shrimp alkaline phosphatase (U. S.
Biochemical Corp.) and gel purified using Geneclean III kit (Bio 101).
The 121-bp fragment insert purified from the pNED vector was ligated
into the 6.272-kb fragment purified from the pGA314.WT vector using T4
DNA ligase (Promega, Madison, WI). Correct orientation of the insert
was confirmed by DNA sequencing. The 6.393-kb plasmid thus generated coded for the STE2 gene with 3' FLAGTM epitope
(FT) and His6 tag (HT) sequences, and allowed expression of
STE2 under its native promoter. This plasmid was referred to as pGA314.STE2.FT.HT and it served as the template for further site-directed mutagenesis.
Primers and Sequencing--
All primers were purchased from
Sigma/Genosys (The Woodlands, TX). Sequences of the primers used are
presented in Table I. DNA sequencing was
carried out in the DNA sequencing facility located on the campus of the
University of Tennessee.
Construction of Cys-less Ste2p.FT.HT--
Single-stranded
phagemid DNA of pGA314.STE2.FT.HT was prepared by infecting
Escherichia coli strain CJ236 (dut
ung ) carrying pGA314.STE2.FT.HT with the
helper phage M13K07 (55). Oligonucleotide-directed mutagenesis of
single-stranded phagemid DNA of pGA314.STE2.FT.HT was constructed as
described previously (56, 57). The product of the mutagenesis reaction
mixture was transformed into DH5 (Invitrogen) E. coli strain, and transformants were selected on
ampicillin-containing plates. Plasmids were then isolated from
transformants using the Wizard Miniprep kit (Promega). After sequencing
of the isolated plasmids to confirm correct incorporation of the
intended mutations (C59S and C252S), constructs were transformed into
yeast strain LM102 (ste2 deletion strain), and transformants were selected by their growth on medium lacking tryptophan. This plasmid, referred to as pGA314.Cys-less.STE2.FT.HT, served as the
template on which Cys-scanning mutagenesis of EL1 of Ste2p was performed.
Cys-scanning Mutagenesis of EL1, the First Extracellular Loop of
Ste2p--
Preparation of single-stranded phagemid DNA of
pGA314.Cys-less.STE2.FT.HT and oligonucleotide-directed mutagenesis of
single-stranded phagemid pGA314.Cys-less.STE2.FT.HT DNA were done as
described in the previous section for pGA314.STE2.FT.HT. The product of the mutagenesis reaction mixture was transformed into E. coli strain DH5 (Invitrogen), and transformants were selected
on ampicillin-containing plates. Plasmids were then isolated from
transformants using the Wizard Miniprep kit (Promega). Each construct
was subjected to sequencing to confirm correct incorporation of the
intended mutations (single Cys substitution on each residue of EL1)
prior to transformation into the ste2 deletion yeast strain
LM102, and subsequent selection of transformants by their growth on the
medium lacking tryptophan. In the case of partially active and
nonfunctional cysteine-substituted mutant receptors (as determined by
growth arrest assay, see "Results"), plasmids from three
independent isolates were transformed into yeast to confirm that the
observed phenotypes were because of the intended single cysteine
mutation but not because of the presence of spurious mutations.
Measuring of Protein Expression Levels by
Immunoblot--
S. cerevisiae strains LM102 (strain with
the ste2 deletion) and LM102 (pGA314.STE2 or
pGA314.mutantSTE2) (the strain containing a plasmid encoding Ste2p or
mutant Ste2p) were grown, and membranes containing or lacking Ste2p and
mutant Ste2p receptors were prepared as described previously (54). All
manipulations with membranes and all purification steps were carried
out at 4 °C in the presence of protease inhibitors (1.0 µg/ml
leupeptin, 1.0 µg/ml pepstatin A, and 17.4 µg/ml
phenylmethylsulfonyl fluoride). Membranes were solubilized in sample
buffer (50 mM Na2CO3, 50 mM dithiothreitol, 15% (w/v) sucrose, 2.5% SDS). Equal
amounts of solubilized membrane proteins (2-10 µg) were resolved by
SDS-PAGE (10%), electrophoretically transferred to
Immobilon P membrane (Millipore, Bedford, MA), and
probed with FLAGTM antibody (IBI, Kodak, Rochester, NY).
The resulting immune complexes were detected by horseradish
peroxidase-conjugated goat anti-rabbit antibodies, and visualized by
chemiluminescence (ECL kit, Amersham Biosciences).
Growth Arrest (Halo) Assay--
Yeast nitrogen base medium with
ammonium sulfate without amino acids (Difco) with 2% glucose (SD
medium), supplemented with histidine (20 µg/ml), leucine (30 µg/ml), and methionine (20 µg/ml), was overlaid with 4 ml of cell
suspension (2.5 × 105 cells/ml, 1.1% Nobel agar).
Filter discs (sterile blanks from Difco), 6 mm in diameter, were
impregnated with 10-µl portions of -factor solutions at various
concentrations and placed onto the overlay. The -factor used was
[Nle12] -factor, which was isosteric, equiactive, and
has the same binding affinity as the wild-type pheromone (58). The
plates were incubated at 30 °C for 24-36 h and then observed for
clear zones (halos) around the discs. The data were expressed as the
diameter of the halo including the diameter of the disc. All assays
were carried out at least three times with no more than a 2-mm
variation in halo size at a particular amount of -factor. A molar
extinction coefficient of 13,500 at 280 nm was used for adjusting
-factor concentration throughout the study. The data were plotted as
halo size versus the amount of peptide, and linearized by
regression analysis using PrismTM software (GraphPad, San
Diego, CA). To compare the relative activities of -factor with
different receptors, the amount of peptide producing a halo of a
particular size was determined from the regression line of
dose-response curves.
FUS1-lacZ Gene Induction Assay--
S. cerevisiae
LM102 and LM23-3az contain a FUS1-lacZ gene that was
inducible by mating pheromone. Cells were grown overnight in SD medium
supplemented with the required amino acids at 30 °C to 5 × 106 cells/ml, washed by centrifugation, and grown for one
doubling (hemocytometer count) at 30 °C. Induction was performed by
adding 0.5 ml of -factor at various concentrations to 4.5 ml of
concentrated cells (1 × 108 cells/ml) to give final
-factor concentrations of 0, 1 × 10 10, 1 × 10 9, 1 × 10 8, 1 × 10 7, and 1 × 10 6 M. The
mixtures were vortexed and placed at 30 °C with shaking for 2 h. After this incubation, cells were harvested by centrifugation, and
each pellet was resuspended and assayed for -galactosidase activity
(expressed as Miller units) in duplicate by modification (59) of a
standard protocol (60, 61) using
o-nitrophenyl- -D-galactopyranoside (Sigma) as
the substrate. EC50 (concentration of peptide required to
give half-maximal activation) and Emax (maximal
activation obtained from the highest peptide concentration, 1 × 10 6 M) values were calculated with a 95%
confidence interval using PrismTM software (GraphPad) with
a sigmoidal dose-response curve fitting, variable slope equation. Each
experiment was carried out at least two times with similar results in
each assay.
Binding Assays--
Saturation and competition binding assays
were performed using [3H] -factor. Cells were grown
overnight at 30 °C and harvested at 1 × 107
cells/ml by centrifugation at 5000 × g at 4 °C. The
pelleted cells were washed two times in ice-cold YM-1 medium (62) and resuspended at 6.25 × 107 cells/ml.
[3H] -Factor was prepared by reduction of
[dehydroproline8, Nle12] -factor as
described previously (58). The competition binding assays were started
by the addition of [3H] -factor as described in detail
elsewhere (62, 63). In saturation binding assays, various
concentrations of [3H] -factor were added to the cell
suspension. Specific binding was determined by subtracting counts
associated with the LM102 (ste2 deletion) strain from counts
bound to the strains harboring WT or mutant receptors. Each experiment
was carried out at least three times with similar results. Nonspecific
binding of labeled -factor to filters in the absence of cells was
less than 20 counts/min. Data curves for competition and
saturation binding assays were fitted from at least eight triplicate
data points using PrismTM software (GraphPad) with
nonlinear regression one site competition, and nonlinear regression one
site saturation hyperbola equations, respectively. The
Ki values for competition binding assays were
calculated by using the equation of Cheng and Prusoff (64), where
Ki = EC50/(1 + [ligand]/Kd).
PROSPECT--
PROSPECT is a computer package for finding an
optimal alignment between a protein sequence and a protein structural
fold (65). PROSPECT finds the globally optimal sequence-structure
alignment and does so in an efficient manner, when considering both
alignment gap penalty and pairwise potential between residues that are
spatially close. A neural network assessment for the reliability of the fold recognition was given by PROSPECT (66). The atomic structures were
generated using MODELLER (67) based on the alignments obtained from
threading. PROSPECT has been applied successfully to many proteins with
unknown experimental structures.
Three-dimensional Modeling--
The first extracellular loop of
Ste2p including a few residues on TM2 and TM3 was modeled in the range
of residues 100-137 through the consensus of several tools for
transmembrane domain prediction, including SOSUI (68) and MEMSAT (69).
Secondary structure predictions for EL1 were carried out using two well known secondary structure prediction tools, i.e. PSIPRED
(70) and PHD (71), both of which gave similar results.
Synthesis of LSNYSSVTYALTGFPQFISRGDVHVYGATNG--
A peptide
corresponding to residues 103-132 of the first extracellular loop of
Ste2p was prepared using a solid phase strategy. For convenience a
glycine residue was added to the carboxyl terminus of the peptide. In
this paper we refer to this synthetic peptide as EL1-(103-132).
All reagents and solvents used for the solid phase peptide synthesis of
the 31-amino acid residue fragment were analytical grade and were
purchased from Advanced Chemtech (Louisville, KY),
Calbiochem-Novabiochem Corp. (San Diego, CA), VWR Scientific
(Piscataway, NJ), and Aldrich. High performance liquid chromatography
grade dichloromethane, acetonitrile, methanol, and water were purchased
from VWR Scientific and Fisher Scientific (Springfield, NJ). Automated
synthesis of EL1-(103-132) was carried out on an Applied Biosystem
433A peptide synthesizer (Applied Biosystem, Foster City, CA) using
preloaded Fmoc (N-(9-fluorenyl)methoxycarbonyl) -Gly-Wang
resin (0.65 mmol/g, Advanced Chemtech) on 0.1-mmol scale. The 0.1-mmol
FastMoc chemistry of Applied Biosystem was used for the elongation of
the peptide chain with an
2-(1H-benzotriazole-1-yl)-1,1,3,3-tetramethyluronium hexafluorophosphate/N-hydroxybenzotriazole/diisopropylethylamine-catalyzed coupling step using 10 equivalents of protected amino acids. For the
first 10-amino acid fragment, single coupling, and after that double
coupling, of amino acids was used to avoid formation of deletion
peptides. Acetic anhydride capping was used after each coupling to
improve the purity of the peptide. Purity of the peptide fragments was
checked after 10 and 20 amino acid residues had been assembled, by
cleaving a small amount of the protected peptide fragment from the resin.
After complete chain assembly, the N- -deprotected
peptidyl resin was washed thoroughly with 1-methyl-2-pyrrolidinone and CH2Cl2 and dried in vacuo for 4-5
h. The peptide was cleaved from the resin support with simultaneous
side chain deprotection using trifluoroacetic acid (10 ml), crystalline
phenol (0.75 g), thioanisol (0.5 ml), water (0.5 ml), and
1,2-ethanedithiol (0.25 ml) (72). Filtrates from the cleavage mixture
were collected, combined with trifluoroacetic acid washes of the resin,
concentrated under reduced pressure, and treated with cold ether to
precipitate the crude product.
The crude peptide so obtained was purified by reversed phase high
performance liquid chromatography (Hewlett-Packard series 1050) on a
semi-preparative Vydac (Hesperia, CA) reverse phase polymer column with
detection at 220 nm. Because of the strong aggregating tendency of the
peptide in water, the crude product (5 mg) was dissolved in 1 ml of
50% trifluroacetic acid/water, applied to the column, and eluted with
a linear gradient of CH3CN/water containing 0.1%
trifluroacetic acid and 10-60% CH3CN over 90 min with a
flow rate of 1.5 ml/min. Fractions were analyzed by reversed phase high
performance liquid chromatography (Hewlett-Packard series 1050) on an
analytical Vydac reversed phase polymer column with detection at 220 nm. Fractions of over 99% homogeneity were pooled and subjected to
lyophilization. The purity of the final peptide was assessed by
electron spray ionization mass spectrometry (ESI-MS, Peptido Genic
Inc., Livermore, CA) and amino acid analysis (Biopolymer Laboratory,
Brigham and Women's Hospital, Cambridge, MA). Molecular weight of the
peptide was calculated to be 3320.61 (monoisotopic) and observed by
mass spectrometry (MS) to be 3321.58.
Circular Dichroism (CD) Analysis--
The CD studies of
EL1-(103-132) were done from 260 to 190 nm under nitrogen purge using
a 0.01-cm path length cylindrical cuvette. The spectra were recorded on
an Aviv 62DS spectrophotometer (AVIV Associates, Lakewood, NJ), which
was interfaced to a computer used for all mathematical calculations.
The instrument was calibrated with D-(+)-10-camphorsulfonic
acid and all measurements were carried out in a 0.01-cm path length
cylindrical cuvette, using a bandwith of 1 nm and an averaging time of
0.5 s. The final spectrum was the average of 5 scans. The
background reference spectrum was collected under identical conditions.
Prior to calculation of final ellipticities, all spectra were corrected
by subtracting the reference spectrum and the plots were created using
the Sigma plot 5.0 software (Jandel Scientific, San Rafael, CA). In
general, measurements were made at peptide concentrations of 1 × 10 4 to 3 × 10 4 M. The
concentration of the solution was determined spectrophotometrically using tyrosine as standard or by amino acid analysis. The extinction coefficient for Tyr at 280 nm was taken as 1340 (73). The CD intensities were expressed as mean residue ellipticities (degree cm2/decimol).
 |
RESULTS |
Construction of a Functional, Tagged Ste2p Devoid of Cysteine
Residues--
COOH-terminal tagged Ste2p (FLAGTM epitope
and His6 tag) has been constructed with wild-type behavior
for both pheromone binding and activation of the signal transduction
pathway (54, 74, 75). These tags were engineered to allow detection of
receptors on Western blots and to serve for their selective
purification using affinity chromatography. To create a template for
Cys-scan mutagenesis, we removed the two native Ste2p Cys residues,
Cys59 in TM1 and Cys252 in TM6, and replaced
them with serine residues (Fig. 1). This form of the receptor, referred to as Cys-less Ste2p.FT.HT (Cys-less), displayed biological activities (Fig. 2)
and pheromone binding affinities (Table
II) indistinguishable from those of WT
Ste2p and Ste2p.FT.HT. In all three receptors (WT Ste2p, Ste2p.FT.HT, and Cys-less Ste2p.FT.HT), 0.4 µg of -factor caused 17.5-mm halo size in the growth arrest assays (Fig. 2), and these GPCRs displayed Ki values between 4 and 7 nM (Table II).
The complete tolerance of Ste2p to replacement of Cys59 and
Cys252 with alanine (74) or isoleucine and alanine,
respectively (75), has been reported previously. The substitution of
either or both of the Cys residues with Ser residues did not result in
any dramatic change in the number of receptors at the cell surface
(Table II). Cys-less Ste2p, Ste2p with two cysteines, or Ste2p with one
cysteine replaced by serine, all expressed about 9,000 receptors/cell
as measured by saturation binding assays. These expression levels were
in agreement with previously published results (12, 54, 58, 76-79).
Likewise, Western blot analysis on membrane preparations using
FLAGTM antibody showed that Cys-less receptor was expressed
at levels similar to Ste2p.FT.HT (data not shown).

View larger version (23K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 1.
Model of Ste2p showing the region targeted in
this study. The seven transmembrane domains are labeled
1-7. The three extracellular and intracellular loops are
labeled EL1-EL3 and IL1-IL3, respectively. Also
shown are the COOH-terminal FLAG and His6 tags, locations
of mutated C59S in TM1 and C252S in TM6 (dark circles in the
respective TM domains), and the region where Cys-scanning mutagenesis
was performed over the first extracellular loop of Ste2p (bold
face in EL1).
|
|

View larger version (41K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 2.
Dose-response curves from growth arrest
assays. Paper discs were spotted with various amounts (µg) of
-factor, as indicated on the right panel and halo
diameters were measured from plates, a representative of which is shown
on the left panel. Amounts of -factor (µg) spotted on
the disc were: 1, 0.0625; 2, 0.125; 3,
0.25; 4, 0.5; and 5, 1. Halo for 2 µg of
-factor is not shown on the plate. Results represent the average
from at least three independent experiments with a S.E. of
±0.2 mm.
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table II
Binding data for WT, FT.HT, and Cys mutants of Ste2p
The data presented are mean ± S.E. of at least three independent
experiments performed in triplicate for competition binding assays and
in quadruplicate for saturation binding assays.
|
|
Growth Arrest Response of Cys-scanned
Mutants--
Upon treatment with pheromone, cells containing WT Ste2p
arrest cell division in the G1 phase of the cell cycle and
therefore fail to grow on plates containing agar medium spotted with
-factor. We assessed the ability of all our 36 Cys substitution
mutants to arrest growth upon treatment with two different amounts of -factor (0.6 and 1.2 µg, Table III).
Most mutations did not affect the ability of the mutant receptor to
arrest growth. However, we identified five mutant receptors (shown in
bold face in Table III) that displayed reduced or complete loss of
biological activity. Interestingly, starting with position 102 and
ending at position 114, Cys substitution at every third residue
resulted in a dramatic defect in signaling by the mutant receptors. Of
these five mutants, L102C and T114C showed only partial activity,
whereas the other three mutants, N105C, S108C, and Y111C, completely
lost their ability to respond to pheromone growth arrest even at a high
amount of -factor (5 µg; data not shown).
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table III
Growth arrest assay results on Ste2p EL1 mutants
(Lys100-Gln135)
Data for mutant receptors that are defective in signaling are shown in
bold face. Results represent the average from at least three
independent experiments with S.E. ± 0.2 mm.
|
|
Gene Induction Response of Cys-scanned Mutants--
Signal
transduction in response to binding of -factor to Ste2p also results
in transcriptional activation of genes involved in mating. One of the
early genes to be activated during the latter pathway was
FUS1, which was involved in fusion of cells during conjugation. As a measure of response to activation of the mating signal transduction pathway, we tested the ability of 22 of our Cys
substitution mutants to activate a FUS1-lacZ reporter gene construct (Fig. 3). Based on the percent
maximal induction, Emax (activation obtained
from -factor at 1 × 10 6 M), most
mutant receptors were able to activate the FUS1-lacZ reporter gene similar to, if not better than, the Cys-less receptor. On
the other hand, the previously identified five mutant receptors, described as partially active or inactive based on growth arrest assays, induced the reporter gene at much diminished levels. Among these, the two partially active mutant receptors, L102C and T114C, displayed relatively higher induction levels (about 20% of the WT
Ste2p) than the three inactive mutant receptors, N105C, S108C, and
Y111C, which were severely compromised in their ability to signal
(about 10% activity in comparison to WT Ste2p). The dramatic reduction
in maximum level of induction was an observation limited to the five
mutant receptors. Cys substitutions at residue positions neighboring
these five positions did not dramatically affect the function of the
mutant receptors because they were able to signal at near normal
levels. Interestingly, all mutant receptors tested with
FUS1-lacZ assays, including the partially active and
inactive mutant receptors, had potencies similar to the Cys-less
receptor as determined by EC50 values (Table
IV), which reflected the concentration of
-factor required to give half-maximal induction.

View larger version (64K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 3.
Maximal FUS1-lacZ induction
(%) of several Ste2p EL1 mutant receptors. Maximal induction (%)
of each mutant was calculated with respect to Cys-less receptors when
induced with 1 µM -factor. The labeling of the bars as
to whether a mutant is active (hatched), partially active
(gray), or inactive (black) was done based on the
results from growth arrest assays. Data represent average from two to
three independent experiments performed in duplicate with error bars
representing mean ± S.E.
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table IV
FUS1-lacZ assay data on several Ste2p EL1 mutants
Data for mutant receptors that are defective in signaling are shown in
bold face. The EC50 results are expressed as mean ± S.E.
of at least two independent experiments performed in duplicate.
|
|
Effect of Extracellular Loop Cys Replacements on Binding of
-Factor to Ste2p--
We tested nine of the mutant receptors,
including the five mutants compromised in signaling, for their ability
to bind [3H] -factor (Fig.
4). The number of cell surface receptors
for each receptor tested was determined from saturation binding studies using whole cells, and the Ki value was determined
from competition binding studies (Table V
and Fig. 4 showing representative binding curves). These results show
that all of these mutant receptors had indistinguishable binding
affinities as compared with Cys-less Ste2p. The majority of the mutant
receptors, however, were reduced in their expression at the cell
surface as determined from saturation binding assays (Table V) and as
corroborated by Western blots (data not shown). For example, Cys-less
Ste2p was expressed at about 9,000 receptors/cell, whereas mutants
L102C, S108C, and Y111C were expressed at about 4,000 receptors/cell,
and N105C and T114C were expressed at about 2,000 receptors/cell.
Importantly, Q118C, a fully active receptor, was expressed at levels
similar to L102C, S108C, and Y111C, receptors that were impaired in
their signaling, and T114C, a partially active receptor, showed the greatest reduction in expression. Nevertheless, we were able to detect
excellent ligand binding by all of these mutant receptors regardless of
their expression levels. Previous studies have shown that biological
responses to pheromone binding were not affected greatly by a large
reduction in the amount of Ste2p at the cell surface in S. cerevisiae (80, 81). Cells expressing as low as 5% of the WT
Ste2p levels could display full activation of the signal transduction
pathway.

View larger version (29K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 4.
Binding data on representative receptors.
Panels A, C, and E show the
saturation binding data for specific binding by the indicated
receptors. Panels B, D, and F show the
competition binding data for the same receptors shown in panels
A, C, and E, respectively. Cys-less receptor
is shown by closed circles ( ), S108C by open
circles ( ), and T114C by closed triangles ( ).
Results represent data from at least three independent experiments
performed in triplicate for competition binding assays, and in
quadruplicate for saturation binding assays.
|
|
View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Table V
Binding data on several Ste2p EL1 mutant receptors
The data are presented as mean ± S.E. of at least three
independent experiments performed in triplicate for competition binding
assays and in quadruplicate for saturation binding assays. Data for
mutant receptors that are defective in signaling are shown in bold
face.
|
|
Biologically Inactive Mutant Receptors Are Not Dominant
Negative--
Previous studies had identified dominant negative Ste2p
mutants which manifested this phenotype through titration of G protein from the WT receptor thereby interfering with the initiation of the
signal transduction pathway (82, 83). We tested whether the five mutant
receptors (L102C, N105C, S108C, Y111C, and T114C) were able to display
a dominant negative effect. We performed five transformations of a
yeast strain (LM23-3az) harboring a functional chromosomal copy of WT
STE2 with CEN-based plasmids encoding the five
mutant receptors. We selected for transformants co-expressing WT Ste2p
and the plasmid-borne mutant receptors, and assessed their ability to
interfere with the function of WT Ste2p by FUS1-lacZ
reporter gene induction assays (Fig. 5).
Of these five mutant receptors, only L102C and T114C were able to cause
a slight reduction (about 30%) in signaling by WT Ste2p. The other
three receptors, N105C, S108C, and Y111C, showed no dominant negative
effect indicating that the WT Ste2p was expressed and fully coupled to
the signal transduction pathway. Saturation binding assays on whole
cells of each co-expressed strain showed an increase of
11/2-2-fold in the total cell surface receptor number when
compared with WT Ste2p expression levels alone, indicating that both
receptors were expressed at similar levels (data not shown).

View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 5.
FUS1-lacZ assays of WT Ste2p in
the presence of partially active and inactive mutant receptors.
Left panel, untransformed strain with intact chromosomal
STE2 is referred to as WT STE2 ( ). The strain
transformed with the mutant receptor is represented by
w/followed by the name of the mutant receptor. Symbols for
the mutant receptors transformed into the WT STE2 strain
are: , Cys-less; , N105C; , S108C; , Y111C; , L102C; and
, T114C. FUS1-LacZ induction (%) of each mutant was
calculated with respect to the untransformed WT STE2 strain.
Right panel, maximal induction (%) is determined from the
data on the left panel with the highest concentration of
-factor (1 µM). Results represent average from two
independent experiments performed in duplicate.
|
|
Structure of EL1, the First Extracellular Loop of
Ste2p--
Biological activity and FUS1-lacZ reporter gene
induction assays allowed us to identify five mutant receptors with
diminished capacity in signaling despite full ability to bind
-factor. A striking observation was the periodicity in the
positioning of these five mutations (at every third residue in a
portion of EL1) that resulted in a signaling deficient phenotype. To
explore any structural tendency in EL1, predictions and
three-dimensional modeling were done on a peptide sequence
corresponding to residues Lys100-Leu137 of
Ste2p. Because EL1 did not have significant sequence similarity to any
proteins with known structures, PROSPECT (65) was used to predict its
structure based on fold recognition. PROSPECT selected Protein Data
Bank 1grj (84) as the best template with the sequence identity of
26.3%. The range in the template 1grj was between residues 117 and
156. An atomic model was built based on the alignment (Fig.
6). Although the confidence level of the prediction was not very high (60% confidence), modeling suggested that
the NH2-terminal half of EL1 may contain a 310
helix followed by a short -sheet on the COOH-terminal half of the
loop. Interestingly, positions of mutations that resulted in defective
signaling in the five mutant receptors coincided very closely with the
predicted helical region of the loop.

View larger version (31K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 6.
Structural model for Ste2p EL1 sequence
between residues 100 and 137. Amino (N) and carboxyl
(C) termini are shown along with the corresponding sequence
of EL1 over which predictions were done. C, H, and
E in the predicted structure stand for loop, -helix, and
-strand, respectively (bold face letters).
Underlined residues are positions on the loop where Cys
substitutions resulted in partial or complete loss of activity of the
mutant receptors. The location of a possible 310 helix is
shown below the predicted structure of the loop
(underlined).
|
|
To obtain some biophysical evidence on the structure of EL1 we
synthesized a 30-amino acid sequence corresponding to residues 103-132
of the loop region. The peptide contained a non-natural Gly residue at
the carboxyl terminus to facilitate the solid phase synthesis. This
peptide was found to have very low solubility in physiological buffers
and aggregated strongly in water. We determined that solubility was
pH-dependent and increased at higher pH values.
Accordingly, we carried out CD analysis both in mixed organic aqueous
medium and water, and buffer at pH above 8.0.
The CD spectrum of the EL1-(103-132) peptide in
trifluoroethanol/water ((8:2 (v/v)) was characterized by minima
at 222 and 206 nm and a maximum at 190 nm (Fig.
7). The general shape of the spectrum was
similar to those reported for -helical polypeptides. However, the
mean residue ellipticities for EL1-(103-132) were approximately 9700
degree cm2 dmol 1 at 206 nm and 6900 degree
cm2 dmol 1 near 222 nm. These are much lower
than the mean residue helicities reported for -helices, and would be
indicative of a low percentage of helical structure. When CD studies
were carried out in water at higher pH values (adjusted to pH 9.2 by
using 1% NH4OH), the spectrum changed significantly with
the distinct minima mentioned above changing in both position and
relative intensity. For example, the higher wavelength minimum moved
below 220 nm. The shape of the spectrum was not typical for any regular
polypeptide and would be more consistent with a mixture of helices,
-sheet, and disordered structures. In 50 mM Tris buffer,
pH 8.6, the peptide exhibited a CD spectrum manifesting a very broad
minima from 200 to 220 nm that was also indicative of a mixture of
secondary structures (Fig. 7). Overall, the CD spectra obtained in both
mixed organic media and in water at pH greater than 8 indicated
that the synthetic peptide assumed a variety of structures among which
were likely helical and -sheet elements.

View larger version (13K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
Fig. 7.
CD studies of a synthetic peptide
(EL1-(103-132)) corresponding to the first 31 residues of the first
extracellular loop of Ste2p. CD studies were carried at 26 °C
in 80% triflurooethanol, 20% water ( ), water, pH 9.2 ( ), and 50 mM Tris, pH 8.6 ( ).
|
|
 |
DISCUSSION |
An analysis of GPCRs from different families has suggested that
peptide ligands interact with extracellular domains of receptors (19-22) unlike small GPCR ligands that bind exclusively in a pocket formed by transmembrane domains (19, 23). The role of extracellular domains in binding of peptides encouraged us to more closely
investigate the contribution of Ste2p extracellular loops to ligand
binding and receptor activation. The rationale behind focusing on EL1 came from studies by Sen and Marsh (47) and Sen et al. (48), who showed that EL1 contained determinants for ligand selectivity. We
therefore decided to follow a systematic, site-directed mutagenesis analysis of EL1 over the entire loop.
For the systematic mutagenesis of EL1, we decided to use the
Cys-scanning mutagenesis method, because Cys is average in bulk, highly
amenable for subsequent modification using sulfhydryl specific reagents, and generally well tolerated as a replacement for all amino
acids in GPCRs. When used in conjunction with biochemical and
biophysical techniques, Cys-scanning methodology can provide valuable
information on accessibility of residues to the aqueous and lipidic
environments, on spatial proximity between domains, and on residues
near or at binding crevices that are important for ligand interactions.
These important properties have allowed successful use of the
Cys-scanning mutagenesis method for several membrane proteins (85-87),
including Ste2p (75).
In this study, we generated a library of 36 Ste2p mutants wherein each
residue of the loop was replaced with Cys one residue at a time.
Because the template used in this study was devoid of Cys, each
resulting Ste2p mutant receptor contained only one Cys residue. Halo
assays showed that the majority of the Ste2p receptors with mutations
of EL1 residues displayed growth arrest indistinguishable from that of
WT Ste2p (Table III). On the other hand, we identified five mutations
(L102C, N105C, S108C, Y111C, and T114C) in the NH2-terminal
portion of EL1 that caused either partial or severe loss of biological
activity of the mutant receptors. Of these, L102C and T114C displayed
partial activity, whereas N105C, S108C, and Y111C completely lost their
biological activities. When we tested 22 of our EL1 mutant receptors as
to proficiency to activate a FUS1-lacZ reporter gene
construct (Fig. 3), only the previously identified five mutant
receptors exhibited severely diminished capacity to transduce signal.
Mutations in neighboring receptor positions resulted in WT-like
FUS1-lacZ induction levels. These results suggested that
residues 102-114 of EL1 of Ste2p play an important role in the
function of the receptor.
The compromised ability to signal observed for the five mutant
receptors could result from improper folding, defective trafficking, reduced level of cell surface expression, and/or diminished or lost
binding properties of these receptors. To delineate the specific reasons behind the observed signaling-deficient phenotype of these five
mutant receptors, we performed a number of experiments on whole cells
including saturation binding assays to quantify the number of cell
surface receptors and their binding properties. Collectively, these
studies showed that all of these five mutant receptors had WT-like
binding affinities for -factor despite some diminished cell surface
expression. On the other hand, the apparent reduction in the cell
surface expression of these mutant receptors did not correlate with the
observed signaling-deficient phenotype. Our saturation binding studies
showed that T114C, a partially active receptor, had the most dramatic
reduction in cell surface expression (about 15% of Cys-less Ste2p
levels), whereas N105C, S108C, and Y111C were expressed at higher
levels (about 40% of Cys-less Ste2p levels) but were completely
inactive for signal transduction. Also, the fully active Q118C was
expressed at levels similar to the three inactive receptors.
Furthermore, it was previously shown that unlike mammalian GPCRs whose
function is regulated by cell surface expression levels, yeast cells
that express anywhere from as low as 5% to as much as 20-fold excess of the normal level of receptors can transduce signal at near normal
levels (80, 81). Taken together, these data indicate that the profound
signaling defect of the five mutant receptors was not connected to
their level of expression.
The five mutant receptors were able to bind -factor with near WT
affinities, but there was a problem for these receptors to initiate
signal transduction. Therefore, we concluded that these five mutations
on EL1 prevented Ste2p from assuming its activated state. To
investigate this hypothesis, we tested effects of the five
signaling-deficient mutant receptors on the function of WT Ste2p when
co-expressed in cells. Of these five mutants, only the partially active
receptors L102C and T114C were able to moderately interfere with the
function of WT Ste2p, whereas the inactive receptors N105C, S108C, and
Y111C had no effect even though they were expressed at the cell
surface. Studies with previously identified dominant negative mutants
of Ste2p concluded that the observed effects were because of the
titration of G proteins from WT Ste2p (82, 83). In light of these
observations, our studies with the five mutant receptors suggested that
L102C and T114C were able to interact weakly with G protein thereby
reducing its interaction with WT Ste2p, whereas N105C, S108C, and Y111C
were unable to interact with G protein. The regions of Ste2p known to
interact with G protein are the third intracellular loop (IL3) and the
distal part of the COOH-terminal tail (77, 88). Therefore, it is
possible that the five mutations on EL1 may affect the ability of Ste2p
to attain an activated state required for coupling to G protein to
initiate signal transduction.
Interestingly, the five mutants manifesting a signaling-defective
phenotype were observed at every third position of the loop starting
from residue 102 and ending at residue 114. The observation of a
distinctive periodicity in the signaling-deficient phenotype at every
third position of EL1 from position 102 to 114 was provocative. We
reasoned that this region of the loop might contain a 310
helix, a secondary structure with 3 residues/turn rather than the
typical 3.6 residues/turn of a standard -helix. Using PROSPECT, the
region of EL1 between residues 105 and 115 was predicted to contain a 310 helix, followed by a short -sheet region between
residues 125 and 136 of EL1. CD studies on EL1-(103-132) suggested
that this peptide displayed different structural elements depending on
the solvent and pH of the solution used and were thus inconclusive as
to the presence of a 310 helix at the
NH2-terminal half of EL1. Further studies are needed to
investigate this possibility.
Previously Schwartz (9) noted that despite an apparent absence of
sequence homology between GPCRs, the lengths of extracellular and
intracellular loops may be conserved, at least in the rhodopsin superfamily of GPCRs. When we compared extracellular loops of several
GPCRs, we noticed that in general GPCRs contain two small extracellular
loops and a third larger extracellular loop with no apparent
conservation in the loop size relative to its position in the receptor.
With this observation, we also noted that the size of rhodopsins EL2
was very similar to that of Ste2ps EL1: 29 versus 30 residues, respectively. A crystal structure of rhodopsin in the ground
state (17) shows that the extracellular loops fold around two twisted
-hairpins forming a compact domain, whereas the
NH2-terminal domain contributes the second pair of
-strands. The two highly conserved Cys residues on EL1 and in the
middle of EL2 of rhodopsin bring TM3 and TM5 together through a
disulfide bond. In this compact structure, EL2 dips into the membrane
and caps the retinal-binding site. Importantly, the stability of the activated state of rhodopsin relies strongly on retaining its retinal
at the active site by -sheet capping via the conserved disulfide
bond between EL1 and EL2. Although EL2 is important for receptor
structure and folding, it is not involved in ligand binding.
Interestingly, our studies show that analogous to EL2 of rhodopsin, EL1
of Ste2p does not participate in binding of -factor but plays a very
crucial role in the receptor activation. Our studies also provide the
first genetic evidence that indicates that EL1 of Ste2p may have a
unique structural fold wherein its first half forms a 310
helix and its second half forms a short -sheet structure. Obviously,
the true three-dimensional structure of EL1 will require either direct
biophysical studies on the intact receptor or high-resolution studies
on more constrained peptide fragments of this receptor domain.
Structural analysis of extracellular loops of a few other GPCRs has
been done using NMR solution studies and a variety of other methods.
For example, in the cholecystokinin A receptor, structural studies
using portions of TM6, TM7, and the EL3 that connects them showed that
this loop has an -helical structure and that the ligand,
cholecystokinin-8, interacts with this loop and TM6 (29). Solution
structure of the homocysteine disulfide bond-constrained EL2 of human
thromboxane A2 receptor (TP) showed that its EL2 contains
two -turns in the middle of the loop (44). This loop was previously
proposed to be involved in ligand binding. In another study, the
structure of EL1 of angiotensin II AT1 receptor was
determined using CD and fluorescence (45). These studies showed that
EL1 of this receptor formed a -turn in the middle of the loop and
this loop played an important role in ligand binding. Finally, using a
combination of CD, fluorescence, NMR, and molecular dynamic modeling on
EL2 of the -opioid receptor in dodecylphosphocholine micelles, Zhang et al. (46) showed that this loop,
previously proposed to be the ligand-binding site for dynorphin, is
highly amphiphilic and contains a well defined helical structure and a
-turn in the middle of the loop. Consistent with the observations presented for EL1 of Ste2p in the present report, the studies on these
other peptide-binding GPCRs clearly demonstrate that their
extracellular loops may have distinct structural elements that are
important for either ligand binding or overall structural stabilization
and proper folding of the receptor.
Activation of GPCRs requires switching of the interhelical constraints
that stabilize the inactive state to a new set of contacts in the
activated state. The free energy for this activation process comes from
binding of the ligand, which in turn results in activation of the G
protein. Given that a signaling-deficient phenotype is observed at five
periodically located positions of the NH2-terminal region
of EL1, this loop of Ste2p may be important in forming part of the
network of interhelical constraints that defines the off-state of a
general transmembrane switch.
In conclusion, our studies with EL1 of Ste2p show that residues
102-114 of this loop are important in initiation of the pheromone signal transduction pathway in yeast but not in pheromone binding itself. To our knowledge, this is the first example of a GPCR, wherein
specific residues in an extracellular loop contribute to the ability of
the receptor to initiate signaling, leading us to surmise that specific
residues of EL1 are involved in the attainment of the activated state
of the receptor. Further studies with this loop and the other
extracellular loops of Ste2p should bring additional insights into how
this and other GPCRs are activated.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
This work was supported in part by Grants GM22086 and
GM22087 from the National Institutes of Health.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 the Office of Biological and Environmental Research,
U.S. Department of Energy, under contract DE-AC05-00OR22725, managed
by UT-Battelle, LLC.
§§
To whom correspondence should be addressed: Dept. of
Biochemistry, Cellular, and Molecular Biology, M407 Walters Life
Sciences Bldg., The University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996. Tel.: 865-974-3006; Fax: 865-974-0361; E-mail: jbecker@utk.edu.
Published, JBC Papers in Press, June 10, 2002, DOI 10.1074/jbc.M204089200
 |
ABBREVIATIONS |
The abbreviations used are:
GPCR, G
protein-coupled receptor;
Cys-less, Ste2p.FT.HT receptor devoid of its
native cysteines;
EL, extracellular loop;
EL1-(103-132), a synthetic
peptide with the sequence LSNYSSVTYALTGFPQFISRGDVHVYGATNG;
G protein, guanine nucleotide binding protein;
[3H] -factor, [3H-Pro8,Nle12] -factor;
IL, intracellular loop;
[Nle12] -factor, form of -factor
with norleucine in place of methionine at position 12;
Ste2p.FT.HT, Ste2p receptor with FLAGTM epitope and His6
tag;
TM, transmembrane domain;
Wang resin, (4-hydroxymethyl)phenoxymethyl on 1% cross-linked polystyrene resin (bead);
WT, wild-type;
FT, FLAG epitope;
HT, His6
tag.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Edwards, S. W.,
Tan, C. M.,
and Limbird, L. E.
(2000)
Trends Pharmacol. Sci.
21,
304-308[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 2.
|
Dowell, S. J.
(2001)
Drug Discov. Today
6,
884-886[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 3.
|
Wise, A.,
Gearing, K.,
and Rees, S.
(2002)
Drug Discov. Today
7,
235-246[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 4.
|
Lu, Z. L.,
Saldanha, J. W.,
and Hulme, E. C.
(2002)
Trends Pharmacol. Sci.
23,
140-146[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 5.
|
Lefkowitz, R. J.
(2000)
Nat. Cell Biol.
2,
E133-E136[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 6.
|
Kenakin, T.
(1997)
Trends Pharmacol. Sci.
18,
416-417[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 7.
|
Gether, U.,
and Kobilka, B. K.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
17979-17982[Free Full Text]
|
| 8.
|
Dohlman, H. G.,
Thorner, J.,
Caron, M. G.,
and Lefkowitz, R. J.
(1991)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
60,
653-688[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 9.
|
Schwartz, T. W.
(1996)
Textbook of Receptor Pharmacology
, pp. 65-84, CRC Press Inc., Boca Raton, FL
|
| 10.
|
Schoneberg, T.,
Schultz, G.,
and Gudermann, T.
(1999)
Mol. Cell. Endocrinol.
151,
181-193[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 11.
|
Gether, U.
(2000)
Endocr. Rev.
21,
90-113[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 12.
|
Blumer, K. J.,
Reneke, J. E.,
Courchesne, W. E.,
and Thorner, J.
(1988)
Cold Spring Harbor Symp. Quant. Biol.
53,
591-603
|
| 13.
|
Konopka, J. B.,
and Fields, S.
(1992)
Antonie Leeuwenhoek
62,
95-108
|
| 14.
|
Sprague, G. F. J.,
and Thorner, J. W.
(1992)
The Molecular and Cellular Biology of the Yeast Saccharomyces
, Vol. II
, pp. 657-741, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press, Cold Spring Harbor, NY
|
| 15.
|
Kurjan, J.
(1992)
Annu. Rev. Biochem.
61,
1097-1129[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 16.
|
Banuett, F.
(1998)
Microbiol. Mol. Biol. Rev.
62,
249-274[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 17.
|
Palczewski, K.,
Kumasaka, T.,
Hori, T.,
Behnke, C. A.,
Motoshima, H.,
Fox, B. A., Le,
Trong, I.,
Teller, D. C.,
Okada, T.,
Stenkamp, R. E.,
Yamamoto, M.,
and Miyano, M.
(2000)
Science
289,
739-745[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 18.
|
Kunishima, N.,
Shimada, Y.,
Tsuji, Y.,
Sato, T.,
Yamamoto, M.,
Kumasaka, T.,
Nakanishi, S.,
Jingami, H.,
and Morikawa, K.
(2000)
Nature
407,
971-977[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 19.
|
Baldwin, J. M.
(1994)
Curr. Opin. Cell Biol.
6,
180-190[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 20.
|
Coughlin, S. R.
(1994)
Curr. Opin. Cell Biol.
6,
191-197[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 21.
|
Ji, T. H.,
Grossmann, M.,
and Ji, I.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
17299-17302[Free Full Text]
|
| 22.
|
Marshall, G. R.
(2001)
Biopolymers
60,
246-277[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 23.
|
Trumpp-Kallmeyer, S.,
Hoflack, J.,
Bruinvels, A.,
and Hibert, M.
(1992)
J. Med. Chem.
35,
3448-3462[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 24.
|
Holtmann, M. H.,
Ganguli, S.,
Hadac, E. M.,
Dolu, V.,
and Miller, L. J.
(1996)
J. Biol. Chem.
271,
14944-14949[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 25.
|
Hoffmann, C.,
Moro, S.,
Nicholas, R. A.,
Harden, T. K.,
and Jacobson, K. A.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
14639-14647[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 26.
|
Moro, S.,
Hoffmann, C.,
and Jacobson, K. A.
(1999)
Biochemistry
38,
3498-3507[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 27.
|
Stillman, B. A.,
Breyer, M. D.,
and Breyer, R. M.
(1999)
Mol. Pharmacol.
56,
545-551[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 28.
|
Blackhart, B. D.,
Ruslim-Litrus, L., Lu, C. C.,
Alves, V. L.,
Teng, W.,
Scarborough, R. M.,
Reynolds, E. E.,
and Oksenberg, D.
(2000)
Mol. Pharmacol.
58,
1178-1187[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 29.
|
Giragossian, C.,
and Mierke, D. F.
(2001)
Biochemistry
40,
3804-3809[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 30.
|
Audoly, L.,
and Breyer, R. M.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
13475-13478[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 31.
|
Ryu, K.,
Gilchrist, R. L.,
Tung, C. S., Ji, I.,
and Ji, T. H.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
28953-28958[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 32.
|
Ryu, K.,
Lee, H.,
Kim, S.,
Beauchamp, J.,
Tung, C. S.,
Isaacs, N. W., Ji, I.,
and Ji, T. H.
(1998)
J. Biol. Chem.
273,
6285-6291[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 33.
|
Stillman, B. A.,
Audoly, L.,
and Breyer, R. M.
(1998)
Eur. J. Pharmacol.
357,
73-82[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 34.
|
Han, K. H.,
Green, S. R.,
Tangirala, R. K.,
Tanaka, S.,
and Quehenberger, O.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
32055-32062[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 35.
|
Mouledous, L.,
Topham, C. M.,
Mazarguil, H.,
and Meunier, J. C.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
29268-29274[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 36.
|
Shi, L.,
and Javitch, J. A.
(2002)
Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol.
42,
437-467[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 37.
|
Behar, V.,
Bisello, A.,
Rosenblatt, M.,
and Chorev, M.
(1999)
Endocrinology
140,
4251-4261[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 38.
|
Boucard, A. A.,
Wilkes, B. C.,
Laporte, S. A.,
Escher, E.,
Guillemette, G.,
and Leduc, R.
(2000)
Biochemistry
39,
9662-9670[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 39.
|
Greenberg, Z.,
Bisello, A.,
Mierke, D. F.,
Rosenblatt, M.,
and Chorev, M.
(2000)
Biochemistry
39,
8142-8152[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 40.
|
Dong, M.,
Wang, Y.,
Pinon, D. I.,
Hadac, E. M.,
and Miller, L. J.
(1999)
J. Biol. Chem.
274,
903-909[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 41.
|
Wille, S.,
Sydow, S.,
Palchaudhuri, M. R.,
Spiess, J.,
and Dautzenberg, F. M.
(1999)
J. Neurochem.
72,
388-395[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 42.
|
Nielsen, S. M.,
Nielsen, L. Z.,
Hjorth, S. A.,
Perrin, M. H.,
and Vale, W. W.
(2000)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
97,
10277-10281[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 43.
|
Piserchio, A.,
Bisello, A.,
Rosenblatt, M.,
Chorev, M.,
and Mierke, D. F.
(2000)
Biochemistry
39,
8153-8160[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 44.
|
Ruan, K. H., So, S. P., Wu, J., Li, D.,
Huang, A.,
and Kung, J.
(2001)
Biochemistry
40,
275-280[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 45.
|
Schreier, S.,
Salinas, R. K.,
Shida, C. S.,
Pertinhez, T. A.,
Spisni, A.,
Nakaie, C. R.,
and Paiva, A. C. M.
(2001)
in
Peptides: The Wave of the Future
(Lebl, M.
, and Houghten, R. A., eds)
, pp. 911-912, American Peptide Society and Kluwer Academic Publishers, San Diego
|
| 46.
|
Zhang, L.,
DeHaven, R. N.,
and Goodman, M.
(2002)
Biochemistry
41,
61-68[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 47.
|
Sen, M.,
and Marsh, L.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
968-973[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 48.
|
Sen, M.,
Shah, A.,
and Marsh, L.
(1997)
Curr. Genet.
31,
235-240[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 49.
|
Abel, M. G.,
Lee, B. K.,
Naider, F.,
and Becker, J. M.
(1998)
Biochim. Biophys. Acta
1448,
12-26[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 50.
|
Lee, B. K.,
Khare, S.,
Naider, F.,
and Becker, J. M.
(2001)
J. Biol. Chem.
276,
37950-37961[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 51.
|
Ding, F. X.,
Lee, B. K.,
Hauser, M.,
Davenport, L.,
Becker, J. M.,
and Naider, F.
(2001)
Biochemistry
40,
1102-1108[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 52.
|
Mentesana, P. E.,
and Konopka, J. B.
(2001)
Biochemistry
40,
9685-9694[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 53.
|
Henry, L. K.,
Khare, S.,
Son, C.,
Naider, F.,
and Becker, J. M.
(2002)
Biochemistry
41,
6128-6139[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 54.
|
David, N. E.,
Gee, M.,
Andersen, B.,
Naider, F.,
Thorner, J.,
and Stevens, R. C.
(1997)
J. Biol. Chem.
272,
15553-15561[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 55.
|
Vieira, J.,
and Messing, J.
(1987)
Methods Enzymol.
153,
3-11[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 56.
|
Kunkel, T. A.
(1985)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
82,
488-492[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 57.
|
Kunkel, T. A.,
Roberts, J. D.,
and Zakour, R. A.
(1987)
Methods Enzymol.
154,
367-382[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 58.
|
Raths, S. K.,
Naider, F.,
and Becker, J. M.
(1988)
J. Biol. Chem.
263,
17333-17341[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 59.
|
Kippert, F.
(1995)
FEMS Microbiol. Lett.
128,
201-206[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 60.
|
Guarente, L.
(1983)
Methods Enzymol.
101,
181-191[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 61.
|
Miller, J. H.
(ed)
(1972)
Experiments in Molecular Genetics
, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, NY
|
| 62.
|
Abel, M. G.,
Zhang, Y. L., Lu, H. F.,
Naider, F.,
and Becker, J. M.
(1998)
J. Pept. Res.
52,
95-106[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 63.
|
Liu, S.,
Henry, L. K.,
Lee, B. K.,
Wang, S. H.,
Arshava, B.,
Becker, J. M.,
and Naider, F.
(2000)
J. Pept. Res.
56,
24-34[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 64.
|
Cheng, Y.,
and Prusoff, W. H.
(1973)
Biochem. Pharmacol.
22,
3099-3108[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 65.
|
Xu, Y.,
and Xu, D.
(2000)
Proteins
40,
343-354[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 66.
|
Xu, Y., Xu, D.,
and Olman, V.
(2002)
Statistica Sinica
12,
159-177
|
| 67.
|
Sali, A.,
and Blundell, T. L.
(1993)
J. Mol. Biol.
234,
779-815[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 68.
|
Hirokawa, T.,
Boon-Chieng, S.,
and Mitaku, S.
(1998)
Bioinformatics
14,
378-379[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 69.
|
Jones, D. T.,
Taylor, W. R.,
and Thornton, J. M.
(1994)
Biochemistry
33,
3038-3049[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 70.
|
Jones, D. T.
(1999)
J. Mol. Biol.
292,
195-202[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 71.
|
Rost, B.,
and Sander, C.
(1993)
J. Mol. Biol.
232,
584-599[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 72.
|
King, D. S.,
Fields, C. G.,
and Fields, G. B.
(1990)
Int. J. Pept. Protein Res.
36,
255-266[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 73.
|
Carpenter, K. A.,
Schmidt, R.,
Yue, S. Y.,
Hodzic, L.,
Pou, C.,
Payza, K.,
Godbout, C.,
Brown, W.,
and Roberts, E.
(1999)
Biochemistry
38,
15295-15304[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 74.
|
Martin, N. P.,
Leavitt, L. M.,
Sommers, C. M.,
and Dumont, M. E.
(1999)
Biochemistry
38,
682-695[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 75.
|
Dube, P.,
DeCostanzo, A.,
and Konopka, J. B.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
26492-26499[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 76.
|
Jenness, D. D.,
Burkholder, A. C.,
and Hartwell, L. H.
(1986)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
6,
318-320[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 77.
|
Clark, C. D.,
Palzkill, T.,
and Botstein, D.
(1994)
J. Biol. Chem.
269,
8831-8841[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 78.
|
Konopka, J. B.,
Margarit, S. M.,
and Dube, P.
(1996)
Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.
93,
6764-6769[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 79.
|
Dube, P.,
and Konopka, J. B.
(1998)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18,
7205-7215[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 80.
|
Sommers, C. M.,
and Dumont, M. E.
(1999)
in
Structure-Function Analysis of G Protein-coupled Receptors
(Wess, J., ed)
, pp. 141-166, Wiley-Liss Inc., New York
|
| 81.
|
Martin, N. P.,
Celic, A.,
and Dumont, M. E.
(2002)
J. Mol. Biol.
317,
765-788[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 82.
|
Dosil, M.,
Giot, L.,
Davis, C.,
and Konopka, J. B.
(1998)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
18,
5981-5991[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 83.
|
Leavitt, L. M.,
Macaluso, C. R.,
Kim, K. S.,
Martin, N. P.,
and Dumont, M. E.
(1999)
Mol. Gen. Genet.
261,
917-932[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 84.
|
Bernstein, F. C.,
Koetzle, T. F.,
Williams, G. J.,
Meyer, E. F., Jr.,
Brice, M. D.,
Rodgers, J. R.,
Kennard, O.,
Shimanouchi, T.,
and Tasumi, M.
(1977)
J. Mol. Biol.
112,
535-542[Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 85.
|
Frillingos, S.,
Sahin-Toth, M., Wu, J.,
and Kaback, H. R.
(1998)
FASEB J.
12,
1281-1299[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 86.
|
Javitch, J. A.,
Ballesteros, J. A.,
Chen, J.,
Chiappa, V.,
and Simpson, M. M.
(1999)
Biochemistry
38,
7961-7968[CrossRef][Medline]
[Order article via Infotrieve]
|
| 87.
|
Iwaki, S.,
Tamura, N.,
Kimura-Someya, T.,
Nada, S.,
and Yamaguchi, A.
(2000)
J. Biol. Chem.
275,
22704-22712[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
| 88.
|
Dosil, M.,
Schandel, K. A.,
Gupta, E.,
Jenness, D. D.,
and Konopka, J. B.
(2000)
Mol. Cell. Biol.
20,
5321-5329[Abstract/Free Full Text]
|
Copyright © 2002 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:

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. Hauser, S. Kauffman, B.-K. Lee, F. Naider, and J. M. Becker
The First Extracellular Loop of the Saccharomyces cerevisiae G Protein-coupled Receptor Ste2p Undergoes a Conformational Change upon Ligand Binding
J. Biol. Chem.,
April 6, 2007;
282(14):
10387 - 10397.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. M. Klco, G. V. Nikiforovich, and T. J. Baranski
Genetic Analysis of the First and Third Extracellular Loops of the C5a Receptor Reveals an Essential WXFG Motif in the First Loop
J. Biol. Chem.,
April 28, 2006;
281(17):
12010 - 12019.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
J. C. Lin, K. Duell, and J. B. Konopka
A Microdomain Formed by the Extracellular Ends of the Transmembrane Domains Promotes Activation of the G Protein-Coupled {alpha}-Factor Receptor
Mol. Cell. Biol.,
March 1, 2004;
24(5):
2041 - 2051.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|
Copyright © 2002 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
|