Advertisement
JBC

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Originally published In Press as doi:10.1074/jbc.M404748200 on September 2, 2004

J. Biol. Chem., Vol. 279, Issue 49, 51590-51600, December 3, 2004
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplemental Data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
279/49/51590    most recent
M404748200v1
Right arrow Submit a Letter to Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kleinau, G.
Right arrow Articles by Krause, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kleinau, G.
Right arrow Articles by Krause, G.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Identification of a Novel Epitope in the Thyroid-stimulating Hormone Receptor Ectodomain Acting as Intramolecular Signaling Interface*

Gunnar Kleinau{ddagger}, Holger Jäschke§, Susanne Neumann§, Jens Lättig{ddagger}, Ralf Paschke§, and Gerd Krause{ddagger}||

From the {ddagger}Forschungsinstitut für Molekulare Pharmakologie, D-13125 Berlin, Germany, the §III Department of Medicine, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig, D-04103 Leipzig, Germany, and NIDDK, National Institutes of Health, CEB, Bethesda, Maryland 20892

Received for publication, April 28, 2004 , and in revised form, September 1, 2004.


   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Glycoprotein hormone receptors (GPHRs) differ from the other seven transmembrane receptors mainly through a complex activation mechanism that requires the binding of a large hormone toward a large N-terminal ectodomain. The intramolecular mechanism of the signal transduction to the serpentine domain upon hormone binding at the ectodomain is not understood. To identify determinants at the GPHR ectodomain that may be involved in signal transduction, we first searched for homologous structural features. Based on high sequence similarity to the determined structures of the Nogo-receptor ectodomain and the intermolecular complex of the Interleukin-8 ligand (IL8) and the N-terminal peptide of the IL8 receptor (IL8RA), the hypothesis was developed that portions of the intramolecular components, Cysteine-box-2 and Cysteine-box-3, of the GPHR ectodomain interact and localize at the interface between ectodomain and serpentine domain. Indeed, point mutations within the D403EFN406 motif at Cysteine-box-3 of the thyrotropin receptor resulted in increased basal cAMP levels, suggesting that this motif may be important for transduction of the signal from the ectodomain to the transmembrane domain. New indications are provided about the tight spatial cooperation and relative location of the new epitope and other determinants at the thyrotropin receptor ectodomain, such as the leucine-rich repeat motif Ser281 and the cysteine boxes. According to the high sequence conservation, the results are of general relevance for the signal transduction mechanism of other glycoprotein hormone receptors such as choriogonadotrophic/luteinizing hormone receptor and follicle-stimulating hormone receptor.


   INTRODUCTION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
The glycoprotein hormone receptors (GPHRs)1 CG/LHR, FSHR, TSHR, and the leucine-rich repeat-containing glycoprotein receptors constitute a subfamily of family A of G-protein-coupled receptors (1). Understanding the specific molecular mechanisms, starting with binding of the heterodimeric hormone to the large ectodomain, and knowledge about the changes in interactions between the ectodomain and transmembrane domain are prerequisites for understanding the specific activation mechanism of GPHRs. Furthermore, it is instrumental in generating new ideas for pharmacological intervention. An x-ray structure of the large ectodomain is not yet available. Based on sequence similarities, the large N-terminal portion of the TSHR seems to consist of five structural components: (i) an N-terminal C-b1 (hTSHR: 1-54), (ii) a 230-amino acid-spanning LRR motif (hTSHR: 55-279) with nine repeats back-to-back followed by (iii) the central C-b2 (hTSHR: 280-316), (iv) the TSHR-specific insertion region (hTSHR: 317-366), and (v) the C-b3 (hTSHR: 370-410) located close to TMH1 (2). For GPHRs it has been demonstrated that the major binding region for the large hormones hCG/hLH, hTSH, and hFSH is located in the extracellular leucine-rich repeat region (3). The crystal structures of 14 proteins containing LRR motifs show that LRRs fold into a curved shape with a parallel {beta}-sheet on the concave face and with various secondary structures, including {alpha}-helix, 3-10 helix, and pII helix, on the convex face (4). Exposed side chains on the concave face are supposed to contact the ligands and provide selective interaction patterns for hormone receptor binding (5). The structures of hCG (PDB accession number 1QFW [PDB] (6)) and hFSH (PDB accession number 1FL7 [PDB] (7)) have been determined. Data of peptide studies and mutagenesis provide established knowledge about direct interaction of the hormone {beta}-subunits and the LRRs (8, 9), whereas the hormone {alpha}-subunit is supposed to be oriented toward the serpentine domain and to be involved in ligand-induced signaling (10, 11). However, the LRR sequence is only one portion in the middle of the complete N-terminal sequence, and there are additional structural components between the LRRs and the TMH1 of the serpentine domain whose three-dimensional structure is unknown. Moreover, it is not completely understood how the intramolecular signal transduction toward the serpentine domain of the GPHR takes place.

The central C-b2 is located back-to-back following the LRR region. Mutants at Ser281, directly preceding the first cysteine in C-b2, are known to act as a switch for constitutive activity (12). The structural interrelation between the constitutive active mutant S281N and the necessary presence of the complete LRR motif has been shown by deletion studies for the hCG/LHR (13). N-terminal truncations of the TSHR ectodomain (14) and mutational studies at corresponding positions of the leucine-rich repeat-containing glycoprotein receptor 2, the CG/LHR, and the FSHR demonstrated the importance of the Ser281 region for the maintenance of a conformational switch in all four glycoprotein hormone receptors (15, 16). Recent studies suggest that amino acids Pro276 and Ser277 in CG/LHR (TSHR: Pro280, Ser281) are constituents of a loop-like epitope that can act as an activation switch (15). This is confirmed by substitution of a proline residue, Pro276, (TSHR: Pro280) adjacent to Ser277 (TSHR: Ser281) of the CG/LH receptor with a glycine that exerts less structural restraint and leads to constitutive receptor activation and higher agonist affinity. Mutations of the TSHR cysteines Cys283 and Cys284 to serine led to a 2-fold increase of basal TSHR activity (17).

Disulfide bonds are involved in the quaternary structure of the TSHR (18). Although there are currently no direct data to indicate which of the single cysteines form pairs, a number of indirect lines of evidence permit global assignments of disulfide bridges (19, 20). Mutations of Cys283, Cys284 (C-b2) and Cys398, Cys408 (C-b3) have dramatic effects on the TSHR structure and TSH binding. The hypothesis that Cys301 (C-b2) and Cys390 (C-b3) are paired is supported by recent evidence that intramolecular cleavage of the TSHR releases a "C peptide" located between these two residues (21). Further evidence is provided by the fact that mutation of either Cys301 or Cys390 produces the identical effect of reduced hTSH binding affinity (22). Moreover, the CG/LH receptor of New World monkey Callithrix jacchus (23) is missing exon 10 encoding the particular cysteine corresponding to Cys301 of TSHR. Additionally, this receptor is simultaneously also missing the cysteine corresponding to Cys390 TSHR. Taken together, the two neighboring cysteines Cys283 and Cys284 of C-b2 are very likely paired either to Cys398 and Cys408 of C-b3 or in reversed order to Cys408 and Cys398, whereas the Cys301 (C-b2) is very likely paired with Cys390 (C-b3). For the large extracellular N-terminal tail of GPHRs, only molecular models for the LRR have been suggested (24, 25), based on the first available LRR crystal structure of the ribonuclease inhibitor (26).

To provide support for the molecular understanding of the signal transduction process upon hormone binding at the glycoprotein hormone receptor ectodomain, we decided to determine how the LRR region cooperates with other fragments of the ectodomain, like C-b2 and C-b3. To identify determinants in the ectodomain that may be involved in the intramolecular signal transduction and to obtain indications for their spatial cooperation, we searched for an optimal structural LRR template and for additional homologous structural motifs in the ectodomain. Sequence similarities between the central C-b2 and C-b3 with the IL8/CXCL8 chemokine and IL8RA/CXCR1 in a structure complex (PDB accession number 1ILQ [PDB] (27)) of an IL8-IL8RA fragment, respectively, led us to propose a tightly packed model of the ectodomain.

In this ectodomain model, C-b3 is located at a prominent interface position between ectodomain and serpentine domain, close to the transmembrane domain, and is therefore very likely a necessary transducer of the intramolecular signal transduction. Based on the proposed model, Asp403, Glu404, Asn406 in C-b3 were targeted for mutagenesis and shown to play a role in the signal transduction mechanism. They resulted in the identification of new residues within C-b3 (Asp403, Glu404, Asn406) that are significantly involved in the intramolecular signal transduction. These residues are located in close spatial proximity to Ser281. In this study we have demonstrated that the combination of comparative modeling and site-directed mutagenesis at the ectodomain of the TSHR allowed the localization of a new site within C-b3 that is involved in intramolecular signal transduction toward the serpentine domain by acting as a conformational switch for constitutive TSHR activity.


   MATERIALS AND METHODS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Structural Bioinformatics and Comparative Modeling—To select an optimal structural template for the LRRs of the GPHR ectodomain, 14 different protein structures with LRR motifs available in the Protein Data Bank (28) were analyzed. The LRR templates were ranked according to the closest number of repeats, residues/repeat, and highest sequence similarity compared with TSHR, CG/LHR, and FSHR (ranked PDB entries 1OZN [PDB] , 1FQV [PDB] , 2BNH [PDB] , 1YRG [PDB] , 1D0B [PDB] , 1M0Z [PDB] , 1O6T [PDB] , 1G9U [PDB] , 1H6U [PDB] , 1DCE [PDB] , 1DS9 [PDB] , 1A9N [PDB] , 1IO0 [PDB] , 1FT8 [PDB] ). The best matching template from the recently deposited hNogo-receptor ectodomain (PDB entry 1OZN [PDB] (29)) was used for comparative modeling, constructing LRR motifs of TSHR (residues 23-279), CG/LHR (residues 40-275), and FSHR (residues 28-271) containing N- and C-terminal flanking residues. For model building, the Sybyl program package (TRIPOS Inc., St. Louis, MO) and the AMBER 7.0 (30) force field were used.

To reveal new homologous structural templates in the ectodomain of the TSHR, in addition to the LRR motif, extensive systematic sequence similarity searches of fragmented sequence portions of different lengths of the ectodomain were conducted in the Protein Data Bank by means of FASTA. Because of the lack of structural templates for the TSHR-specific region containing two cleavage sites, a polyglycine loop was used to link the structural components of C-b2 and C-b3. One putative disulfide bridge between Cys283 (C-b2) and Cys408 (C-b3) for the TSHR resulting from the structural template IL8-IL8RA fragment complex (PDB entry 1ILQ [PDB] (27)) was used as a model constraint. For the TSHR ectodomain model, the following disulfide bridges were formed: Cys24/Cys31, Cys29/Cys41, Cys283 or Cys284/Cys408, Cys284 or Cys283/Cys398, Cys301/Cys390. Structures of hCG (PDB entry 1QFW [PDB] (6)) and hFSH (PDB entry 1FL7 [PDB] (7)) are available. The TSH was modeled by homology using the hFSH structure as template. For the hTSH model, disulfide bridges between cysteines were incorporated based on the template: {alpha}-subunit, Cys31/Cys55, Cys34/Cys84, Cys52/Cys106, Cys56/Cys108, Cys83/Cys111; {beta}-subunit, Cys22/Cys72, Cys36/Cys87, Cys39/Cys125, Cys47/Cys103, Cys51/Cys105, and Cys108/Cys115. Conjugate gradient minimizations were performed until it converged at a termination gradient of 0.05 kcal/(mol*Å). The AMBER 7.0 force field was used. The geometric quality of the models was controlled by the PROCHECK (31) software.

Modeling of Hormone-Receptor Ectodomain Interactions—Components of homologous models were assembled manually or by constrained molecular dynamic simulations using functional data and complementary side chain properties with the biopolymer module or automatically using the docking module FlexX of the Sybyl program package. The electrostatic potentials (calculated by a probe radius of 2.0 Å) were created at the Connolly surface of all three GPHR LRRs and corresponding hormones by the MolCad module of the Sybyl program package. The hormones hTSH, hCG, and hFSH were initially placed close to the corresponding GPHR LRRs according to their complementary electrostatic potentials. The hormones were docked during a constrained molecular dynamics simulation. Putative interaction pairs TSHR Lys209-Asp111TSH, CG/LHR Glu206-Arg115CG, FHSR Lys179-Asp108FSH were used as constraints according to experimental data (5, 32), allowing complementary side chain interaction (repulsion and attraction) for the remaining portions. The models were scored according to their consistency to available experimental binding data. All assembling calculations were performed in a vacuum.

The assembled ectodomain-ligand models of the three GPHRs were soaked with water in a periodic boundary box. Initially the ectodomain atoms were kept fixed to relax the water during minimization. Later on, the entire system was studied. Minimizations were performed as described above. Molecular dynamics simulations were performed at 300 K for 1 ns. For both, the AMBER 7.0 force field was used; the geometric quality of the model was controlled by the PROCHECK software (31).

Site-directed Mutagenesis—Mutations were introduced into the human TSHR via a QuikChange site-directed mutagenesis kit (Stratagene). TSHR-pSVL (33) was used as template. PCR products containing the mutations were digested with BspTI and Eco91I (MBI Fermentas) and used to replace the analogous BspTI/Eco91I fragment in the wild type TSHR-pSVL vector. Sequences of mutated TSH receptors were verified by dideoxy sequencing with Big Dye Terminator Cycle Sequencing chemistry (ABI Advanced Biotechnolgies, Inc., Columbia, MD). Sequencing reactions were analyzed on a genetic analyzer ABI 310 (ABI Advanced Biotechnologies).

The mutated receptors were cloned in the expression vector pSVL and transiently expressed in COS-7 cells. Characterization of the constructs was performed by determination of cAMP and phospholipase C-inositol phosphate accumulation, TSH binding, and cell surface expression. The wt receptor and empty pSVL vector were used as controls. Levels for cell surface expression were determined by flow cytometry.

Cell Culture and Transfection—COS-7 cells were grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum, 100 units/ml penicillin, and 100 µg/ml streptomycin (Invitrogen) at 37 °C in a humidified 5% CO2 incubator. Cells were transiently transfected in 24-well plates (0.5 x 105 cells/well) with 0.5 µg of DNA/well for cAMP accumulation and TSH binding analysis. For determination of inositol phosphate (IP) formation, cells were transiently transfected in 12-well plates (1 x 105 cells/well) with 1 µg of DNA/well. COS-7 cells were transfected using FuGENETM6 reagent (Roche Applied Science).

FACS Analysis—48 h after transfection, nonpermeabilized cells were detached from the dishes using 1 mM EDTA and 1 mM EGTA in PBS and transferred in Falcon 2054 tubes. Before incubation with the primary antibody, cells were washed once with PBS containing 0.1% bovine serum albumin and 0.1% NaN3. For permeabilized cell assay, in the first step cells were fixed with 1% paraformaldehyde for 10 min on ice following an incubation with PBS containing 0.1% bovine serum albumin, 0.1% NaN3, and 0.2% saponin for 30 min. Saponin was supplemented in all subsequent buffers. Subsequently, cells were incubated for 1 h with a mouse anti-human TSHR antibody (10 µg/ml, 2C11; Serotec, Oxford, UK). Cells were washed twice and incubated for 1 h in the dark with a fluorescein-conjugated F(ab')2 rabbit antimouse IgG (Serotec). Before FACS analysis (FACscan; BD Biosciences), cells were washed twice and fixed with 1% paraformaldehyde. Receptor expression was determined by fluorescence intensity; the percentage of signal positive cells corresponded to transfection efficiency.

Radioligand Binding Assay—Competitive binding studies were performed as previously described (34). Data were analyzed assuming a one-site binding model using the fitting module of SigmaPlot 2.0 for Windows (35).

cAMP Accumulation Assay—Measurement of cyclic AMP (cAMP) accumulation was performed 48 h after transfection as previously described (34).

Stimulation of IP Formation—Transfected COS-7 cells were incubated with 2 µCi/ml myo[3H]inositol (Amersham Biosciences) for 8 h. Thereafter, cells were preincubated with serum-free Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium containing 10 mM LiCl2 for 30 min. Stimulation with bTSH for 1 h was performed with the same medium supplemented with 100 milliunits/ml bTSH. Evaluation of basal and TSH-induced increases in intracellular IP levels was performed by anion exchange chromatography as described (36). IP values are expressed as the percentage of radioactivity incorporated from [H]inositol phosphates (IP1-3) over the sum of radioactivity incorporated in IPs and phosphatidylinositols.

Specific Constitutive Activity (SCA)—The assays for determination of Bmax values and basal cAMP accumulation were performed as follows: COS-7 cells were transiently transfected in 24-well plates (0.5 x 105 cells/well) with various concentrations of wt and mutant DNA (50, 100, 200, 300, 400, and 500 ng/well). For radioligand binding assays, cells were incubated in the presence of 180,000-200,000 cpm of 125I bovine thyrotropin (bTSH) supplemented with 5 milliunits/ml nonlabeled bTSH. The effect of expression level on basal cAMP accumulation was analyzed according to Ballesteros et al. (37) using the fitting module of Graph Pad Prism 2.01 for Windows.

Confocal Laser Scanning Microscopy—HEK 293 cells were grown in Dulbecco's modified Eagle's medium supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum, 100 units/ml penicillin, and 100 µg/ml streptomycin (Invitrogen) at 37 °C in a humidified 5% CO2 incubator. Cells were seeded on coverslips into 6-well plates (2.5 x 105 HEK 293 cells/well). The cells were incubated 36 h before transfection with plasmid constructs (2.5 µg of DNA/well) containing the coding sequence of the wt or mutated TSHRs. 48 h after transfection, coverslips were rinsed two times with ice-cold PBS and fixed with 2% paraformaldehyde containing 0.1% Triton X-100 (for permeabilization) for 30 min at 4 °C. After two 5-min wash steps with cold PBS, the cells were incubated with the primary antibody for 1 h at 4 °C. TSHR was detected using the anti-human TSHR antibody (2C11; Serotec; 1:500 in PBS). The cells were washed two times for 5 min with cold PBS, and the primary antibody was detected by incubation with an Alexa-Fluor® 488-conjugated goat anti-mouse secondary antibody (Molecular Probes, Eugene, OR; 1:1000 in PBS) for 1 h at 4 °C. After four final 5-min wash steps, the coverslips were mounted on glass slides. Confocal analysis was performed on a confocal laser scanning system (TCS SP2; Leica) attached to a microscope (DM IRBE; Leica) with a x100 oil immersion lens (PL Fluotar 1.3; Leica). Sections (0.45 µm) were taken, and representative sections corresponding to the middle section of the cells are presented in Fig. 3B. After indirect immunofluorescence staining, no specific fluorescence was observed in untransfected HEK 293 cells or in transfected HEK 293 cells treated only with secondary Alexa-Fluor® 488-conjugated antibody.




View larger version (59K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 3.
Characteristics of mutants at the TSHR epitope Asp403-Asn406. A, cell surface expression by FACS analysis of wt and mutated TSHRs in COS-7 cells. B, comparison of cell surface expression of wt TSHR and mutated TSHR in non-permeabilized (np) and permeabilized (p) cells by FACS analysis and confocal laser scanning microscopy (HEK 293 cells). FACS data are presented as mean ± S.E. of three independent experiments, each performed in duplicate. After permeabilization of the cells, receptors with impaired cell surface expression (D403A, D403K, E404K) showed an increased FACS signal up to 60% compared with the wt TSHR. In confocal laser scanning microscopy experiments, TSHR mutants D403A, D403K, and E404K show strong intracellular receptor accumulation after permeabilization. This is in accordance with the results obtained by FACS analysis. C, Bmax values were determined by homologous competitive binding experiments. D, the TSHR has been described to be basal active in cAMP signaling. Therefore, elevated basal cAMP levels of cells expressing the wt TSHR in comparison with the pSVL vector alone can be observed after transient transfection of COS-7 cells. Because of the basal activity of the wt TSHR, cAMP levels are expressed as -fold over wt TSHR basal level. E and G, maximum increases in cAMP and IP1-3 levels were determined after stimulation with 100 milliunits of bTSH/ml. F, IP1-3 basal activity. H, effect of receptor density at the cell surface on basal cAMP accumulation. COS-7 cells were transiently transfected with increasing amounts of plasmids encoding wt TSHR or mutant TSHRs. Values were expressed as a function of receptor density at the cell surface, and lines were calculated by linear regression analysis. All data are presented as mean ± S.E. of three independent experiments, each performed in duplicate. The values for slopes are as follows: TSHR (0.0024 ± 0.0002) <N406A (0.031 ± 0.003) <D403A (0.032 ± 0.004) <E404K (0.042 ± 0.004).

 

   RESULTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 
Hormone-bound LRR Complex—Studies were carried out to examine the optimal structural template for the LRR domain of the GPHR. The LRR motif from the Nogo-receptor ectodomain (PDB entry 1OZN [PDB] ) (29) was identified from 14 different LRR structures (4) as the best matching template to the LRR features of all three human GPHRs (Table I, hNogo-receptor: hCG/LHR, hFSHR, hTSHR).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE I
LRR repeat-wise sequence alignments of N-terminal Cysteine-box-1, LRR motifs of GPHRs from the hNogo-receptor ectodomain

The sequence from the hNogo-receptor ectodomain (PDB entry 1OZN [PDB] ) best matched the LRR of the GPHR according to sequence similarity, sequence length/repeat, and number of repeats out of 14 LRR structures. An additional N-terminal repeat (named LRR0) including Cys41 provided by the Cysteine-box-1 (background grey) is a new structural feature. An additional {beta}-strand occurs at the C-terminal end (LRRX). The back-to-back following sequence of Cysteine-box-2 (background grey) and the template sequences for malonyl coenzyme and chemokine sequences (Eotaxin2, IL8) homologies are given. Sequence names of crystal structures are underlined. Beside the number of each repeat (repeats 0-X) the patterns of LRR sequence similarity positions are given by x1x2Lx3Lx4x5nxxLxaFxx. Highly conserved residues like leucine are marked by upper case letters. Conserved phenylalanine residues forming a Phe spine are marked by bold F. Lower case "n" and "a" sequences contain only less conserved N and A. Additional residues in the loop region occurring in the template and GPHR sequences are marked as x. The {beta}-strands are indicated by {beta}. The potential binding site comprises residue positions x1-x5.

 
Not only did the nine typical repeats match best to the sequence of the three receptors but also the cysteine box of the Nogo-receptor structure, which is N-terminal directly attached to the LRR, showed a best fit to C-b1 of the GPHR sequences. The putative disulfide bridges between the cysteines Cys24, Cys29, Cys31, and Cys41 in the homologous TSHR model (Fig. 1, a and b) stabilize an anti-parallel and parallel {beta}-strand as integral parts of the LRR, where the latter participates as an additional parallel strand (LRR0) to the convex binding face.



View larger version (35K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 1.
New LRR structural template allows parallel hormone interaction and complies best with available functional data. a, LRR structure of the Nogo-receptor ectodomain (PDB entry 1OZN [PDB] ). A Phe spine (green aromatic rings) inside the LRR stabilizes the fold instead of the missing helices at the concave outer face. The new template provides the N-terminal flanking C-b1 as an integral structural part of the LRR by contributing with an additional parallel {beta}-stand (LRR0 in red) to the convex {beta}-sheets. b, comparison of the previous model of TSHR (PDB entry 1XUM, gray) based on ribonuclease inhibitor template (PDB entry 2BNH [PDB] ) and the newly generated homologous LRR structure for the TSHR (colored) based on the x-ray structure of the hNogo-receptor ectodomain. The new LRR model offers a much larger radius and two additional parallel {beta}-strands (red) for the inner convex arch of the hormone-binding region compared with the previous model. In our new LRR model TSHR amino acids Thr273-Ser278 arrange the inner region of the additional 11th {beta}-strand (LRRX), which is consistent with previously observed functional data. Strong structural importance of these residues in this 11th {beta}-strand for expression has also been shown for the mutants T272A, L273A, T274A, Y275A (TSHR: Asp276, Leu277, Ser278, Tyr279) in the CG/LH receptor (50). Chimeras between TSHR and CG/LHR, comprising this region (52), show that substitutions of TSHR residues L270HLTRADLS278 with corresponding amino acids of the CG/LHR resulted in an impaired TSH binding and abolished cAMP response. c, docking model of hTSH (orange, {alpha}-subunit; violet, {beta}-subunit) at the LRR motif (green) of TSHR, which complies best with current available functional data and with complementary shape and electrostatic properties (Table II and "Results"). Shown are residues from ligand and receptor potentially important for the ligand binding process. The three Asn glycosylation sites on hTSH are marked (cyan). Amino acid Asp111 of the "determinant loop" of hTSH {beta}-subunit oriented toward the {beta}-strands of the LRR.

 
According to the LRR pattern rule, an additional {beta}-strand (named {beta}-strand X) is adopted at the C-terminal side for all three GPHRs. Based on this match, nine complete LRRs (LRRIIX) plus one additional {beta}-strand (LRR0) at the N terminus plus one at the C-terminal side (LRRX) form 9 + 2 {beta}-strands lining the inner convex surface of the hormone-binding region (Fig. 1a). The TSHR LRR sequence not only shows fewer sequence similarities (PAM250 matrix) to the previous RI template (22%) and other LRR templates compared with the new Nogo-receptor template (34%) but the new LRR model for the GPHRs also offers, as the only one, a much larger radius for the inner convex arch of the hormone-binding region. This resulting radius is a shallow deflection like a "scythe blade" shape rather than a "horseshoe" shape, as demonstrated by the superimposition of TSHR models using both templates (Fig. 1b). The LRR structure of the Nogo-receptor ectodomain contains inside the LRR a "Phe spine" (green aromatic rings) for the stabilization of the fold, instead of the missing helices at the concave outer face (Fig. 1a and Table I). The importance of phenylalanines from such a Phe spine for the overall fold of LRRs, as well as for the GPHRs, is demonstrated by a homozygous mutation at the CG/LHR, where a F194V mutant causes male pseudohermaphroditism by lost trafficking to the membrane (38).

Examination of complementary shapes and properties of electrostatic potentials for LRRs in our docking studies (see supplementary material) and functional data from mutations of all three GPHR subtypes, TSHR, CG/LHR, and FSHR and their hormones (Table II), resulted finally in a refined complex model for LRR-hormone with parallel orientation to each other (Fig. 1c). This is only possible by the widened radius of the scythe blade-shaped LRR. The {beta}-subunit of the hormone is thereby oriented with a large face that also includes amino acids of the "determinant loop" ({beta}-TSH Asn109-Asp114 (25, 32, 39)) toward the {beta}-strands of the LRR (Fig. 1c, TSHR). Residues for hTSH, hCG/hLH, and hFSH and their counterparts at the receptors that mainly take part in complementary intermolecular hormone-LRR recognition in our models are given in Table II. The models are consistent with previous mutation studies of the hormone (32, 40) and the LRRs of the GPHR (5, 41-43). This orientation is consistent with several functional data of the hormones previously reported as important features for signaling to the ecto- and serpentine domains, like locations of glycosylation sites (44) and an accessible C-terminus of the {alpha}-subunit (10, 11). Moreover, residues that are highly conserved among hormones and among GPHRs interact in our model. Identical complementary charged residue pairs fitting between the additional repeat LRR0 and hormone are observed for hTSHR-hTSH and hFSHR-hFSH interaction. Furthermore, charged residues of the hormone's determinant loop spatially fit to the LRR position with complementary charges (Table II). Finally, the electrostatic potentials that led to this parallel orientation between hormone and LRR also provide an explanation for the promiscuity of hormone binding caused by some point mutations in LRRs (5, 43) (see also Supplemental Figs. 5-7).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE II
Complementary pairs of charged residues

Complementary pairs of charged residues for hTSH, hCG/LH, and hFSH and their receptors hTSHR, hCG/LHR, and hFSHR, mainly take part in hormone-LRR interaction, according to our new parallel docking models. Positions that have been demonstrated experimentally to participate in hormone binding are indicated by appropriate references. Residues with negative charge are shown in black background and white font. Interacting locations between highly conserved complementary residues identical for all three hormone-receptor pairs are indicated by #. Identical complementary charged residue pairs between hormone and receptor at position x5 at LRR0 are observed for hTSHTSHR and hFSH-FSHR interaction (indicated by *). Residues in a row are not only involved in pair-wise intermolecular interactions but also in multiple residue inter- and intramolecular interaction. Residues of the determinant loop (&) of the hormones are fit to position x5 of LRR VII (hTSH-hTSHR) and to spatial adjacent position x5 of LRRV and VII (hCG/-hCG/LHR) or to position x5 of LRRVI (hFSH-hFSHR) (see also Supplemental Figs. 5-7).

 
Cysteine-box-2 and Cysteine-box-3 Interact and Are Located Close to the Transmembrane Domain—Next we asked whether additional structural templates exist in the N-terminal ectodomain of the TSHR. Systematic searches with fragmented portions of the ectodomain in the Protein Data Bank for sequence similarities identified a new homologous structural template for C-b2 and C-b3 of the TSHR ectodomain, based on the structure of the complex between chemokine IL8/CXCL8 and chemokine receptor fragment IL8RA/CXCR1 (PDB entry 1ILQ [PDB] ) solved by NMR solution methods (27). Chemokine ligand structures like MIP-II (PDB entry 1HFG [PDB] ), Rantes (PDB entry 1RT0), and Eotaxin-3 (PDB entry 1G2S [PDB] ) show a common extended-like conformation for sequences directly following the two characteristic cysteines. Those are involved in chemokine-ligand-receptor interaction. A sequence similarity to the central C-b2 of the TSHR ectodomain was identified exactly for this region with the consensus sequence pattern C283CAFXXQKKI292 (Fig. 2a).



View larger version (38K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		FIG. 2.
Additional homologous structural templates identified by sequence similarity assembled to a TSHR ectodomain model are consistent with previous functional data. a, partial sequence alignments for portions with sequence similarity of different chemokines (determined structures) and C-b2 region of the hTSHR upstream (red) of double cysteines Cys283Cys284 (blue). Downstream of the double cysteines, high sequence similarity (cyan) to fragments with turn conformation from stem cell factor (PDB entry 1EXZ [PDB] ) and from malonyl coenzyme (PDB entry 1MLA [PDB] ) was identified. Residues with high similarities are marked in bold. Sequence alignment is shown in reversed order to be consistent with the anti-parallel orientation in the structure in panels b and c. Arrows indicate the corresponding cysteine in the crystal structure. Asterisk marks the templates used in panel b. b, conformational portions based on high sequence similarity adopted to the TSHR receptor are highlighted at the structure complex of IL8 monomer (gray) and its bound peptide (yellow) of the N-terminal tail of the IL8RA receptor fragment (PDB entry 1ILQ [PDB] ). Red, region of sequence similarity to C-b2 region C284aFxxQKKI292 of TSHR. Blue, IL8 cysteines homologous to the TSHR. Yellow, IL8RA fragment of the N-terminal extracellular tail with sequence similarity to the TSHR P400XXDEFNPC408 cysteine (TSHR Cys408) placed in ideal distance to cysteines of the other chain coming from C-b2 (TSHR Cys283, Cys284) to form a disulfide bridge. Cyan, turn/loop conformation for a fragment of malonyl coenzyme as an additional template fragment for the TSHR consecutive residues P280SxC283. c, partial sequence alignments of the IL8RA N-terminal peptide and the TSHR Cysteine-box-3 portion; homologous residues are marked in bold. Arrow indicates the corresponding position in the x-ray structure. d, homology model of the TSHR ectodomain demonstrates a tightly packed structural arrangement of Cysteine-box-1 (orange), LRR (green), Ser281 turn (cyan), Cysteine-box-2 (red), and Cysteine-box-3 (yellow). The structural components are adopted from the homologous crystal structures of the Nogo-receptor ectodomain and the complex of IL8 and the N-terminal peptide of the IL8RA. For clarity the remaining portions of C-b2 and C-b3 are not visualized. The suggested homologous Ser281 turn/loop (cyan) adopted from malonyl coenzyme links the LRR and the C-b2 component, which very likely functions as a pivot of the activation mechanism. Irrespective of the question whether the homologous turn (cyan) configuration and LRR are assembled in the "right" orientation (indicated by interrupted backbone and arrows), a turn/loop structure very likely organizes the mutual spatial orientation between the LRR structure and the C-b2/C-b3 component(s). The attached LRR/C-b2 components are linked to the serpentine domain via the disulfide bond between C-b2 and C-b3. e, detail of C-b2 (red) and C-b3 (yellow) interaction, backbone conformations adopted from IL8 and IL8RA. Aromatic interaction of Phe286 (C-b2) and Phe405 (C-b3); disulfide bridge between Cys408 (C-b3) and Cys283 (C-b2) based on biochemical data (blue) (see "Results"); Ser281 loop/turn conformation adopted from malonyl coenzyme (cyan). Residues Asp403, Glu404, Asn406 are located at an interface position at the ectodomain toward the serpentine domain.

 
Moreover, also for the bound peptide, representing a portion of the IL8RA N-terminal tail, a high sequence similarity to the TSH receptor sequence of C-b3 was identified with the consensus sequence pattern P400XXDEFNPC408 (Fig. 2, b and c). This structural template applied to the TSHR ectodomain model by substituting amino acid side chains from C-b2 (C283CAFKNQKKI292) and C-b3 (P400KSDEFNPC408) resulted in homologous model residues with complementary properties matching as interacting side chains like the aromatic interaction of Phe286 in C-b2 and Phe405 in C-b3 (Fig. 2e).

Subsequently using this template, Cys408 of C-b3 is ideally placed close to Cys283 (or Cys284) of C-b2 to form a disulfide bridge (Fig. 2e). Our findings support the hypothesis of disulfide bridges between cysteines Cys283/Cys284 of C-b2 either to Cys398/Cys408 or to the reverse order, Cys408/Cys398 of C-b3 (21).

The TSHR sequence S278YPSHC283 directly following the last {beta}-strand of LRRX and preceding Cys283 of C-b2 (including Ser281) matched best with sequences of structural fragments containing a turn/loop conformation, such as SVPSHC from the malonyl coenzyme (PDB entry 1MLA [PDB] ) and VLPSHC from a stem cell factor (PDB entry 1EXZ [PDB] ) (Fig. 2, a and b, and Table I). These findings confirm previous suggestions that Ser281 is an integral part of a turn or loop conformation (15). Adapted to our model, such a turn links the LRR and C-b2 and places the C-terminal portion of the LRR domain directly above the linked C-b2 and C-b3. The function of this turn as a potential spatial pivot or hinge between LRR and C-b2/C-b3 is consistent with the data for mutational activation at Ser281 (12). The assembled model provides support for a very compact structural arrangement of the C-b1, LRR, Ser281 turn/loop, C-b2, and C-b3 proximal to the extracellular end of TMH1 (Fig. 2d). Subsequently the residues D403EFNPC408 of the C-b3 are located particularly at prominent interface positions of the ectodomain (Fig. 2e), closest to the transmembrane domain. The hydrophilic residues Asp403, Glu404, and Asn406 were therefore hypothesized to very likely participate in the intramolecular signal transduction from the ectodomain toward the serpentine domain.

New Switch for Constitutive Activity Induced by Mutations Identified in the Ectodomain—To provide support for this hypothesis, we experimentally addressed the three amino acids, Asp403, Glu404, and Asn406, in the ectodomain by site-directed mutagenesis. To investigate the functional properties of these residues in the intramolecular signal transduction, the positions of the acidic residues Asp403 and Glu404 were replaced by a non-polar and a basic amino acid, alanine and lysine, respectively (Table III). For Asn406, a substitution to alanine was characterized.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
  		TABLE III
Characterization of mutants at the TSHR epitope Asp403-Asn406

The mutated TSH receptors were cloned in the expression vector pSVL and transiently expressed in COS-7 cells. Characterization of the constructs was performed by determination of TSH binding, cell surface expression, cAMP accumulation, IP accumulation. The wt receptor and empty pSVL vector were used as controls.

 
The cell surface expression of the transfected TSHR constructs compared with the wt TSHR were as follows: wt TSHR set at 100%; D403A, 27.2 ± 0.9%; D403K, 12.3 ± 0.8%; E404A, 95.4 ± 4.6%; E404K, 35.3 ± 1.0%; N406A, 66.4 ± 3. 6% (Fig. 3A and Table III). After permeabilization of the cells, receptors with a strong impaired cell surface expression (D403A, D403K, E404K) showed an increased FACS signal up to 60% compared with the wt TSHR, suggesting an increased accumulation within the cells (Fig. 3B). To confirm our assumption of an intracellular receptor accumulation, we performed confocal laser scanning microscopy in HEK 293 cells. In brief, for mutants D403A, D403K, and E404K a strong intracellular receptor accumulation after permeabilization was observed. In contrast, E404A showed a cell surface expression comparable with the wt TSHR before and after permeabilization. This is in accordance with the results obtained by FACS analysis. However, for mutant N406A with a cell surface expression of 66% (wt TSHR set at 100%) the difference between non-permeabilized and permeabilized cells was not consistent. This is most likely because the reduced cell surface expression for N406A was only very slight compared with the other mutants.

Three new mutations (D403A, E404K, and N406A) in the ectodomain of the TSHR, causing constitutive cAMP activity, were identified. The mutant with the highest constitutive activity is N406A with a 5- to 6-fold over basal cAMP production (Fig. 3D). Moreover, after stimulation with 100 milliunits/ml of bTSH, a maximal cAMP response of ~90% of the wt receptor could be detected (Fig. 3E). Substitution of the TSHR-specific position Glu404 by lysine resulted in a 4- to 5-fold increase of basal cAMP production. In contrast, the replacement of Glu404 by alanine had no significant effect on cAMP production. Mutant D403A showed a constitutive activation of the cAMP-signaling cascade (2-fold over wt TSHR basal). The hTSH-induced cAMP response was half of the wild type. A strongly reduced cAMP production was detected by the D403K mutant.

To investigate the effects of these mutations on the basal receptor signal transduction more precisely, we calculated the specific constitutive activity. The calculation was based on a linear increase of basal cAMP accumulation of higher densities of receptors at the cell surface. An increase of basal activity was determined as follows: wt TSHR (slope = 0.0024 ± 0.0002) <N406A (slope = 0.031 ± 0.003) <D403A (slope = 0.032 ± 0.004) <E404K (slope = 0.042 ± 0.004) (Fig. 3H). Stimulated with higher concentrations of hTSH, the activated TSHR also coupled to the phospholipase C-inositol phosphate pathway (IP1-3). No constitutive activation of the IP pathway was observed for any of the mutants (Fig. 3F). After stimulation with 100 milliunits/ml bTSH, the mutations E404K and N406A showed decreased IP1-3 accumulation (Fig. 3G), which correlates with the cell surface expression. The mutant E404A had similar characteristics as the wt receptor. For the mutations D403A and D403K, no IP1-3 response could be detected. These findings were in accordance with the impaired cell surface expression of these two mutants.

In summary, we have identified a complete epitope with three extracellular constitutively activating mutants, D403A, E404K, and N406A, in the N-terminal portion of the TSHR. Aspartate 403 and asparagine 406 are highly conserved in the GPHR family, and the D403A and N406A mutations lead to similar levels of constitutive activity. In contrast, the E404A mutation does not affect basal cAMP accumulation, whereas the E404K mutation leads to an increased basal cAMP accumulation compared with the wt TSHR.


   DISCUSSION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
REFERENCES
 
Using data from comparative modeling, sequence analysis, and reported site-directed mutagenesis studies, we have provided in this report strong indications explaining the spatial cooperation and relative location of molecular components in the GPHR ectodomain involved in receptor activation. Moreover, we have presented molecular models for the N-terminal TSHR components like the C-b1, the LRR motif, the C-b2 including Ser281 and a C-terminal epitope of C-b3 based on homologous structural features. By extensive consideration of known functional data, these structural features were assembled to a tightly packed molecular model. This led to the identification of new key residues participating in intramolecular signal transduction at the interface toward the serpentine domain. By a combined modeling/mutagenesis approach, we demonstrated the functional importance of the N-terminal epitope D403EFN406 within the C-b3 component of the TSHR ectodomain for the intramolecular signaling processes in the TSHR.

LRR Oriented in Spatial Proximity to the Serpentine Domain and Linked via Cysteine-box-2 and -3—For the LRR motif of GPHRs a new augmented structural template based on the Nogo-receptor ectodomain with 9 + 2 repeats was generated that resulted in a strongly enlarged radius at the hormone binding site at the inner convex surface of the LRR arch. This allowed for the first time a docking model with parallel orientation of hormone and LRR (Fig. 1, a-c). There are a number of biochemical data available that are consistent with such a type of interaction (see supplemental material). Moreover, the N-terminal-flanked C-b1 is an integral structural part of the LRR by its contribution of an additional parallel {beta}-strand (LRR0 (TSHR37-41)) to the convex {beta}-sheet of the hormone-binding region. The resulting structural LRR models, augmented by C-b1, provide for the first time a structural rationale for the previously observed participation of residues from C-b1 in hormone binding, similar to the three residues at the additional repeat LRR0 of the FSHR29-31 (45). Furthermore, a peptide comprising exactly the additional LRR0 {beta}-strand region TSHR37-41 has been reported to inhibit hTSH binding (46). Finally, mutations in the N-terminal epitope from Asp39 to Pro47 forming the LRR0 binding site in the CG/LHR model show strongly decreased or no receptor expression and no ligand binding (8) (Table I).

The next following structural component, C-b2, is attached back-to-back to the 11th {beta}-strand of the LRR, very likely via a short turn/loop containing Ser281. Irrespective of the question whether the homologous turn configuration suggested by sequence identity is assembled in the right orientation, a turn/loop structure very likely organizes how the LRR is spatially arranged (e.g. transversal or lateral) relative to C-b2/C-b3 and to the extracellular loops of the serpentine domain. Their mutual orientation obviously has a function as a potential pivot or hinge between them. This is consistent with data based on mutational activation at position Ser281 (12, 47) that indicate that minor conformational changes in the Ser281 turn/loop activate the receptor. This may support the idea of a mechanism in which a certain spatial adjustment between the LRR motif and the following C-b2 (and remaining components of the ectodomain) via the Ser281 turn/loop is responsible for the TSHR activation. This is consistent with our model, in which a LRR-bound hormone may also influence the spatial adjustment between LRR and C-b2/C-b3 (Fig. 2d).

Epitope D403EFNPC408 of Cysteine-box-3 Is Localized at the Interface between the Ectodomain and Serpentine Domain—Based on new structural features for the ectodomain, identified by sequence homology with a complex of the IL8 ligand and the IL8RA peptide, we formed the hypothesis that the structural components C-b2 and C-b3 interact and are located close to TMH1. The structural consequence of this model is a potential disulfide bridge between Cys283 and Cys408 or Cys284 and Cys408. Our findings are in agreement with suggestions of disulfide bridges between C-b2 and C-b3 based on biochemical data (48, 49). Moreover, because the C-terminal end of the LRR is connected to C-b2 via the Ser281 turn/loop and C-b3 is connected with the transmembrane domain TMH1, we have postulated a tightly packed structure including the C-terminal end of the LRRs and the C-b2 and C-b3 of the ectodomain. Subsequently, the epitope D403EFNPC408 of C-b3 of the ectodomain was structurally localized at the interface between ectodomain and serpentine domain; it was therefore proposed as an important mediator for the intramolecular signal transduction from the ectodomain to serpentine domain (Fig. 2e). In the assembled models the two linked C-b2/C-b3 motifs are arranged across the serpentine domain. Their relative location may account for an interaction with the embedded conformation of ECL2, which fits to data of an ECL2 interaction with the ectodomain reported for CG/LHR (16). Although the linked C-b2/C-b3 motifs are constrained by the fact that they are connected to TMH1, some altered orientations across the extracellular loops should be considered until non-ambiguous contact points are known (Supplemental Fig. 8, arrows). Therefore, interactions of C-b2/C-b3 with the other ECLs, as well as simultaneous access of the hormone to C-b2/C-b3 and to one of the ECLs, are feasible and correspond to previous results (50). This would also fit to reported data of ligand (relaxin-3) binding to both the N-terminal ectodomain and ECL2 of leucine-rich repeat-containing glycoprotein receptor 7 (51).

New Intramolecular Switch for Constitutive Activity in the TSHR Ectodomain—Our major finding is a new switch for constitutive activity identified in the TSHR ectodomain. Three amino acids of an epitope in the ectodomain (Asp403, Glu404, Asn406) within the C-b3 component in proximity to TMH1 can act as switches for constitutive activity of the TSHR induced by point mutations. The residues Asp403 and Asn406 are highly conserved in GPHR and show similar constitutive activity for alanine mutants. The TSHR-specific glutamate at position 404 shows constitutive activity for lysine mutation, but not for an alanine substitution. Subsequently, the side chains of consecutive acidic residues Asp403 and Glu404 are obviously differently orientated in space and/or are differently tightly packed. Mutation of Asp403 with a smaller neutral amino acid (alanine) causes a constitutive active mutant, very likely by loss of side chain interaction. In contrast, a lysine mutant at position Asp403 with a more bulky and basic side chain strongly disturbs the receptor expression, probably by a bulky/electrostatic repulsion, which obviously only has an effect on the overall fold but no effect on basal activity. Therefore it is likely that Asp403 and Asn406 constrain the partial inactive receptor state by a side chain interaction via H-bonds toward a tightly packed environment, such as extracellular loops or TMHs. On the contrary, at the TSHR-specific residue Glu404, the mutant with a smaller neutral side chain, E404A, behaves as the wt TSHR. However, the mutant with the bulkier basic residue, E404K, behaves as constitutive active mutant, obviously by electrostatic/bulk repulsion effects. Therefore, Glu404 does not seem to be involved in constraining the partial inactive state by its side chain interaction.

Ser281 Turn/Loop and the New Epitope Asp403-Asn406 in Cysteine-box-3 Are in Spatial Proximity—The results of our study show that the Ser281 turn/loop and the epitope Asp403-Asn406 are assembled in close spatial proximity at the interface between ectodomain and serpentine domain (Fig. 2d). Compared with Ser281, this epitope to a certain extent reacts differently to mutations and obviously has additional capabilities to induce a constitutive activity. The latter can be seen in previous observations (14) where stepwise N-terminal truncations of the TSHR ectodomain caused a 5-fold specific constitutive activation of the TSHR by deleting the Ser281 region. An additional increase to 6-fold specific constitutive activation was observed by those fragments in which Asp403 and/or Asn406 were also deleted. In conclusion, the stepwise truncation of structural components of the ectodomain led to a graduated constitutive activation (partial activation) of the TSHR cAMP pathway. Single mutations at positon Ser277 (Ser281 in TSHR) cause constitutive activation. Their strength depends on size and property of the mutated side chain (47). In contrast to Ser281, which seems to be involved in constraining a loop/turn conformation (15), Asp403 and Asn406 seem to interact with other partners.

Asp403 and Asn406 Are Members of a Constraining Network at the Interface between Ectodomain and Serpentine Domain—From our study we cannot exclude an interaction of Asp403 and Asn406 with other N-terminal portions. However, based on our and other data available from reported mutagenesis studies, we suggest that they very likely form a common tightly interacting structural interface together with the extracellular loops and/or TMH residues. Already minor conformational changes (by mutants or by hormone binding) lead to receptor activation. We suggest a scenario where this tight structural interface of the ectodomain (C terminus LRR, Ser281-turn/loop, C-b2, C-b3) and serpentine domain/extracellular loops constrains the native basal receptor state. Presumably it mediates the signaling upon hormone binding by release/formation of hydrogen bonds between ectodomain and serpentine domain. These predictions follow from the concept that receptor activation may involve the disruption of a constraining hydrogen bond network between the TMHs of the serpentine domain that stabilizes the partial inactive basal state while promoting the formation of a new set of hydrogen bonds that stabilizes the active state. We suggest that this constraining hydrogen bond network in the TSHR has an increased density toward the compact ectodomain. Asp403 and Asn406 seem to be members of this constraining network at the interface between ectodomain and serpentine domain.

The known constitutive active mutant switch position at Ser281 is 100% conserved to a serine in the hCG/LHR (Ser277) and hFSHR (Ser273). According to the 100% conservation of the newly identified residues Asp403 and Asn406 in GPHRs, we strongly assume that these residues are of general relevance for the signal transduction mechanism of other glycoprotein receptors such as lutropin and follitropin receptors.


   FOOTNOTES
 
* This work was supported by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (PA 423/12-1 and KR 1273/1-1), the Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung, and the Interdisciplinary Center for Clinical Research (IZKF) at the University of Leipzig (project B19). The costs of publication of this article were defrayed in part by the payment of page charges. This article must therefore be hereby marked "advertisement" in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1734 solely to indicate this fact. Back

The on-line version of this article (available at http://www.jbc.org) contains supplementary figures. Back

|| To whom correspondence should be addressed: Forschungsinstitut für Molekulare Pharmakologie, Robert-Rössle-Str.10, D-13125 Berlin, Germany. Tel.: 49-30-94793228; Fax: 49-30-94793230; E-mail: GKrause{at}FMP-Berlin.de.

1 The abbreviations used are: GPHR, glycoprotein hormone receptor; hCG/LHR, human choriogonadotropin/luteinizing hormone receptor; hLH, human lutropin; hFSHR, human follicle-stimulating hormone receptor; hTSHR, human thyroid-stimulating hormone receptor; C-b1, C-b2, C-b3, Cysteine-box-1, -2, -3; LRR, leucine-rich repeat; TMH, transmembrane helix; SCA, specific constitutive activity; IL, interleukin; PDB, Protein Data Bank; wt, wild type; FACS, fluorescence-activated cell sorter; IP, inositol phosphate; PBS, phosphate-buffered saline. Back


   ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
 
We thank Eileen Bösenberg for excellent technical assistance. We thank BRAHMS Diagnostica (Berlin, Germany) for providing 125I-bTSH.



   REFERENCES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 INTRODUCTION
 MATERIALS AND METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Szkudlinski, M. W., Fremont, V., Ronin, C., and Weintraub, B. D. (2002) Physiol. Rev. 82, 473-502[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  2. Themmen, A. P. N., and Huhtaniemi, I. T. (2000) Endocr. Rev. 21, 551-583[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Braun, T., Schofield, P. R., and Sprengel, R. (1991) EMBO J. 10, 1885-1890[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  4. Enkhbayar, P., Kamiya, M., Osaki, M., Matsumoto, T., and Matsushima, N. (2003) Proteins Struct. Funct. Bioinf. 54, 394-403
  5. Smits, G., Campillo, M., Govaerts, C., Janssens, V., Richter, C., Vassart, G., Pardo, L., and Costagliola, S. (2003) EMBO J. 22, 2692-2703S[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  6. Lapthorn, A. J., Harris, D. C., Littlejohn, A., Lustbader, J. W., Canfield, R. E., Machin, K. J., Morgan, F. J., and Isaacs, N. W. (1994) Nature 369, 455-461[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  7. Fox, K. M., Dias, J. A., and Van Roey, P. (2001) Mol. Endocrinol. 15, 378-389[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  8. Hong, S. H., Ji, I. H., and Ji, T. H. (1999) Mol. Endocrinol. 13, 1285-1294[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  9. Mishra, A. K., Mahale, S. D., and Iyer, K. S. (2001) J. Pept. Res. 58, 17-26[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  10. Yoo, J., Zeng, H., Ji, I., Murdoch, W. J., and Ji, T. H. (1993) J. Biol. Chem. 268, 13034-13042[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Zeng, H., Ji, I., and Ji, T. H. (1995) Endocrinology 136, 2948-2953[Abstract]
  12. Duprez, L., Parma, J., Costagliola, S., Hermans, J., Van Sande, J., Dumont, J. E., and Vassart, G. (1997) FEBS Lett. 409, 469-474[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  13. Sangkuhl, K., Schulz, A., Schultz, G., and Schoneberg, T. (2002) J. Biol. Chem. 277, 47748-47755[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  14. Vlaeminck-Guillem, V., Ho, S. C., Rodien, P., Vassart, G., and Costagliola, S. (2002) Mol. Endocrinol. 16, 736-746[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  15. Nakabayashi, K., Kudo, M., Hsueh, A. J., and Maruo, T. (2003) Mol. Cell. Endocrinol. 202, 139-144[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  16. Nishi, S., Nakabayashi, K., Kobilka, B., and Hsueh, A. J. (2002) J. Biol. Chem. 277, 3958-3964[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  17. Ho, S. C., Van Sande, J., Lefort, A., Vassart, G., and Costagliola, S. (2001) Endocrinology 142, 2760-2767[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  18. Rapoport, B., Chazenbalk, G. D., Jaume, J. C., and McLachlan, S. M. (1998) Endocr. Rev. 19, 673-716[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  19. Bozon, V., Couture, L., Pajot-Augy, E., Richard, F., Remy, J. J., and Salesse, R. (2002) Protein Expression Purif. 25, 114-123[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  20. Zhang, R., Buczko, E., and Dufau, M. L. (1996) J. Biol. Chem. 271, 5755-5760[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  21. Tanaka, K., Chazenbalk, G. D., McLachlan, S. M., and Rapoport, B. (1998) J. Biol. Chem. 273, 1959-1963[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  22. Nagayama, Y., and Rapoport, B. (1992) Endocrinology 131, 548-552[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  23. Gromoll, J., Wistuba, J., Terwort, N., Godmann, M., Muller, T., and Simoni, M. (2003) Biol. Reprod. 69, 75-80[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  24. Jiang, X., Dreano, M., Buckler, D. R., Cheng, S., Ythier, A., Wu, H., Hendrickson, W. A., and el Tayar, N. (1995) Structure 3, 1341-1353[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  25. Moyle, W. R., Campbell, R. K., Rao, S. N., Ayad, N. G., Bernard, M. P., Han, Y., and Wang, Y. (1995) J. Biol. Chem. 270, 20020-20031[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  26. Kobe, B., and Deisenhofer, J. (1993) Nature 366, 751-756[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  27. Skelton, N. J., Quan, C., Reilly, D., and Lowman, H. (1999) Structure Fold Des. 7, 157-168[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  28. Berman, H. M., Westbrook, J., Feng, Z., Gilliland, G., Bhat, T. N., Weissig, H., Shindyalov, I. N., and Bourne, P. E. (2000) Nucleic Acids Res. 28, 235-242[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  29. He, X. L., Bazan, J. F., McDermott, G., Park, J. B., Wang, K., Tessier-Lavigne, M., He, Z., and Garcia, K. C. (2003) Neuron 38, 177-185[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  30. Case, D. A., Pearlman, D. A., Caldwell, J. W., Cheatham, T. E., III, Wang, J., Ross, W. S., Simmerling, C. L., Darden, T. A., Merz, K. M., Stanton, R. V., Cheng, A. L., Vincent, J. J., Crowley, M., Tsui, V., Gohlke, H., Radmer, R. J., Duan, Y., Pitera, J., Massova, I., Seibel, G. L., Singh, U. C., Weiner, P. K., and Kollman, P. A. (2002), AMBER 7, University of California, San Francisco
  31. Laskowski, R. A., MacArthur, M. W., Moss, D. S., and Thornton, J. M. (1993) J. Appl. Crystallogr., 26, 283-291[CrossRef]
  32. Grossmann, M., Szkudlinski, M. W., Wong, R., Dias, J. A., Ji, T. H., and Weintraub, B. D. (1997) J. Biol. Chem. 272, 15532-15540[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  33. Libert, F., Lefort, A., and Gerard, C. (1989) Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun. 165, 1250-1255[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  34. Wonerow, P., Schoneberg, T., Schultz, G., Gudermann, T., and Paschke, R. J. (1998) Biol. Chem. 273, 7900-7905
  35. Swillens, S. (1995) Mol. Pharmacol. 47, 1197-2003[Abstract]
  36. Berridge, M. J. (1983) Biochem. J. 212, 849-858[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  37. Ballesteros, J. A., Jensen, A. D., Liapakis, G., Rasmussen, S. G. F., Shi, L., Gether, U., and Javitch, J. A. (2001) J. Biol. Chem. 276, 29171-29177[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  38. Gromoll, J., Schulz, A., Borta, H., Gudermann, T., Teerds, K. J., Greschniok, A., Nieschlag, E., and Seif, F. J. (2002) Eur. J. Endocrinol. 147, 597-608[Abstract]
  39. Keutmann, H. T., Mason, K. A., Kitzmann, K., and Ryan, R. J. (1989) Mol. Endocrinol. 3, 526-531[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  40. Tayar, N. E. (1996) Mol. Cell. Endocrinol. 125, 65-70[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  41. Bhowmick, N., Huang, J., Puett, D., Isaacs, N. W., and Lapthorn, A. J. (1996) Mol. Endocrinol. 10, 1147-1159[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  42. Bhowmick, N., Narayan, P., and Puett, D. (1999) Endocrinology 140, 4558-4563[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  43. Smits, G., Govaerts, C., Nubourgh, I., Pardo, L., Vassart, G., and Costagliola, S. (2002) Mol. Endocrinol. 16, 722-735[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  44. Valove, F. M., Finch, C., Anasti, J. N., Froehlich, J., and Flack, M. R. (1994) Endocrinology 135, 2657-2661[Abstract]
  45. Nechamen, C. A., and Dias, J. A. (2000) Mol. Cell. Endocrinol. 166, 101-110[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  46. Morris, J. C., Bergert, E. R., and McCormick, D. J. (1993) J. Biol. Chem. 15, 10900-10905
  47. Nakabayashi, K., Kudo, M., Kobilka, B., and Hsueh, A. J. (2000) J. Biol. Chem. 275, 30264-30271[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  48. Chen, C. R., Chazenbalk, G. D., McLachlan, S. M., and Rapoport, B. (2003) Endocrinology 144, 1324-1330[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  49. Ciullo, I., Latif, R., Graves, P., and Davies, T. F. (2003) Endocrinology 144, 3176-3181[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  50. Zeng, H., Phang, T., Song, Y. S., Ji, I., and Ji, T. H. (2001) J. Biol. Chem. 276, 3451-3458[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  51. Sudo, S., Kumagai, J., Nishi, S., Layfiled, S., Ferraro, T., Bathgates, R. A. D., and Hsueh, A. J. W. (2003) J. Biol. Chem. 278, 7855-7862[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  52. Nagayama, Y., Wadsworth, H. L., Chazenbalk, G. D., Russo, D., Seto, P., and Rapoport, B. (1991) Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 88, 902-905[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 EndocrinologyHome page
C.-R. Chen, S. M. McLachlan, and B. Rapoport
A Monoclonal Antibody with Thyrotropin (TSH) Receptor Inverse Agonist and TSH Antagonist Activities Binds to the Receptor Hinge Region as Well as to the Leucine-Rich Domain
Endocrinology, July 1, 2009; 150(7): 3401 - 3408.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Biol. Chem.Home page
S. Mueller, G. Kleinau, M. W. Szkudlinski, H. Jaeschke, G. Krause, and R. Paschke
The Superagonistic Activity of Bovine Thyroid-stimulating Hormone (TSH) and the Human TR1401 TSH Analog Is Determined by Specific Amino Acids in the Hinge Region of the Human TSH Receptor
J. Biol. Chem., June 12, 2009; 284(24): 16317 - 16324.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Endocr. Rev.Home page
G. Kleinau and G. Krause
Thyrotropin and Homologous Glycoprotein Hormone Receptors: Structural and Functional Aspects of Extracellular Signaling Mechanisms
Endocr. Rev., April 1, 2009; 30(2): 133 - 151.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Mol EndocrinolHome page
R Nunez Miguel, J Sanders, D Y Chirgadze, T L Blundell, J Furmaniak, and B Rees Smith
FSH and TSH binding to their respective receptors: similarities, differences and implication for glycoprotein hormone specificity
J. Mol. Endocrinol., September 1, 2008; 41(3): 145 - 164.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 FASEB J.Home page
G. Kleinau, H. Jaeschke, S. Mueller, B. M. Raaka, S. Neumann, R. Paschke, and G. Krause
Evidence for cooperative signal triggering at the extracellular loops of the TSH receptor
FASEB J, August 1, 2008; 22(8): 2798 - 2808.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 EndocrinologyHome page
C.-R. Chen, S. M. McLachlan, and B. Rapoport
Identification of Key Amino Acid Residues in a Thyrotropin Receptor Monoclonal Antibody Epitope Provides Insight into Its Inverse Agonist and Antagonist Properties
Endocrinology, July 1, 2008; 149(7): 3427 - 3434.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Biol. Chem.Home page
S. Mueller, G. Kleinau, H. Jaeschke, R. Paschke, and G. Krause
Extended Hormone Binding Site of the Human Thyroid Stimulating Hormone Receptor: DISTINCTIVE ACIDIC RESIDUES IN THE HINGE REGION ARE INVOLVED IN BOVINE THYROID STIMULATING HORMONE BINDING AND RECEPTOR ACTIVATION
J. Biol. Chem., June 27, 2008; 283(26): 18048 - 18055.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Mol. Endocrinol.Home page
Y. Mizutori, C.-R. Chen, S. M. McLachlan, and B. Rapoport
The Thyrotropin Receptor Hinge Region Is Not Simply a Scaffold for the Leucine-Rich Domain but Contributes to Ligand Binding and Signal Transduction
Mol. Endocrinol., May 1, 2008; 22(5): 1171 - 1182.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab.Home page
N. G. Morgenthaler, S. C. Ho, and W. B. Minich
Stimulating and Blocking Thyroid-Stimulating Hormone (TSH) Receptor Autoantibodies from Patients with Graves' Disease and Autoimmune Hypothyroidism Have Very Similar Concentration, TSH Receptor Affinity, and Binding Sites
J. Clin. Endocrinol. Metab., March 1, 2007; 92(3): 1058 - 1065.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Mol. Endocrinol.Home page
G. Kleinau, M. Brehm, U. Wiedemann, D. Labudde, U. Leser, and G. Krause
Implications for Molecular Mechanisms of Glycoprotein Hormone Receptors Using a New Sequence-Structure-Function Analysis Resource
Mol. Endocrinol., February 1, 2007; 21(2): 574 - 580.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Biol. Chem.Home page
G. Kleinau, M. Claus, H. Jaeschke, S. Mueller, S. Neumann, R. Paschke, and G. Krause
Contacts between Extracellular Loop Two and Transmembrane Helix Six Determine Basal Activity of the Thyroid-stimulating Hormone Receptor
J. Biol. Chem., January 5, 2007; 282(1): 518 - 525.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J. Biol. Chem.Home page
S. Mueller, G. Kleinau, H. Jaeschke, S. Neumann, G. Krause, and R. Paschke
Significance of Ectodomain Cysteine Boxes 2 and 3 for the Activation Mechanism of the Thyroid-stimulating Hormone Receptor
J. Biol. Chem., October 20, 2006; 281(42): 31638 - 31646.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Mol. Endocrinol.Home page
H. F. Vischer, J. C. M. Granneman, and J. Bogerd
Identification of Follicle-Stimulating Hormone-Selective {beta}-Strands in the N-Terminal Hormone-Binding Exodomain of Human Gonadotropin Receptors
Mol. Endocrinol., August 1, 2006; 20(8): 1880 - 1893.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 EndocrinologyHome page
H. Jaeschke, S. Neumann, G. Kleinau, S. Mueller, M. Claus, G. Krause, and R. Paschke
An Aromatic Environment in the Vicinity of Serine 281 Is a Structural Requirement for Thyrotropin Receptor Function
Endocrinology, April 1, 2006; 147(4): 1753 - 1760.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 EndocrinologyHome page
M. Claus, H. Jaeschke, G. Kleinau, S. Neumann, G. Krause, and R. Paschke
A Hydrophobic Cluster in the Center of the Third Extracellular Loop Is Important for Thyrotropin Receptor Signaling
Endocrinology, December 1, 2005; 146(12): 5197 - 5203.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J EndocrinolHome page
B. Karges, G. Krause, J. Homoki, K.-M. Debatin, N. de Roux, and W. Karges
TSH receptor mutation V509A causes familial hyperthyroidism by release of interhelical constraints between transmembrane helices TMH3 and TMH5
J. Endocrinol., August 1, 2005; 186(2): 377 - 385.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Mol. Endocrinol.Home page
B. Karges, S. Gidenne, C. Aumas, F. Haddad, P. A. Kelly, E. Milgrom, and N. de Roux
Zero-Length Cross-Linking Reveals that Tight Interactions between the Extracellular and Transmembrane Domains of the Luteinizing Hormone Receptor Persist during Receptor Activation
Mol. Endocrinol., August 1, 2005; 19(8): 2086 - 2098.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplemental Data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
279/49/51590    most recent
M404748200v1
Right arrow Submit a Letter to Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kleinau, G.
Right arrow Articles by Krause, G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kleinau, G.
Right arrow Articles by Krause, G.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 All ASBMB Journals   Molecular and Cellular Proteomics 
 Journal of Lipid Research   ASBMB Today 
Copyright © 2004 by the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology.
Advertisement
spacer
Advertisement
Advertisement