Structured and disordered facets of the GPCR fold

Diverse activation pathways in class A GPCRs converge near the G-protein-coupling region

Class A G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are a large family of membrane proteins that mediate a wide variety of physiological functions, including vision, neurotransmission and immune responses. They are the targets of nearly one-third of all prescribed medicinal drugs such as beta blockers and antipsychotics. GPCR activation is facilitated by extracellular ligands and leads to the recruitment of intracellular G proteins. Structural rearrangements of residue contacts in the transmembrane domain serve as 'activation pathways' that connect the ligand-binding pocket to the G-protein-coupling region within the receptor. In order to investigate the similarities in activation pathways across class A GPCRs, we analysed 27 GPCRs from diverse subgroups for which structures of active, inactive or both states were available. Here we show that, despite the diversity in activation pathways between receptors, the pathways converge near the G-protein-coupling region. This convergence is mediated by a highly conserved structural rearrangement of residue contacts between transmembrane helices 3, 6 and 7 that releases G-protein-contacting residues. The convergence of activation pathways may explain how the activation steps initiated by diverse ligands enable GPCRs to bind a common repertoire of G proteins.

Structure-Based Sequence Alignment of the Transmembrane Domains of All Human GPCRs: Phylogenetic, Structural and Functional Implications

The understanding of G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) is undergoing a revolution due to increased information about their signaling and the experimental determination of structures for more than 25 receptors. The availability of at least one receptor structure for each of the GPCR classes, well separated in sequence space, enables an integrated superfamily-wide analysis to identify signatures involving the role of conserved residues, conserved contacts, and downstream signaling in the context of receptor structures. In this study, we align the transmembrane (TM) domains of all experimental GPCR structures to maximize the conserved inter-helical contacts. The resulting superfamily-wide GpcR Sequence-Structure (GRoSS) alignment of the TM domains for all human GPCR sequences is sufficient to generate a phylogenetic tree that correctly distinguishes all different GPCR classes, suggesting that the class-level differences in the GPCR superfamily are encoded at least partly in the TM domains. The inter-helical contacts conserved across all GPCR classes describe the evolutionarily conserved GPCR structural fold. The corresponding structural alignment of the inactive and active conformations, available for a few GPCRs, identifies activation hot-spot residues in the TM domains that get rewired upon activation. Many GPCR mutations, known to alter receptor signaling and cause disease, are located at these conserved contact and activation hot-spot residue positions. The GRoSS alignment places the chemosensory receptor subfamilies for bitter taste (TAS2R) and pheromones (Vomeronasal, VN1R) in the rhodopsin family, known to contain the chemosensory olfactory receptor subfamily. The GRoSS alignment also enables the quantification of the structural variability in the TM regions of experimental structures, useful for homology modeling and structure prediction of receptors. Furthermore, this alignment identifies structurally and functionally important residues in all human GPCRs. These residues can be used to make testable hypotheses about the structural basis of receptor function and about the molecular basis of disease-associated single nucleotide polymorphisms.

G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) are a large superfamily of integral membrane proteins that share a characteristic 7 transmembrane helix fold. They detect various molecules outside of the cell and signal their presence to the inside of the cell. At least half of the 800 human GPCRs are potential drug targets, so understanding their structure and function is critical. Experimental structures are now available for at least one receptor from each GPCR class. The structure of the 7 helix fold is highly conserved even for receptors with very low sequence similarity. We analyze the available experimental structures and compare the common inter-helical contacts. Our analysis leads to a unified sequence-structure alignment of the GPCR superfamily that can then be used as the starting point for structure prediction of all other GPCRs. A key result of our analysis is a list of conserved contact residues and activation “hot-spots” residues that are critical for GPCR folding and function. We propose that mutations and natural variants of amino acids at these locations in the GPCRs can dramatically influence their activation state and alter intracellular signaling. This provides hypotheses for the molecular mechanisms underlying disease causing mutants for any GPCR.

Comparing Class A GPCRs to bitter taste receptors: Structural motifs, ligand interactions and agonist-to-antagonist ratios

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are seven transmembrane (TM) proteins that play a key role in human physiology. The GPCR superfamily comprises about 800 members, classified into several classes, with rhodopsin-like Class A being the largest and most studied thus far. A huge component of the human repertoire consists of the chemosensory GPCRs, including ∼400 odorant receptors, 25 bitter taste receptors (TAS2Rs), which are thought to guard the organism from consuming poisons, and sweet and umami TAS1R heteromers, which indicate the nutritive value of food. The location of the binding site of TAS2Rs is similar to that of Class A GPCRs. However, most of the known bitter ligands are agonists, with only a few antagonists documented thus far. The agonist-to-antagonist ratios of Class A GPCRs vary, but in general are much lower than for TAS2Rs. For a set of well-studied GPCRs, a gradual change in agonists-to-antagonists ratios is observed when comparing low (10 μM)- and high (10 nM)-affinity ligand sets from ChEMBL and the DrugBank set of drugs. This shift reflects pharmaceutical bias toward the therapeutically desirable pharmacology for each of these GPCRs, while the 10 μM sets possibly represent the native tendency of the receptors toward either agonists or antagonists. Analyzing ligand-GPCR interactions in 56 X-ray structures representative of currently available structural data, we find that the N-terminus, TM1 and TM2 are more involved in binding of antagonists than of agonists. On the other hand, ECL2 tends to be more involved in binding of agonists. This is of interest, since TAS2Rs harbor variations on the typical Class A sequence motifs, including the absence of the ECL2-TM3 disulfide bridge. This suggests an alternative mode of regulation of conformational states for TAS2Rs, with potentially less stabilized inactive state. The comparison of TAS2Rs and Class A GPCRs structural features and the pharmacology of the their ligands highlights the intricacies of GPCR architecture and provides a framework for rational design of new ligands.

Disordered regions in transmembrane proteins

The functions of transmembrane proteins in living cells are widespread; they range from various transport processes to energy production, from cell-cell adhesion to communication. Structurally, they are highly ordered in their membrane-spanning regions, but may contain disordered regions in the cytosolic and extra-cytosolic parts. In this study, we have investigated the disordered regions in transmembrane proteins by a stringent definition of disordered residues on the currently available largest experimental dataset, and show a significant correlation between the spatial distributions of positively charged residues and disordered regions. This finding suggests a new role of disordered regions in transmembrane proteins by providing structural flexibility for stabilizing interactions with negatively charged head groups of the lipid molecules. We also find a preference of structural disorder in the terminal--as opposed to loop--regions in transmembrane proteins, and survey the respective functions involved in recruiting other proteins or mediating allosteric signaling effects. Finally, we critically compare disorder prediction methods on our transmembrane protein set. While there are no major differences between these methods using the usual statistics, such as per residue accuracies, Matthew's correlation coefficients, etc.; substantial differences can be found regarding the spatial distribution of the predicted disordered regions. We conclude that a predictor optimized for transmembrane proteins would be of high value to the field of structural disorder.

How do disordered regions achieve comparable functions to structured domains?

The traditional structure to function paradigm conceives of a protein's function as emerging from its structure. In recent years, it has been established that unstructured, intrinsically disordered regions (IDRs) in proteins are equally crucial elements for protein function, regulation and homeostasis. In this review, we provide a brief overview of how IDRs can perform similar functions to structured proteins, focusing especially on the formation of protein complexes and assemblies and the mediation of regulated conformational changes. In addition to highlighting instances of such functional equivalence, we explain how differences in the biological and physicochemical properties of IDRs allow them to expand the functional and regulatory repertoire of proteins. We also discuss studies that provide insights into how mutations within functional regions of IDRs can lead to human diseases.

Can proteins be intrinsically disordered inside a membrane?

Intrinsically disorder has evolved in many soluble proteins because it confers a unique set of functional advantages. In contrast, the functions of membrane proteins are largely understood in terms of well-defined structures. This raises the question: Why would the evolutionary pressures that select for disorder leave membrane proteins untouched. In this hypothesis piece, I argue that intrinsic disorder may exist in membrane embedded proteins, but that it will take a different form due to the different environment. Disordered membrane proteins are thus likely to have fully formed secondary structure, but little tertiary structure. Furthermore, the sequence signature for disorder in membrane proteins is likely to be reversed; so disordered proteins are more hydrophobic than their folded counterparts. At present it is impossible to tell how common this type of disordered membrane protein is.