Functional map of arrestin-1 at single amino acid resolution

Arrestins: A Small Family of Multi-Functional Proteins

The first member of the arrestin family, visual arrestin-1, was discovered in the late 1970s. Later, the other three mammalian subtypes were identified and cloned. The first described function was regulation of G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling: arrestins bind active phosphorylated GPCRs, blocking their coupling to G proteins. It was later discovered that receptor-bound and free arrestins interact with numerous proteins, regulating GPCR trafficking and various signaling pathways, including those that determine cell fate. Arrestins have no enzymatic activity; they function by organizing multi-protein complexes and localizing their interaction partners to particular cellular compartments. Today we understand the molecular mechanism of arrestin interactions with GPCRs better than the mechanisms underlying other functions. However, even limited knowledge enabled the construction of signaling-biased arrestin mutants and extraction of biologically active monofunctional peptides from these multifunctional proteins. Manipulation of cellular signaling with arrestin-based tools has research and likely therapeutic potential: re-engineered proteins and their parts can produce effects that conventional small-molecule drugs cannot.

ProteinGym: Large-Scale Benchmarks for Protein Design and Fitness Prediction

Predicting the effects of mutations in proteins is critical to many applications, from understanding genetic disease to designing novel proteins that can address our most pressing challenges in climate, agriculture and healthcare. Despite a surge in machine learning-based protein models to tackle these questions, an assessment of their respective benefits is challenging due to the use of distinct, often contrived, experimental datasets, and the variable performance of models across different protein families. Addressing these challenges requires scale. To that end we introduce ProteinGym, a large-scale and holistic set of benchmarks specifically designed for protein fitness prediction and design. It encompasses both a broad collection of over 250 standardized deep mutational scanning assays, spanning millions of mutated sequences, as well as curated clinical datasets providing high-quality expert annotations about mutation effects. We devise a robust evaluation framework that combines metrics for both fitness prediction and design, factors in known limitations of the underlying experimental methods, and covers both zero-shot and supervised settings. We report the performance of a diverse set of over 70 high-performing models from various subfields (eg., alignment-based, inverse folding) into a unified benchmark suite. We open source the corresponding codebase, datasets, MSAs, structures, model predictions and develop a user-friendly website that facilitates data access and analysis.

Functional Role of Arrestin-1 Residues Interacting with Unphosphorylated Rhodopsin Elements

Arrestin-1, or visual arrestin, exhibits an exquisite selectivity for light-activated phosphorylated rhodopsin (P-Rh*) over its other functional forms. That selectivity is believed to be mediated by two well-established structural elements in the arrestin-1 molecule, the activation sensor detecting the active conformation of rhodopsin and the phosphorylation sensor responsive to the rhodopsin phosphorylation, which only active phosphorylated rhodopsin can engage simultaneously. However, in the crystal structure of the arrestin-1-rhodopsin complex there are arrestin-1 residues located close to rhodopsin, which do not belong to either sensor. Here we tested by site-directed mutagenesis the functional role of these residues in wild type arrestin-1 using a direct binding assay to P-Rh* and light-activated unphosphorylated rhodopsin (Rh*). We found that many mutations either enhanced the binding only to Rh* or increased the binding to Rh* much more than to P-Rh*. The data suggest that the native residues in these positions act as binding suppressors, specifically inhibiting the arrestin-1 binding to Rh* and thereby increasing arrestin-1 selectivity for P-Rh*. This calls for the modification of a widely accepted model of the arrestin-receptor interactions.

Rhodopsin, light-sensor of vision

The light sensor of vertebrate scotopic (low-light) vision, rhodopsin, is a G-protein-coupled receptor comprising a polypeptide chain with bound chromophore, 11-cis-retinal, that exhibits remarkable physicochemical properties. This photopigment is extremely stable in the dark, yet its chromophore isomerises upon photon absorption with 70% efficiency, enabling the activation of its G-protein, transducin, with high efficiency. Rhodopsin's photochemical and biochemical activities occur over very different time-scales: the energy of retinaldehyde's excited state is stored in <1 ps in retinal-protein interactions, but it takes milliseconds for the catalytically active state to form, and many tens of minutes for the resting state to be restored. In this review, we describe the properties of rhodopsin and its role in rod phototransduction. We first introduce rhodopsin's gross structural features, its evolution, and the basic mechanisms of its activation. We then discuss light absorption and spectral sensitivity, photoreceptor electrical responses that result from the activity of individual rhodopsin molecules, and recovery of rhodopsin and the visual system from intense bleaching exposures. We then provide a detailed examination of rhodopsin's molecular structure and function, first in its dark state, and then in the active Meta states that govern its interactions with transducin, rhodopsin kinase and arrestin. While it is clear that rhodopsin's molecular properties are exquisitely honed for phototransduction, from starlight to dawn/dusk intensity levels, our understanding of how its molecular interactions determine the properties of scotopic vision remains incomplete. We describe potential future directions of research, and outline several major problems that remain to be solved.

How Carvedilol activates β2-adrenoceptors

Carvedilol is among the most effective β-blockers for improving survival after myocardial infarction. Yet the mechanisms by which carvedilol achieves this superior clinical profile are still unclear. Beyond blockade of β1-adrenoceptors, arrestin-biased signalling via β2-adrenoceptors is a molecular mechanism proposed to explain the survival benefits. Here, we offer an alternative mechanism to rationalize carvedilol's cellular signalling. Using primary and immortalized cells genome-edited by CRISPR/Cas9 to lack either G proteins or arrestins; and combining biological, biochemical, and signalling assays with molecular dynamics simulations, we demonstrate that G proteins drive all detectable carvedilol signalling through β2ARs. Because a clear understanding of how drugs act is imperative to data interpretation in basic and clinical research, to the stratification of clinical trials or to the monitoring of drug effects on the target pathway, the mechanistic insight gained here provides a foundation for the rational development of signalling prototypes that target the β-adrenoceptor system.

β-arrestin1 and 2 exhibit distinct phosphorylation-dependent conformations when coupling to the same GPCR in living cells

β-arrestins mediate regulatory processes for over 800 different G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) by adopting specific conformations that result from the geometry of the GPCR–β-arrestin complex. However, whether β-arrestin1 and 2 respond differently for binding to the same GPCR is still unknown. Employing GRK knockout cells and β-arrestins lacking the finger-loop-region, we show that the two isoforms prefer to associate with the active parathyroid hormone 1 receptor (PTH1R) in different complex configurations (“hanging” and “core”). Furthermore, the utilisation of advanced NanoLuc/FlAsH-based biosensors reveals distinct conformational signatures of β-arrestin1 and 2 when bound to active PTH1R (P-R*). Moreover, we assess β-arrestin conformational changes that are induced specifically by proximal and distal C-terminal phosphorylation and in the absence of GPCR kinases (GRKs) (R*). Here, we show differences between conformational changes that are induced by P-R* or R* receptor states and further disclose the impact of site-specific GPCR phosphorylation on arrestin-coupling and function.

Here the authors present improved intramolecular sensors for β-arrestin2 and 1, which enable assessment of conformational changes of both isoforms in living cells. These reveal that the same GPCR induces differential conformational rearrangements that determine the functional diversity between the two β-arrestins.

GPCR-mediated β-arrestin activation deconvoluted with single-molecule precision

β-arrestins bind G protein-coupled receptors to terminate G protein signaling and to facilitate other downstream signaling pathways. Using single-molecule fluorescence resonance energy transfer imaging, we show that β-arrestin is strongly autoinhibited in its basal state. Its engagement with a phosphopeptide mimicking phosphorylated receptor tail efficiently releases the β-arrestin tail from its N domain to assume distinct conformations. Unexpectedly, we find that β-arrestin binding to phosphorylated receptor, with a phosphorylation barcode identical to the isolated phosphopeptide, is highly inefficient and that agonist-promoted receptor activation is required for β-arrestin activation, consistent with the release of a sequestered receptor C tail. These findings, together with focused cellular investigations, reveal that agonism and receptor C-tail release are specific determinants of the rate and efficiency of β-arrestin activation by phosphorylated receptor. We infer that receptor phosphorylation patterns, in combination with receptor agonism, synergistically establish the strength and specificity with which diverse, downstream β-arrestin-mediated events are directed.

Structural Basis of Arrestin Selectivity for Active Phosphorylated G Protein-Coupled Receptors

Arrestins are a small family of proteins that bind G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Arrestin binds to active phosphorylated GPCRs with higher affinity than to all other functional forms of the receptor, including inactive phosphorylated and active unphosphorylated. The selectivity of arrestins suggests that they must have two sensors, which detect receptor-attached phosphates and the active receptor conformation independently. Simultaneous engagement of both sensors enables arrestin transition into a high-affinity receptor-binding state. This transition involves a global conformational rearrangement that brings additional elements of the arrestin molecule, including the middle loop, in contact with a GPCR, thereby stabilizing the complex. Here, we review structural and mutagenesis data that identify these two sensors and additional receptor-binding elements within the arrestin molecule. While most data were obtained with the arrestin-1-rhodopsin pair, the evidence suggests that all arrestins use similar mechanisms to achieve preferential binding to active phosphorylated GPCRs.

The finger loop as an activation sensor in arrestin

The finger loop in the central crest of the receptor-binding site of arrestins engages the cavity between the transmembrane helices of activated G-protein-coupled receptors. Therefore, it was hypothesized to serve as the sensor that detects the activation state of the receptor. We performed comprehensive mutagenesis of the finger loop in bovine visual arrestin-1, generated mutant radiolabeled proteins by cell-free translation, and determined the effects of mutations on the in vitro binding of arrestin-1 to purified phosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin. This interaction is driven by two factors, rhodopsin activation and rhodopsin-attached phosphates. Therefore, the binding of arrestin-1 to light-activated unphosphorylated rhodopsin is low. To evaluate the role of the finger loop specifically in the recognition of the active receptor conformation, we tested the effects of these mutations in the context of truncated arrestin-1 that demonstrates much higher binding to unphosphorylated activated and phosphorylated inactive rhodopsin. The majority of finger loop residues proved important for arrestin-1 binding to light-activated rhodopsin, with six mutations affecting the binding exclusively to this form. Thus, the finger loop is the key element of arrestin-1 activation sensor. The data also suggest that arrestin-1 and its enhanced mutant bind various functional forms of rhodopsin differently.

Biological Role of Arrestin-1 Oligomerization

Members of the arrestin superfamily have great propensity of self-association, but the physiological significance of this phenomenon is unclear. To determine the biological role of visual arrestin-1 oligomerization in rod photoreceptors, we expressed mutant arrestin-1 with severely impaired self-association in mouse rods and analyzed mice of both sexes. We show that the oligomerization-deficient mutant is capable of quenching rhodopsin signaling normally, as judged by electroretinography and single-cell recording. Like wild type, mutant arrestin-1 is largely excluded from the outer segments in the dark, proving that the normal intracellular localization is not due the size exclusion of arrestin-1 oligomers. In contrast to wild type, supraphysiological expression of the mutant causes shortening of the outer segments and photoreceptor death. Thus, oligomerization reduces the cytotoxicity of arrestin-1 monomer, ensuring long-term photoreceptor survival.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Visual arrestin-1 forms dimers and tetramers. The biological role of its oligomerization is unclear. To test the role of arrestin-1 self-association, we expressed oligomerization-deficient mutant in arrestin-1 knock-out mice. The mutant quenches light-induced rhodopsin signaling like wild type, demonstrating that in vivo monomeric arrestin-1 is necessary and sufficient for this function. In rods, arrestin-1 moves from the inner segments and cell bodies in the dark to the outer segments in the light. Nonoligomerizing mutant undergoes the same translocation, demonstrating that the size of the oligomers is not the reason for arrestin-1 exclusion from the outer segments in the dark. High expression of oligomerization-deficient arrestin-1 resulted in rod death. Thus, oligomerization reduces the cytotoxicity of high levels of arrestin-1 monomer.

Lysine in the lariat loop of arrestins does not serve as phosphate sensor

Arrestins demonstrate strong preference for phosphorylated over unphosphorylated receptors, but how arrestins "sense" receptor phosphorylation is unclear. A conserved lysine in the lariat loop of arrestins directly binds the phosphate in crystal structures of activated arrestin-1, -2, and -3. The lariat loop supplies two negative charges to the central polar core, which must be disrupted for arrestin activation and high-affinity receptor binding. Therefore, we hypothesized that receptor-attached phosphates pull the lariat loop via this lysine, thus removing the negative charges and destabilizing the polar core. We tested the role of this lysine by introducing charge elimination (Lys->Ala) and reversal (Lys->Glu) mutations in arrestin-1, -2, and -3. These mutations in arrestin-1 only moderately reduced phospho-rhodopsin binding and had no detectable effect on arrestin-2 and -3 binding to cognate non-visual receptors in cells. The mutations of Lys300 in bovine and homologous Lys301 in mouse arrestin-1 on the background of pre-activated mutants had variable effects on the binding to light-activated phosphorylated rhodopsin, while affecting the binding to unphosphorylated rhodopsin to a greater extent. Thus, conserved lysine in the lariat loop participates in receptor binding, but does not play a critical role in phosphate-induced arrestin activation.

Molecular basis of β-arrestin coupling to formoterol-bound β1-adrenoceptor

The β₁-adrenoceptor (β₁AR) is a G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) that couples¹ to the heterotrimeric G protein G_s. G-protein-mediated signalling is terminated by phosphorylation of the C terminus of the receptor by GPCR kinases (GRKs) and by coupling of β-arrestin 1 (βarr1, also known as arrestin 2), which displaces G_s and induces signalling through the MAP kinase pathway². The ability of synthetic agonists to induce signalling preferentially through either G proteins or arrestins-known as biased agonism³-is important in drug development, because the therapeutic effect may arise from only one signalling cascade, whereas the other pathway may mediate undesirable side effects⁴. To understand the molecular basis for arrestin coupling, here we determined the cryo-electron microscopy structure of the β₁AR-βarr1 complex in lipid nanodiscs bound to the biased agonist formoterol⁵, and the crystal structure of formoterol-bound β₁AR coupled to the G-protein-mimetic nanobody⁶ Nb80. βarr1 couples to β₁AR in a manner distinct to that⁷ of G_s coupling to β₂AR-the finger loop of βarr1 occupies a narrower cleft on the intracellular surface, and is closer to transmembrane helix H7 of the receptor when compared with the C-terminal α5 helix of G_s. The conformation of the finger loop in βarr1 is different from that adopted by the finger loop of visual arrestin when it couples to rhodopsin⁸. β₁AR coupled to βarr1 shows considerable differences in structure compared with β₁AR coupled to Nb80, including an inward movement of extracellular loop 3 and the cytoplasmic ends of H5 and H6. We observe weakened interactions between formoterol and two serine residues in H5 at the orthosteric binding site of β₁AR, and find that formoterol has a lower affinity for the β₁AR-βarr1 complex than for the β₁AR-G_s complex. The structural differences between these complexes of β₁AR provide a foundation for the design of small molecules that could bias signalling in the β-adrenoceptors.

An arrestin-1 surface opposite of its interface with photoactivated rhodopsin engages with enolase-1

Arrestin-1 is the arrestin family member responsible for inactivation of the G protein–coupled receptor rhodopsin in photoreceptors. Arrestin-1 is also well-known to interact with additional protein partners and to affect other signaling cascades beyond phototransduction. In this study, we investigated one of these alternative arrestin-1 binding partners, the glycolysis enzyme enolase-1, to map the molecular contact sites between these two proteins and investigate how the binding of arrestin-1 affects the catalytic activity of enolase-1. Using fluorescence quench protection of strategically placed fluorophores on the arrestin-1 surface, we observed that arrestin-1 primarily engages enolase-1 along a surface that is opposite of the side of arrestin-1 that binds photoactivated rhodopsin. Using this information, we developed a molecular model of the arrestin-1–enolase-1 complex, which was validated by targeted substitutions of charge-pair interactions. Finally, we identified the likely source of arrestin's modulation of enolase-1 catalysis, showing that selective substitution of two amino acids in arrestin-1 can completely remove its effect on enolase-1 activity while still remaining bound to enolase-1. These findings open up opportunities for examining the functional effects of arrestin-1 on enolase-1 activity in photoreceptors and their surrounding cells.

Plethora of functions packed into 45 kDa arrestins: biological implications and possible therapeutic strategies

Mammalian arrestins are a family of four highly homologous relatively small ~ 45 kDa proteins with surprisingly diverse functions. The most striking feature is that each of the two non-visual subtypes can bind hundreds of diverse G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and dozens of non-receptor partners. Through these interactions, arrestins regulate the G protein-dependent signaling by the desensitization mechanisms as well as control numerous signaling pathways in the G protein-dependent or independent manner via scaffolding. Some partners prefer receptor-bound arrestins, some bind better to the free arrestins in the cytoplasm, whereas several show no apparent preference for either conformation. Thus, arrestins are a perfect example of a multi-functional signaling regulator. The result of this multi-functionality is that reduction (by knockdown) or elimination (by knockout) of any of these two non-visual arrestins can affect so many pathways that the results are hard to interpret. The other difficulty is that the non-visual subtypes can in many cases compensate for each other, which explains relatively mild phenotypes of single knockouts, whereas double knockout is lethal in vivo, although cultured cells lacking both arrestins are viable. Thus, deciphering the role of arrestins in cell biology requires the identification of specific signaling function(s) of arrestins involved in a particular phenotype. This endeavor should be greatly assisted by identification of structural elements of the arrestin molecule critical for individual functions and by the creation of mutants where only one function is affected. Reintroduction of these biased mutants, or introduction of monofunctional stand-alone arrestin elements, which have been identified in some cases, into double arrestin-2/3 knockout cultured cells, is the most straightforward way to study arrestin functions. This is a laborious and technically challenging task, but the upside is that specific function of arrestins, their timing, subcellular specificity, and relations to one another could be investigated with precision.

Distinct G protein-coupled receptor phosphorylation motifs modulate arrestin affinity and activation and global conformation

Cellular functions of arrestins are determined in part by the pattern of phosphorylation on the G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) to which arrestins bind. Despite high-resolution structural data of arrestins bound to phosphorylated receptor C-termini, the functional role of each phosphorylation site remains obscure. Here, we employ a library of synthetic phosphopeptide analogues of the GPCR rhodopsin C-terminus and determine the ability of these peptides to bind and activate arrestins using a variety of biochemical and biophysical methods. We further characterize how these peptides modulate the conformation of arrestin-1 by nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR). Our results indicate different functional classes of phosphorylation sites: 'key sites' required for arrestin binding and activation, an 'inhibitory site' that abrogates arrestin binding, and 'modulator sites' that influence the global conformation of arrestin. These functional motifs allow a better understanding of how different GPCR phosphorylation patterns might control how arrestin functions in the cell.

Critical role of the finger loop in arrestin binding to the receptors

We tested the interactions with four different G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) of arrestin-3 mutants with substitutions in the four loops, three of which contact the receptor in the structure of the arrestin-1-rhodopsin complex. Point mutations in the loop at the distal tip of the N-domain (Glu157Ala), in the C-loop (Phe255Ala), back loop (Lys313Ala), and one of the mutations in the finger loop (Gly65Pro) had mild variable effects on receptor binding. In contrast, the deletion of Gly65 at the beginning of the finger loop reduced the binding to all GPCRs tested, with the binding to dopamine D2 receptor being affected most dramatically. Thus, the presence of a glycine at the beginning of the finger loop appears to be critical for the arrestin-receptor interaction.

Structural biology of G protein-coupled receptor signaling complexes

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) constitute the largest family of cell surface receptors that mediate numerous cell signaling pathways, and are targets of more than one-third of clinical drugs. Thanks to the advancement of novel structural biology technologies, high-resolution structures of GPCRs in complex with their signaling transducers, including G-protein and arrestin, have been determined. These 3D complex structures have significantly improved our understanding of the molecular mechanism of GPCR signaling and provided a structural basis for signaling-biased drug discovery targeting GPCRs. Here we summarize structural studies of GPCR signaling complexes with G protein and arrestin using rhodopsin as a model system, and highlight the key features of GPCR conformational states in biased signaling including the sequence motifs of receptor TM6 that determine selective coupling of G proteins, and the phosphorylation codes of GPCRs for arrestin recruitment. We envision the future of GPCR structural biology not only to solve more high-resolution complex structures but also to show stepwise GPCR signaling complex assembly and disassembly and dynamic process of GPCR signal transduction.

Arrestin-1 engineering facilitates complex stabilization with native rhodopsin

Arrestin-1 desensitizes the activated and phosphorylated photoreceptor rhodopsin by forming transient rhodopsin−arrestin-1 complexes that eventually decay to opsin, retinal and arrestin-1. Via a multi-dimensional screening setup, we identified and combined arrestin-1 mutants that form lasting complexes with light-activated and phosphorylated rhodopsin in harsh conditions, such as high ionic salt concentration. Two quadruple mutants, D303A + T304A + E341A + F375A and R171A + T304A + E341A + F375A share similar heterologous expression and thermo-stability levels with wild type (WT) arrestin-1, but are able to stabilize complexes with rhodopsin with more than seven times higher half-maximal inhibitory concentration (IC₅₀) values for NaCl compared to the WT arrestin-1 protein. These quadruple mutants are also characterized by higher binding affinities to phosphorylated rhodopsin, light-activated rhodopsin and phosphorylated opsin, as compared with WT arrestin-1. Furthermore, the assessed arrestin-1 mutants are still specifically associating with phosphorylated or light-activated receptor states only, while binding to the inactive ground state of the receptor is not significantly altered. Additionally, we propose a novel functionality for R171 in stabilizing the inactive arrestin-1 conformation as well as the rhodopsin–arrestin-1 complex. The achieved stabilization of the active rhodopsin–arrestin-1 complex might be of great interest for future structure determination, antibody development studies as well as drug-screening efforts targeting G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs).

Using In Vitro Pull-Down and In-Cell Overexpression Assays to Study Protein Interactions with Arrestin

Nonvisual arrestins (arrestin-2/arrestin-3) interact with hundreds of G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) subtypes and dozens of non-receptor signaling proteins. Here we describe the methods used to identify the interaction sites of arrestin-binding partners on arrestin-3 and the use of monofunctional individual arrestin-3 elements in cells. Our in vitro pull-down assay with purified proteins demonstrates that relatively few elements in arrestin engage each partner, whereas cell-based functional assays indicate that certain arrestin elements devoid of other functionalities can perform individual functions in living cells.

Arrestins: Introducing Signaling Bias Into Multifunctional Proteins

Arrestins were discovered as proteins that bind active phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and block their interactions with G proteins, i.e., for their role in homologous desensitization of GPCRs. Mammals express only four arrestin subtypes, two of which are largely restricted to the retina. Two nonvisual arrestins are ubiquitous and interact with hundreds of different GPCRs and dozens of other binding partners. Changes of just a few residues on the receptor-binding surface were shown to dramatically affect GPCR preference of inherently promiscuous nonvisual arrestins. Mutations on the cytosol-facing side of arrestins modulate their interactions with individual downstream signaling molecules. Thus, it appears feasible to construct arrestin mutants specifically linking particular GPCRs with signaling pathways of choice or mutants that sever the links between selected GPCRs and unwanted pathways. Signaling-biased "designer arrestins" have the potential to become valuable molecular tools for research and therapy.

Molecular mechanism of modulating arrestin conformation by GPCR phosphorylation

Arrestins regulate the signaling of ligand-activated, phosphorylated G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Different patterns of receptor phosphorylation (phosphorylation barcode) can modulate arrestin conformations, resulting in distinct functional outcomes (for example, desensitization, internalization, and downstream signaling). However, the mechanism of arrestin activation and how distinct receptor phosphorylation patterns could induce different conformational changes on arrestin are not fully understood. We analyzed how each arrestin amino acid contributes to its different conformational states. We identified a conserved structural motif that restricts the mobility of the arrestin finger loop in the inactive state and appears to be regulated by receptor phosphorylation. Distal and proximal receptor phosphorylation sites appear to selectively engage with distinct arrestin structural motifs (that is, micro-locks) to induce different arrestin conformations. These observations suggest a model in which different phosphorylation patterns of the GPCR C terminus can combinatorially modulate the conformation of the finger loop and other phosphorylation-sensitive structural elements to drive distinct arrestin conformation and functional outcomes.

Structural Basis of Arrestin-Dependent Signal Transduction

Arrestins are a small family of proteins with four isoforms in humans. Remarkably, two arrestins regulate signaling from >800 G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) or nonreceptor activators by simultaneously binding an activator and one out of hundreds of other signaling proteins. When arrestins are bound to GPCRs or other activators, the affinity for these signaling partners changes. Thus, it is proposed that an activator alters arrestin's ability to transduce a signal. The comparison of all available arrestin structures identifies several common conformational rearrangements associated with activation. In particular, it identifies elements that are directly involved in binding to GPCRs or other activators, elements that likely engage distinct downstream effectors, and elements that likely link the activator-binding sites with the effector-binding sites.

Arrestins: structural disorder creates rich functionality

Arrestins are soluble relatively small 44–46 kDa proteins that specifically bind hundreds of active phosphorylated GPCRs and dozens of non-receptor partners. There are binding partners that demonstrate preference for each of the known arrestin conformations: free, receptor-bound, and microtubule-bound. Recent evidence suggests that conformational flexibility in every functional state is the defining characteristic of arrestins. Flexibility, or plasticity, of proteins is often described as structural disorder, in contrast to the fixed conformational order observed in high-resolution crystal structures. However, protein-protein interactions often involve highly flexible elements that can assume many distinct conformations upon binding to different partners. Existing evidence suggests that arrestins are no exception to this rule: their flexibility is necessary for functional versatility. The data on arrestins and many other multi-functional proteins indicate that in many cases, “order” might be artificially imposed by highly non-physiological crystallization conditions and/or crystal packing forces. In contrast, conformational flexibility (and its extreme case, intrinsic disorder) is a more natural state of proteins, representing true biological order that underlies their physiologically relevant functions.

The arrestin-1 finger loop interacts with two distinct conformations of active rhodopsin

Signaling of the prototypical G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) rhodopsin through its cognate G protein transducin (G_t) is quenched when arrestin binds to the activated receptor. Although the overall architecture of the rhodopsin/arrestin complex is known, many questions regarding its specificity remain unresolved. Here, using FTIR difference spectroscopy and a dual pH/peptide titration assay, we show that rhodopsin maintains certain flexibility upon binding the "finger loop" of visual arrestin (prepared as synthetic peptide ArrFL-1). We found that two distinct complexes can be stabilized depending on the protonation state of E3.49 in the conserved (D)ERY motif. Both complexes exhibit different interaction modes and affinities of ArrFL-1 binding. The plasticity of the receptor within the rhodopsin/ArrFL-1 complex stands in contrast to the complex with the C terminus of the G_t α-subunit (GαCT), which stabilizes only one specific substate out of the conformational ensemble. However, G_t α-subunit binding and both ArrFL-1-binding modes involve a direct interaction to conserved R3.50, as determined by site-directed mutagenesis. Our findings highlight the importance of receptor conformational flexibility and cytoplasmic proton uptake for modulation of rhodopsin signaling and thereby extend the picture provided by crystal structures of the rhodopsin/arrestin and rhodopsin/ArrFL-1 complexes. Furthermore, the two binding modes of ArrFL-1 identified here involve motifs of conserved amino acids, which indicates that our results may have elucidated a common modulation mechanism of class A GPCR-G protein/-arrestin signaling.

Structure and dynamics of GPCR signaling complexes

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) relay numerous extracellular signals by triggering intracellular signaling through coupling with G proteins and arrestins. Recent breakthroughs in the structural determination of GPCRs and GPCR-transducer complexes represent important steps toward deciphering GPCR signal transduction at a molecular level. A full understanding of the molecular basis of GPCR-mediated signaling requires elucidation of the dynamics of receptors and their transducer complexes as well as their energy landscapes and conformational transition rates. Here, we summarize current insights into the structural plasticity of GPCR-G-protein and GPCR-arrestin complexes that underlies the regulation of the receptor's intracellular signaling profile.

Directed Evolution of Proteins Based on Mutational Scanning

Directed evolution has emerged as one of the most effective protein engineering methods in basic research as well as in applications in synthetic organic chemistry and biotechnology. The successful engineering of protein activity, allostery, binding affinity, expression, folding, fluorescence, solubility, substrate scope, selectivity (enantio-, stereo-, and regioselectivity), and/or stability (temperature, organic solvents, pH) is just limited by the throughput of the genetic selection, display, or screening system that is available for a given protein. Sometimes it is possible to analyze millions of protein variants from combinatorial libraries per day. In other cases, however, only a few hundred variants can be screened in a single day, and thus the creation of smaller yet smarter libraries is needed. Different strategies have been developed to create these libraries. One approach is to perform mutational scanning or to construct "mutability landscapes" in order to understand sequence-function relationships that can guide the actual directed evolution process. Herein we provide a protocol for economically constructing scanning mutagenesis libraries using a cytochrome P450 enzyme in a high-throughput manner. The goal is to engineer activity, regioselectivity, and stereoselectivity in the oxidative hydroxylation of a steroid, a challenging reaction in synthetic organic chemistry. Libraries based on mutability landscapes can be used to engineer any fitness trait of interest. The protocol is also useful for constructing gene libraries for deep mutational scanning experiments.

Identification of Phosphorylation Codes for Arrestin Recruitment by G Protein-Coupled Receptors

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) mediate diverse signaling in part through interaction with arrestins, whose binding promotes receptor internalization and signaling through G protein-independent pathways. High-affinity arrestin binding requires receptor phosphorylation, often at the receptor's C-terminal tail. Here, we report an X-ray free electron laser (XFEL) crystal structure of the rhodopsin-arrestin complex, in which the phosphorylated C terminus of rhodopsin forms an extended intermolecular β sheet with the N-terminal β strands of arrestin. Phosphorylation was detected at rhodopsin C-terminal tail residues T336 and S338. These two phospho-residues, together with E341, form an extensive network of electrostatic interactions with three positively charged pockets in arrestin in a mode that resembles binding of the phosphorylated vasopressin-2 receptor tail to β-arrestin-1. Based on these observations, we derived and validated a set of phosphorylation codes that serve as a common mechanism for phosphorylation-dependent recruitment of arrestins by GPCRs.

High-throughput mutagenesis using a two-fragment PCR approach

Site-directed scanning mutagenesis is a powerful protein engineering technique which allows studies of protein functionality at single amino acid resolution and design of stabilized proteins for structural and biophysical work. However, creating libraries of hundreds of mutants remains a challenging, expensive and time-consuming process. The efficiency of the mutagenesis step is the key for fast and economical generation of such libraries. PCR artefacts such as misannealing and tandem primer repeats are often observed in mutagenesis cloning and reduce the efficiency of mutagenesis. Here we present a high-throughput mutagenesis pipeline based on established methods that significantly reduces PCR artefacts. We combined a two-fragment PCR approach, in which mutagenesis primers are used in two separate PCR reactions, with an in vitro assembly of resulting fragments. We show that this approach, despite being more laborious, is a very efficient pipeline for the creation of large libraries of mutants.

Uncovering missing pieces: duplication and deletion history of arrestins in deuterostomes

BACKGROUND

The cytosolic arrestin proteins mediate desensitization of activated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) via competition with G proteins for the active phosphorylated receptors. Arrestins in active, including receptor-bound, conformation are also transducers of signaling. Therefore, this protein family is an attractive therapeutic target. The signaling outcome is believed to be a result of structural and sequence-dependent interactions of arrestins with GPCRs and other protein partners. Here we elucidated the detailed evolution of arrestins in deuterostomes.

RESULTS

Identity and number of arrestin paralogs were determined searching deuterostome genomes and gene expression data. In contrast to standard gene prediction methods, our strategy first detects exons situated on different scaffolds and then solves the problem of assigning them to the correct gene. This increases both the completeness and the accuracy of the annotation in comparison to conventional database search strategies applied by the community. The employed strategy enabled us to map in detail the duplication- and deletion history of arrestin paralogs including tandem duplications, pseudogenizations and the formation of retrogenes. The two rounds of whole genome duplications in the vertebrate stem lineage gave rise to four arrestin paralogs. Surprisingly, visual arrestin ARR3 was lost in the mammalian clades Afrotheria and Xenarthra. Duplications in specific clades, on the other hand, must have given rise to new paralogs that show signatures of diversification in functional elements important for receptor binding and phosphate sensing.

CONCLUSION

The current study traces the functional evolution of deuterostome arrestins in unprecedented detail. Based on a precise re-annotation of the exon-intron structure at nucleotide resolution, we infer the gain and loss of paralogs and patterns of conservation, co-variation and selection.

Muscarinic receptor regulates extracellular signal regulated kinase by two modes of arrestin binding

Binding of agonists to G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) activates heterotrimeric G proteins and downstream signaling. Agonist-bound GPCRs are then phosphorylated by protein kinases and bound by arrestin to trigger desensitization and endocytosis. Arrestin plays another important signaling function. It recruits and regulates activity of an extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) cascade. However, molecular details and timing of ERK activation remain fundamental unanswered questions that limit understanding of how arrestin-dependent GPCR signaling controls cell functions. Here we validate and model a system that tracks the dynamics of interactions of arrestin with receptors and of ERK activation using optical reporters. Our intermolecular FRET measurements in living cells are consistent with β-arrestin binding to M₁ muscarinic acetylcholine receptors (M₁Rs) in two different binding modes, transient and stable. The stable mode persists for minutes after agonist removal. The choice of mode is governed by phosphorylation on key residues in the third intracellular loop of the receptor. We detect a similar intramolecular conformational change in arrestin in either binding mode. It develops within seconds of arrestin binding to the M₁ receptor, and it reverses within seconds of arrestin unbinding from the transient binding mode. Furthermore, we observed that, when stably bound to phosphorylated M₁R, β-arrestin scaffolds and activates MEK-dependent ERK. In contrast, when transiently bound, β-arrestin reduces ERK activity via recruitment of a protein phosphatase. All this ERK signaling develops at the plasma membrane. In this scaffolding hypothesis, a shifting balance between the two arrestin binding modes determines the degree of ERK activation at the membrane.

Understanding the Differential Selectivity of Arrestins toward the Phosphorylation State of the Receptor

Proteins in the arrestin family exhibit a conserved structural fold that nevertheless allows for significant differences in their selectivity for G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) and their phosphorylation states. To reveal the mechanism of activation that prepares arrestin for selective interaction with GPCRs, and to understand the basis for these differences, we used unbiased molecular dynamics simulations to compare the structural and dynamic properties of wild type Arr1 (Arr1-WT), Arr3 (Arr3-WT), and a constitutively active Arr1 mutant, Arr1-R175E, characterized by a perturbation of the phosphate recognition region called "polar core". We find that in our simulations the mutant evolves toward a conformation that resembles the known preactivated structures of an Arr1 splice-variant, and the structurally similar phosphopeptide-bound Arr2-WT, while this does not happen for Arr1-WT. Hence, we propose an activation allosteric mechanism connecting the perturbation of the polar core to a global conformational change, including the relative reorientation of N- and C-domains, and the emergence of electrostatic properties of putative binding surfaces. The underlying local structural changes are interpreted as markers of the evolution of an arrestin structure toward an active-like conformation. Similar activation related changes occur in Arr3-WT in the absence of any perturbation of the polar core, suggesting that this system could spontaneously visit preactivated states in solution. This hypothesis is proposed to explain the lower selectivity of Arr3 toward nonphosphorylated receptors. Moreover, by elucidating the allosteric mechanism underlying activation, we identify functionally critical regions on arrestin structure that can be targeted with drugs or chemical tools for functional modulation.

Functional map of arrestin binding to phosphorylated opsin, with and without agonist

Arrestins desensitize G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and act as mediators of signalling. Here we investigated the interactions of arrestin-1 with two functionally distinct forms of the dim-light photoreceptor rhodopsin. Using unbiased scanning mutagenesis we probed the individual contribution of each arrestin residue to the interaction with the phosphorylated apo-receptor (Ops-P) and the agonist-bound form (Meta II-P). Disruption of the polar core or displacement of the C-tail strengthened binding to both receptor forms. In contrast, mutations of phosphate-binding residues (phosphosensors) suggest the phosphorylated receptor C-terminus binds arrestin differently for Meta II-P and Ops-P. Likewise, mutations within the inter-domain interface, variations in the receptor-binding loops and the C-edge of arrestin reveal different binding modes. In summary, our results indicate that arrestin-1 binding to Meta II-P and Ops-P is similarly dependent on arrestin activation, although the complexes formed with these two receptor forms are structurally distinct.

Evidence that the Rhodopsin Kinase (GRK1) N-Terminus and the Transducin Gα C-Terminus Interact with the Same "Hydrophobic Patch" on Rhodopsin TM5

Phosphorylation of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) terminates their ability to couple with and activate G proteins by increasing their affinity for arrestins. Unfortunately, detailed information regarding how GPCRs interact with the kinases responsible for their phosphorylation is still limited. Here, we purified fully functional GPCR kinase 1 (GRK1) using a rapid method and used it to gain insights into how this important kinase interacts with the GPCR rhodopsin. Specifically, we find that GRK1 uses the same site on rhodopsin as the transducin (Gt) Gtα C-terminal tail and the arrestin "finger loop", a cleft formed in the cytoplasmic face of the receptor upon activation. Our studies also show GRK1 requires two conserved residues located in this cleft (L226 and V230) that have been shown to be required for Gt activation due to their direct interactions with hydrophobic residues on the Gα C-terminal tail. Our data and modeling studies are consistent with the idea that all three proteins (Gt, GRK1, and visual arrestin) bind, at least in part, in the same site on rhodopsin and interact with the receptor through a similar hydrophobic contact-driven mechanism.

Rhodopsin on tracks: new ways to go in signaling

In this issue of Structure, Gunkel et al. describe cryoelectron tomography analysis of the nano-organization of the G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) rhodopsin in the rod photoreceptor disk membranes in a near-native environment. Their data strongly suggest that rhodopsin is organized in the native rod disk as dimers arranged in parallel tracks aligned to the incisure.

Structural evidence for the role of polar core residue Arg175 in arrestin activation

Binding mechanism of arrestin requires photoactivation and phosphorylation of the receptor protein rhodopsin, where the receptor bound phosphate groups cause displacement of the long C-tail ‘activating’ arrestin. Mutation of arginine 175 to glutamic acid (R175E), a central residue in the polar core and previously predicted as the ‘phosphosensor’ leads to a pre-active arrestin that is able to terminate phototransduction by binding to non-phosphorylated, light-activated rhodopsin. Here, we report the first crystal structure of a R175E mutant arrestin at 2.7 Å resolution that reveals significant differences compared to the basal state reported in full-length arrestin structures. These differences comprise disruption of hydrogen bond network in the polar core, and three-element interaction including disordering of several residues in the receptor-binding finger loop and the C-terminus (residues 361–404). Additionally, R175E structure shows a 7.5° rotation of the amino and carboxy-terminal domains relative to each other. Consistent to the biochemical data, our structure suggests an important role of R29 in the initial activation step of C-tail release. Comparison of the crystal structures of basal arrestin and R175E mutant provide insights into the mechanism of arrestin activation, where binding of the receptor likely induces structural changes mimicked as in R175E.

Crystal structure of rhodopsin bound to arrestin by femtosecond X-ray laser

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) signal primarily through G proteins or arrestins. Arrestin binding to GPCRs blocks G protein interaction and redirects signalling to numerous G-protein-independent pathways. Here we report the crystal structure of a constitutively active form of human rhodopsin bound to a pre-activated form of the mouse visual arrestin, determined by serial femtosecond X-ray laser crystallography. Together with extensive biochemical and mutagenesis data, the structure reveals an overall architecture of the rhodopsin-arrestin assembly in which rhodopsin uses distinct structural elements, including transmembrane helix 7 and helix 8, to recruit arrestin. Correspondingly, arrestin adopts the pre-activated conformation, with a ∼20° rotation between the amino and carboxy domains, which opens up a cleft in arrestin to accommodate a short helix formed by the second intracellular loop of rhodopsin. This structure provides a basis for understanding GPCR-mediated arrestin-biased signalling and demonstrates the power of X-ray lasers for advancing the frontiers of structural biology.

The rhodopsin-arrestin-1 interaction in bicelles

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are essential mediators of information transfer in eukaryotic cells. Interactions between GPCRs and their binding partners modulate the signaling process. For example, the interaction between GPCR and cognate G protein initiates the signal, while the interaction with cognate arrestin terminates G-protein-mediated signaling. In visual signal transduction, arrestin-1 selectively binds to the phosphorylated light-activated GPCR rhodopsin to terminate rhodopsin signaling. Under physiological conditions, the rhodopsin-arrestin-1 interaction occurs in highly specialized disk membrane in which rhodopsin resides. This membrane is replaced with mimetics when working with purified proteins. While detergents are commonly used as membrane mimetics, most detergents denature arrestin-1, preventing biochemical studies of this interaction. In contrast, bicelles provide a suitable alternative medium. An advantage of bicelles is that they contain lipids, which have been shown to be necessary for normal rhodopsin-arrestin-1 interaction. Here we describe how to reconstitute rhodopsin into bicelles, and how bicelle properties affect the rhodopsin-arrestin-1 interaction.

Molecular mechanism of phosphorylation-dependent arrestin activation

The past years have seen tremendous progress towards understanding how arrestins recognize phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Two arrestin crystal structures, one of a pre-activated splice variant and one bound to a GPCR phosphopeptide, provided insights into the conformational changes upon phosphate recognition. Scanning mutagenesis and spectroscopic studies complete the picture of arrestin activation and receptor binding. Most perspicuous is the C-tail exchange mechanism, by which the C-tail of arrestin is released from its basal conformation and replaced by the phosphorylated GPCR C-terminus. Three positively charged clusters could act as conserved arrestin phosphosensors. Variations in the pattern of phosphorylation in a GPCR and variations within the C-terminus of different GPCRs may encode specificity to arrestin subtypes and particular physiological responses.

Conformational selection and equilibrium governs the ability of retinals to bind opsin

Despite extensive study, how retinal enters and exits the visual G protein-coupled receptor rhodopsin remains unclear. One clue may lie in two openings between transmembrane helix 1 (TM1) and TM7 and between TM5 and TM6 in the active receptor structure. Recently, retinal has been proposed to enter the inactive apoprotein opsin (ops) through these holes when the receptor transiently adopts the active opsin conformation (ops*). Here, we directly test this "transient activation" hypothesis using a fluorescence-based approach to measure rates of retinal binding to samples containing differing relative fractions of ops and ops*. In contrast to what the transient activation hypothesis model would predict, we found that binding for the inverse agonist, 11-cis-retinal (11CR), slowed when the sample contained more ops* (produced using M257Y, a constitutively activating mutation). Interestingly, the increased presence of ops* allowed for binding of the agonist, all-trans-retinal (ATR), whereas WT opsin showed no binding. Shifting the conformational equilibrium toward even more ops* using a G protein peptide mimic (either free in solution or fused to the receptor) accelerated the rate of ATR binding and slowed 11CR binding. An arrestin peptide mimic showed little effect on 11CR binding; however, it stabilized opsin · ATR complexes. The TM5/TM6 hole is apparently not involved in this conformational selection. Increasing its size by mutagenesis did not enable ATR binding but instead slowed 11CR binding, suggesting that it may play a role in trapping 11CR. In summary, our results indicate that conformational selection dictates stable retinal binding, which we propose involves ATR and 11CR binding to different states, the latter a previously unidentified, open-but-inactive conformation.

Crystal structure of a common GPCR-binding interface for G protein and arrestin

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) transmit extracellular signals to activate intracellular heterotrimeric G proteins (Gαβγ) and arrestins. For G protein signalling, the Gα C-terminus (GαCT) binds to a cytoplasmic crevice of the receptor that opens upon activation. A consensus motif is shared among GαCT from the G_i/G_t family and the ‘finger loop’ region (ArrFL1–4) of all four arrestins. Here we present a 2.75 Å crystal structure of ArrFL-1, a peptide analogue of the finger loop of rod photoreceptor arrestin, in complex with the prototypical GPCR rhodopsin. Functional binding of ArrFL to the receptor was confirmed by ultraviolet-visible absorption spectroscopy, competitive binding assays and Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. For both GαCT and ArrFL, binding to the receptor crevice induces a similar reverse turn structure, although significant structural differences are seen at the rim of the binding crevice. Our results reflect both the common receptor-binding interface and the divergent biological functions of G proteins and arrestins.

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) transmit signals through intracellular heterotrimeric G proteins and arrestins. Here, Szczepek et al. present the structure of a common binding interface for Gα and arrestin on rhodopsin to shed light on key interactions that mediate transduction of specific signals through a single GPCR.

Structured and disordered facets of the GPCR fold

The seven-transmembrane (7TM) helix fold of G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) has been adapted for a wide variety of physiologically important signaling functions. Here, we discuss the diversity in the structured and disordered regions of GPCRs based on the recently published crystal structures and sequence analysis of all human GPCRs. A comparison of the structures of rhodopsin-like receptors (class A), secretin-like receptors (class B), metabotropic receptors (class C) and frizzled receptors (class F) shows that the relative arrangement of the transmembrane helices is conserved across all four GPCR classes although individual receptors can be activated by ligand binding at varying positions within and around the transmembrane helical bundle. A systematic analysis of GPCR sequences reveals the presence of disordered segments in the cytoplasmic side, abundant post-translational modification sites, evidence for alternative splicing and several putative linear peptide motifs that have the potential to mediate interactions with cytosolic proteins. While the structured regions permit the receptor to bind diverse ligands, the disordered regions appear to have an underappreciated role in modulating downstream signaling in response to the cellular state. An integrated paradigm combining the knowledge of structured and disordered regions is imperative for gaining a holistic understanding of the GPCR (un)structure-function relationship.

The receptor concept in 3D: from hypothesis and metaphor to GPCR-ligand structures

The first mentioning of the word "receptor" for the structure with which a bioactive compound should react for obtaining its specific influence on a physiological system goes back to the years around 1900. The receptor concept was adapted from the lock and key theory for the enzyme substrate and blockers interactions. Through the years the concept, in the beginning rather being a metaphor, not a model, was refined and became reality in recent years. Not only the structures of receptors were elucidated, also the receptor machineries were unraveled. Following a brief historical review we will describe how the recent breakthroughs in the experimental determination of G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) crystal structures can be complemented by computational modeling, medicinal chemistry, biochemical, and molecular pharmacological studies to obtain new insights into the molecular determinants of GPCR-ligand binding and activation. We will furthermore discuss how this information can be used for structure-based discovery of novel GPCR ligands that bind specific (allosteric) binding sites with desired effects on GPCR functional activity.

Biased signaling through G-protein-coupled PROKR2 receptors harboring missense mutations

Various missense mutations in the gene coding for prokineticin receptor 2 (PROKR2), a G-protein-coupled receptor, have been identified in patients with Kallmann syndrome. However, the functional consequences of these mutations on the different signaling pathways of this receptor have not been studied. We first showed that the wild-type PROKR2 can activate different G-protein subtypes (Gq, Gs, and Gi/o) and recruit β-arrestins in transfected HEK-293 cells. We then examined, for each of these signaling pathways, the effects of 9 mutations that did not significantly impair cell surface targeting or ligand binding of the receptor. Four mutant receptors showing defective Gq signaling (R85C, R85H, R164Q, and V331M) could still recruit β-arrestins on ligand activation, which may cause biased signaling in vivo. Conversely, the R80C receptor could activate the 3 types of G proteins but could not recruit β-arrestins. Finally, the R268C receptor could recruit β-arrestins and activate the Gq and Gs signaling pathways but could not activate the Gi/o signaling pathway. Our results validate the concept that mutations in the genes encoding membrane receptors can bias downstream signaling in various ways, possibly leading to pathogenic and, perhaps in some cases, protective (e.g., R268C) effects.