Internalization of the m2 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor. Arrestin-independent and -dependent pathways

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.

Molecular insights into atypical modes of β-arrestin interaction with seven transmembrane receptors

β-arrestins (βarrs) are multifunctional proteins involved in signaling and regulation of seven transmembrane receptors (7TMRs), and their interaction is driven primarily by agonist-induced receptor activation and phosphorylation. Here, we present seven cryo-electron microscopy structures of βarrs either in the basal state, activated by the muscarinic receptor subtype 2 (M2R) through its third intracellular loop, or activated by the βarr-biased decoy D6 receptor (D6R). Combined with biochemical, cellular, and biophysical experiments, these structural snapshots allow the visualization of atypical engagement of βarrs with 7TMRs and also reveal a structural transition in the carboxyl terminus of βarr2 from a β strand to an α helix upon activation by D6R. Our study provides previously unanticipated molecular insights into the structural and functional diversity encoded in 7TMR-βarr complexes with direct implications for exploring novel therapeutic avenues.

Phosphorylation motif dictates GPCR C-terminal domain conformation and arrestin interaction

Arrestin-dependent G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling pathway is regulated by the phosphorylation state of GPCR's C-terminal domain, but the molecular bases of arrestin:receptor interaction are to be further illuminated. Here we investigated the impact of phosphorylation on the conformational features of the C-terminal region from three rhodopsin-like GPCRs, the vasopressin V2 receptor (V2R), the growth hormone secretagogue or ghrelin receptor type 1a (GHSR), and the β2-adernergic receptor (β2AR). Using phosphomimetic variants, we identified pre-formed secondary structure elements, or short linear motifs (SLiMs), that undergo specific conformational transitions upon phosphorylation. Of importance, such conformational transitions appear to favor arrestin-2 binding. Hence, our results suggest a model in which the phosphorylation-dependent structuration of the GPCR C-terminal regions would modulate arrestin binding and therefore signaling outcomes in arrestin-dependent pathways.

GPCR Binding and JNK3 Activation by Arrestin-3 Have Different Structural Requirements

Arrestins bind active phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Among the four mammalian subtypes, only arrestin-3 facilitates the activation of JNK3 in cells. In available structures, Lys-295 in the lariat loop of arrestin-3 and its homologue Lys-294 in arrestin-2 directly interact with the activator-attached phosphates. We compared the roles of arrestin-3 conformational equilibrium and Lys-295 in GPCR binding and JNK3 activation. Several mutants with enhanced ability to bind GPCRs showed much lower activity towards JNK3, whereas a mutant that does not bind GPCRs was more active. The subcellular distribution of mutants did not correlate with GPCR recruitment or JNK3 activation. Charge neutralization and reversal mutations of Lys-295 differentially affected receptor binding on different backgrounds but had virtually no effect on JNK3 activation. Thus, GPCR binding and arrestin-3-assisted JNK3 activation have distinct structural requirements, suggesting that facilitation of JNK3 activation is the function of arrestin-3 that is not bound to a GPCR.

GPCR binding and JNK3 activation by arrestin-3 have different structural requirements

Arrestins bind active phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Among the four mammalian subtypes, only arrestin-3 facilitates the activation of JNK3 in cells. In available structures, Lys-295 in the lariat loop of arrestin-3 and its homologue Lys-294 in arrestin-2 directly interact with the activator-attached phosphates. We compared the role of arrestin-3 conformational equilibrium and of Lys-295 in GPCR binding and JNK3 activation. Several mutants with enhanced ability to bind GPCRs showed much lower activity towards JNK3, whereas a mutant that does not bind GPCRs was more active. Subcellular distribution of mutants did not correlate with GPCR recruitment or JNK3 activation. Charge neutralization and reversal mutations of Lys-295 differentially affected receptor binding on different backgrounds, but had virtually no effect on JNK3 activation. Thus, GPCR binding and arrestin-3-assisted JNK3 activation have distinct structural requirements, suggesting that facilitation of JNK3 activation is the function of arrestin-3 that is not bound to a GPCR.

The cellular model for Alzheimer's disease research: PC12 cells

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a common age-related neurodegenerative disease characterized by progressive cognitive decline and irreversible memory impairment. Currently, several studies have failed to fully elucidate AD's cellular and molecular mechanisms. For this purpose, research on related cellular models may propose potential predictive models for the drug development of AD. Therefore, many cells characterized by neuronal properties are widely used to mimic the pathological process of AD, such as PC12, SH-SY5Y, and N2a, especially the PC12 pheochromocytoma cell line. Thus, this review covers the most systematic essay that used PC12 cells to study AD. We depict the cellular source, culture condition, differentiation methods, transfection methods, drugs inducing AD, general approaches (evaluation methods and metrics), and in vitro cellular models used in parallel with PC12 cells.

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.

Receptor-Arrestin Interactions: The GPCR Perspective

Arrestins are a small family of four proteins in most vertebrates that bind hundreds of different G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Arrestin binding to a GPCR has at least three functions: precluding further receptor coupling to G proteins, facilitating receptor internalization, and initiating distinct arrestin-mediated signaling. The molecular mechanism of arrestin–GPCR interactions has been extensively studied and discussed from the “arrestin perspective”, focusing on the roles of arrestin elements in receptor binding. Here, we discuss this phenomenon from the “receptor perspective”, focusing on the receptor elements involved in arrestin binding and emphasizing existing gaps in our knowledge that need to be filled. It is vitally important to understand the role of receptor elements in arrestin activation and how the interaction of each of these elements with arrestin contributes to the latter’s transition to the high-affinity binding state. A more precise knowledge of the molecular mechanisms of arrestin activation is needed to enable the construction of arrestin mutants with desired functional characteristics.

Arrestin-Dependent and -Independent Internalization of G Protein-Coupled Receptors: Methods, Mechanisms, and Implications on Cell Signaling

Agonist-induced endocytosis is a key regulatory mechanism for controlling the responsiveness of the cell by changing the density of cell surface receptors. In addition to the role of endocytosis in signal termination, endocytosed G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) have been found to signal from intracellular compartments of the cell. Arrestins are generally believed to be the master regulators of GPCR endocytosis by binding to both phosphorylated receptors and adaptor protein 2 (AP-2) or clathrin, thus recruiting receptors to clathrin-coated pits to facilitate the internalization process. However, many other functions have been described for arrestins that do not relate to their role in terminating signaling. Additionally, there are now more than 30 examples of GPCRs that internalize independently of arrestins. Here we review the methods, pharmacological tools, and cellular backgrounds used to determine the role of arrestins in receptor internalization, highlighting their advantages and caveats. We also summarize key examples of arrestin-independent GPCR endocytosis in the literature and their suggested alternative endocytosis pathway (e.g., the caveolae-dependent and fast endophilin-mediated endocytosis pathways). Finally, we consider the possible function of arrestins recruited to GPCRs that are endocytosed independently of arrestins, including the catalytic arrestin activation paradigm. Technological improvements in recent years have advanced the field further, and, combined with the important implications of endocytosis on drug responses, this makes endocytosis an obvious parameter to include in molecular pharmacological characterization of ligand-GPCR interactions. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) endocytosis is an important means to terminate receptor signaling, and arrestins play a central role in the widely accepted classical paradigm of GPCR endocytosis. In contrast to the canonical arrestin-mediated internalization, an increasing number of GPCRs are found to be endocytosed via alternate pathways, and the process appears more diverse than the previously defined "one pathway fits all."

Dissecting the structural features of β-arrestins as multifunctional proteins

β-arrestins bind active G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and play a crucial role in receptor desensitization and internalization. The classical paradigm of arrestin function has been expanded with the identification of many non-receptor-binding partners, which indicated the multifunctional role of β-arrestins in cellular functions. To elucidate the molecular mechanism of β-arrestin-mediated signaling, the structural features of β-arrestins were investigated using X-ray crystallography and cryogenic electron microscopy (cryo-EM). However, the intrinsic conformational flexibility of β-arrestins hampers the elucidation of structural interactions between β-arrestins and their binding partners using conventional structure determination tools. Therefore, structural information obtained using complementary structure analysis techniques would be necessary in combination with X-ray crystallography and cryo-EM data. In this review, we describe how β-arrestins interact with their binding partners from a structural point of view, as elucidated by both traditional methods (X-ray crystallography and cryo-EM) and complementary structure analysis techniques.

GRKs as Modulators of Neurotransmitter Receptors

Many receptors for neurotransmitters, such as dopamine, norepinephrine, acetylcholine, and neuropeptides, belong to the superfamily of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). A general model posits that GPCRs undergo two-step homologous desensitization: the active receptor is phosphorylated by kinases of the G protein-coupled receptor kinase (GRK) family, whereupon arrestin proteins specifically bind active phosphorylated receptors, shutting down G protein-mediated signaling, facilitating receptor internalization, and initiating distinct signaling pathways via arrestin-based scaffolding. Here, we review the mechanisms of GRK-dependent regulation of neurotransmitter receptors, focusing on the diverse modes of GRK-mediated phosphorylation of receptor subtypes. The immediate signaling consequences of GRK-mediated receptor phosphorylation, such as arrestin recruitment, desensitization, and internalization/resensitization, are equally diverse, depending not only on the receptor subtype but also on phosphorylation by GRKs of select receptor residues. We discuss the signaling outcome as well as the biological and behavioral consequences of the GRK-dependent phosphorylation of neurotransmitter receptors where known.

Phosphorylation barcode-dependent signal bias of the dopamine D1 receptor

Agonist-activated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) must correctly select from hundreds of potential downstream signaling cascades and effectors. To accomplish this, GPCRs first bind to an intermediary signaling protein, such as G protein or arrestin. These intermediaries initiate signaling cascades that promote the activity of different effectors, including several protein kinases. The relative roles of G proteins versus arrestins in initiating and directing signaling is hotly debated, and it remains unclear how the correct final signaling pathway is chosen given the ready availability of protein partners. Here, we begin to deconvolute the process of signal bias from the dopamine D1 receptor (D1R) by exploring factors that promote the activation of ERK1/2 or Src, the kinases that lead to cell growth and proliferation. We found that ERK1/2 activation involves both arrestin and Gαs, while Src activation depends solely on arrestin. Interestingly, we found that the phosphorylation pattern influences both arrestin and Gαs coupling, suggesting an additional way the cells regulate G protein signaling. The phosphorylation sites in the D1R intracellular loop 3 are particularly important for directing the binding of G protein versus arrestin and for selecting between the activation of ERK1/2 and Src. Collectively, these studies correlate functional outcomes with a physical basis for signaling bias and provide fundamental information on how GPCR signaling is directed.

Biased GPCR signaling: Possible mechanisms and inherent limitations

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are targeted by about a third of clinically used drugs. Many GPCRs couple to more than one type of heterotrimeric G proteins, become phosphorylated by any of several different GRKs, and then bind one or more types of arrestin. Thus, classical therapeutically active drugs simultaneously initiate several branches of signaling, some of which are beneficial, whereas others result in unwanted on-target side effects. The development of novel compounds to selectively channel the signaling into the desired direction has the potential to become a breakthrough in health care. However, there are natural and technological hurdles that must be overcome. The fact that most GPCRs are subject to homologous desensitization, where the active receptor couples to G proteins, is phosphorylated by GRKs, and then binds arrestins, suggest that in most cases the GPCR conformations that facilitate their interactions with these three classes of binding partners significantly overlap. Thus, while partner-specific conformations might exist, they are likely low-probability states. GPCRs are inherently flexible, which suggests that complete bias is highly unlikely to be feasible: in the conformational ensemble induced by any ligand, there would be some conformations facilitating receptor coupling to unwanted partners. Things are further complicated by the fact that virtually every cell expresses numerous G proteins, several GRK subtypes, and two non-visual arrestins with distinct signaling capabilities. Finally, novel screening methods for measuring ligand bias must be devised, as the existing methods are not specific for one particular branch of signaling.

The M2 muscarinic receptor, in association to M1 , regulates the neuromuscular PKA molecular dynamics

Muscarinic acetylcholine receptor 1 subtype (M₁ ) and muscarinic acetylcholine receptor 2 subtype (M₂ ) presynaptic muscarinic receptor subtypes increase and decrease, respectively, neurotransmitter release at neuromuscular junctions. M₂ involves protein kinase A (PKA), although the muscarinic regulation to form and inactivate the PKA holoenzyme is unknown. Here, we show that M₂ signaling inhibits PKA by downregulating Cβ subunit, upregulating RIIα/β and liberating RIβ and RIIα to the cytosol. This promotes PKA holoenzyme formation and reduces the phosphorylation of the transmitter release target synaptosome-associated protein 25 and the gene regulator cAMP response element binding. Instead, M₁ signaling, which is downregulated by M₂ , opposes to M₂ by recruiting R subunits to the membrane. The M₁ and M₂ reciprocal actions are performed through the anchoring protein A kinase anchor protein 150 as a common node. Interestingly, M₂ modulation on protein expression needs M₁ signaling. Altogether, these results describe the dynamics of PKA subunits upon M₂ muscarinic signaling in basal and under presynaptic nerve activity, uncover a specific involvement of the M₁ receptor and reveal the M₁ /M₂ balance to activate PKA to regulate neurotransmission. This provides a molecular mechanism to the PKA holoenzyme formation and inactivation which could be general to other synapses and cellular models.

Impairment of agonist-induced M2 muscarinic receptor activation by autoantibodies from chagasic patients with cardiovascular dysautonomia

Previous studies showed that circulating autoantibodies against M₂ muscarinic receptors (anti-M₂R Ab) are associated with decreased cardiac parasympathetic modulation in patients with chronic Chagas disease (CD). Here we investigated whether the exposure of M₂R to such antibodies could impair agonist-induced receptor activation, leading to the inhibition of associated signaling pathways. Preincubation of M₂R-expressing HEK 293T cells with serum IgG fractions from chagasic patients with cardiovascular dysautonomia, followed by the addition of carbachol, resulted in the attenuation of agonist-induced G_i protein activation and arrestin-2 recruitment. These effects were not mimicked by the corresponding Fab fractions, suggesting that they occur through receptor crosslinking. IgG autoantibodies did not enhance M₂R/arrestin interaction or promote M₂R internalization, suggesting that their inhibitory effects are not likely a result of short-term receptor regulation. Rather, these immunoglobulins could function as negative allosteric modulators of acetylcholine-mediated responses, thereby contributing to the development of parasympathetic dysfunction in patients with CD.

Endocytic sorting and downregulation of the M2 acetylcholine receptor is regulated by ubiquitin and the ESCRT complex

Cholinergic dysfunction plays a critical role in a number of disease states, and the loss of functional muscarinic acetylcholine receptors plays a key role in disease pathogenesis. Therefore, preventing receptor downregulation would maintain functional receptor number, and be predicted to alleviate symptoms. However, the molecular mechanism(s) underlying muscarinic receptor downregulation are currently unknown. Here we demonstrate that the M2 muscarinic receptor undergoes rapid lysosomal proteolysis, and this lysosomal trafficking is facilitated by ubiquitination of the receptor. Importantly, we show that this trafficking is driven specifically by ESCRT mediated involution. Critically, we provide evidence that disruption of this process leads to a re-routing of the trafficking of the M2 receptor away from the lysosome and into recycling pathway, and eventually back to the plasma membrane. This study is the first to identify the process by which the M2 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor undergoes endocytic sorting, and critically reveals a regulatory checkpoint that represents a target to pharmacologically increase the number of functional muscarinic receptors within the central nervous system.

Targeting arrestin interactions with its partners for therapeutic purposes

Most vertebrates express four arrestin subtypes: two visual ones in photoreceptor cells and two non-visuals expressed ubiquitously. The latter two interact with hundreds of G protein-coupled receptors, certain receptors of other types, and numerous non-receptor partners. Arrestins have no enzymatic activity and work by interacting with other proteins, often assembling multi-protein signaling complexes. Arrestin binding to every partner affects cell signaling, including pathways regulating cell survival, proliferation, and death. Thus, targeting individual arrestin interactions has therapeutic potential. This requires precise identification of protein-protein interaction sites of both participants and the choice of the side of each interaction which would be most advantageous to target. The interfaces involved in each interaction can be disrupted by small molecule therapeutics, as well as by carefully selected peptides of the other partner that do not participate in the interactions that should not be targeted.

Biased signaling agonist of dopamine D3 receptor induces receptor internalization independent of β-arrestin recruitment

Agonist-induced internalization of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) is a significant step in receptor kinetics and is known to be involved in receptor down-regulation. However, the dopamine D3 receptor (D3R) has been an exception wherein agonist induces D3Rs to undergo desensitization followed by pharmacological sequestration - which is defined as the sequestration of cell surface receptors into a more hydrophobic fraction within the plasma membrane without undergoing the process of receptor internalization. Pharmacological sequestration renders the receptor in an inactive state on the membrane. In our previous study we demonstrated that a novel class of D3R agonists exemplified by SK608 have biased signaling properties via the G-protein dependent pathway and do not induce D3R desensitization. In this study, using radioligand binding assay, immunoblot or immunocytochemistry methods, we observed that SK608 induced internalization of human D3R stably expressed in CHO, HEK and SH-SY5Y cells which are derived from neuroblastoma cells, suggesting that it is not a cell-type specific event. Further, we have evaluated the potential mechanism of D3R internalization induced by these biased signaling agonists. SK608-induced D3R internalization was time- and concentration-dependent. In comparison, dopamine induced D3R upregulation and pharmacological sequestration in the same assays. GRK2 and clathrin/dynamin I/II are the key molecular players in the SK608-induced D3R internalization process, while β-arrestin 1/2 and GRK-interacting protein 1(GIT1) are not involved. These results suggest that SK608-promoted D3R internalization is similar to the type II internalization observed among peptide binding GPCRs.

The structural basis of the arrestin binding to GPCRs

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the largest family of signaling proteins targeted by more clinically used drugs than any other protein family. GPCR signaling via G proteins is quenched (desensitized) by the phosphorylation of the active receptor by specific GPCR kinases (GRKs) followed by tight binding of arrestins to active phosphorylated receptors. Thus, arrestins engage two types of receptor elements: those that contain GRK-added phosphates and those that change conformation upon activation. GRKs attach phosphates to serines and threonines in the GPCR C-terminus or any one of the cytoplasmic loops. In addition to these phosphates, arrestins engage the cavity that appears between trans-membrane helices upon receptor activation and several other non-phosphorylated elements. The residues that bind GPCRs are localized on the concave side of both arrestin domains. Arrestins undergo a global conformational change upon receptor binding (become activated). Arrestins serve as important hubs of cellular signaling, emanating from activated GPCRs and receptor-independent.

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.

Endocytosis of Activated Muscarinic m2 Receptor (m2R) in Live Mouse Hippocampal Neurons Occurs via a Clathrin-Dependent Pathway

Our aim was to examine the dynamics of the muscarinic m2 receptor (m2R), a G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR), after agonist activation in living hippocampal neurons, and especially clathrin dependency endocytosis. We have previously shown that the m2R undergoes agonist-induced internalization in vivo. However, the nature of the endocytotic pathway used by m2R after activation is still unknown in living neurons. Using live cell imaging and quantitative analyses, we have monitored the effect of stimulation on the fate of the membrane-bound m2R and on its redistribution in intraneuronal compartments. Shortly (6 min) after activation, m2R is internalized into clathrin immunopositive structures. Furthermore, after clathrin-dependent endocytosis, m2R associates with early and late endosomes and with subcellular organelles involved in degradation. Together, these results provide, for the first time, a description of m2R trafficking in living neurons and prove that m2R undergoes clathrin-dependent endocytosis before being degraded.

A synthetic intrabody-based selective and generic inhibitor of GPCR endocytosis

Beta-arrestins (βarrs) critically mediate desensitization, endocytosis and signalling of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), and they scaffold a large number of interaction partners. However, allosteric modulation of their scaffolding abilities and direct targeting of their interaction interfaces to modulate GPCR functions selectively have not been fully explored yet. Here we identified a series of synthetic antibody fragments (Fabs) against different conformations of βarrs from phage display libraries. Several of these Fabs allosterically and selectively modulated the interaction of βarrs with clathrin and ERK MAP kinase. Interestingly, one of these Fabs selectively disrupted βarr-clathrin interaction, and when expressed as an intrabody, it robustly inhibited agonist-induced endocytosis of a broad set of GPCRs without affecting ERK MAP kinase activation. Our data therefore demonstrate the feasibility of selectively targeting βarr interactions using intrabodies and provide a novel framework for fine-tuning GPCR functions with potential therapeutic implications.

Molecular Mechanisms of GPCR Signaling: A Structural Perspective

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are cell surface receptors that respond to a wide variety of stimuli, from light, odorants, hormones, and neurotransmitters to proteins and extracellular calcium. GPCRs represent the largest family of signaling proteins targeted by many clinically used drugs. Recent studies shed light on the conformational changes that accompany GPCR activation and the structural state of the receptor necessary for the interactions with the three classes of proteins that preferentially bind active GPCRs, G proteins, G protein-coupled receptor kinases (GRKs), and arrestins. Importantly, structural and biophysical studies also revealed activation-related conformational changes in these three types of signal transducers. Here, we summarize what is already known and point out questions that still need to be answered. Clear understanding of the structural basis of signaling by GPCRs and their interaction partners would pave the way to designing signaling-biased proteins with scientific and therapeutic potential.

Regulation and trafficking of muscarinic acetylcholine receptors

Fidelity of signal transduction relies on cells expressing the appropriate number of functional receptors. Fluctuation in the total number of muscarinic acetylcholine receptors has been implicated in a range of physiological and pathophysiological processes, and the mechanisms responsible for this regulation represent potential molecular targets for therapeutic intervention. This article will review the current literature on the endocytic trafficking of muscarinic receptors and how knowledge of the trafficking of related receptors might influence future studies. This article is part of the Special Issue entitled 'Neuropharmacology on Muscarinic Receptors'.

G protein-coupled receptor kinases as regulators of dopamine receptor functions

Actions of the neurotransmitter dopamine in the brain are mediated by dopamine receptors that belong to the superfamily of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Mammals have five dopamine receptor subtypes, D1 through D5. D1 and D5 couple to Gs/olf and activate adenylyl cyclase, whereas D2, D3, and D4 couple to Gi/o and inhibit it. Most GPCRs upon activation by an agonist are phosphorylated by GPCR kinases (GRKs). The GRK phosphorylation makes receptors high-affinity binding partners for arrestin proteins. Arrestin binding to active phosphorylated receptors stops further G protein activation and promotes receptor internalization, recycling or degradation, thereby regulating their signaling and trafficking. Four non- visual GRKs are expressed in striatal neurons. Here we describe known effects of individual GRKs on dopamine receptors in cell culture and in the two in vivo models of dopamine-mediated signaling: behavioral response to psychostimulants and L-DOPA- induced dyskinesia. Dyskinesia, associated with dopamine super-sensitivity of striatal neurons, is a debilitating side effect of L-DOPA therapy in Parkinson's disease. In vivo, GRK subtypes show greater receptor specificity than in vitro or in cultured cells. Overexpression, knockdown, and knockout of individual GRKs, particularly GRK2 and GRK6, have differential effects on signaling of dopamine receptor subtypes in the brain. Furthermore, deletion of GRK isoforms in select striatal neuronal types differentially affects psychostimulant-induced behaviors. In addition, anti-dyskinetic effect of GRK3 does not require its kinase activity: it is mediated by the binding of its RGS-like domain to Gαq/11, which suppresses Gq/11 signaling. The data demonstrate that the dopamine signaling in defined neuronal types in vivo is regulated by specific and finely orchestrated actions of GRK isoforms.

Regulation of N-Formyl Peptide Receptor Signaling and Trafficking by Arrestin-Src Kinase Interaction

Arrestins were originally described as proteins recruited to ligand-activated, phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) to attenuate G protein-mediated signaling. It was later revealed that arrestins also mediate GPCR internalization and recruit a number of signaling proteins including, but not limited to, Src family kinases, ERK1/2, and JNK3. GPCR-arrestin binding and trafficking control the spatial and temporal activity of these multi-protein complexes. In previous reports, we concluded that N-formyl peptide receptor (FPR)-mediated apoptosis, which occurs upon receptor stimulation in the absence of arrestins, is associated with FPR accumulation in perinuclear recycling endosomes. Under these conditions, inhibition of Src kinase and ERK1/2 prevented FPR-mediated apoptosis. To better understand the role of Src kinase in this process, in the current study we employed a previously described arrestin-2 (arr2) mutant deficient in Src kinase binding (arr2-P91G/P121E). Unlike wild type arrestin, arr2-P91G/P121E did not inhibit FPR-mediated apoptosis, suggesting that Src binding to arrestin-2 prevents apoptotic signaling. However, in cells expressing this mutant, FPR-mediated apoptosis was still blocked by inhibition of Src kinase activity, suggesting that activation of Src independent of arrestin-2 binding is involved in FPR-mediated apoptosis. Finally, while Src kinase inhibition prevented FPR-mediated-apoptosis in the presence of arr2-P91G/P121E, it did not prevent FPR-arr2-P91G/P121E accumulation in the perinuclear recycling endosome. On the contrary, inhibition of Src kinase activity mediated the accumulation of activated FPR-wild type arrestin-2 in recycling endosomes without initiating FPR-mediated apoptosis. Based on these observations, we conclude that Src kinase has two independent roles following FPR activation that regulate both FPR-arrestin-2 signaling and trafficking.

Spatial and Temporal Aspects of Signaling by G-Protein-Coupled Receptors

Signaling by G-protein-coupled receptors is often considered a uniform process, whereby a homogeneously activated proportion of randomly distributed receptors are activated under equilibrium conditions and produce homogeneous, steady-state intracellular signals. While this may be the case in some biologic systems, the example of rhodopsin with its strictly local single-quantum mode of function shows that homogeneity in space and time cannot be a general property of G-protein-coupled systems. Recent work has now revealed many other systems where such simplicity does not prevail. Instead, a plethora of mechanisms allows much more complex patterns of receptor activation and signaling: different mechanisms of protein-protein interaction; temporal changes under nonequilibrium conditions; localized receptor activation; and localized second messenger generation and degradation-all of which shape receptor-generated signals and permit the creation of multiple signal types. Here, we review the evidence for such pleiotropic receptor signaling in space and time.

Revisiting the endocytosis of the m2 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor

The agonist-induced endocytosis of the muscarinic acetylcholine receptor M2 is different from that of the other members of the muscarinic receptor family. The uptake of the M2 receptor involves the adapter proteins of the β-arrestin family and the small GTPase ADP-ribosylation factor 6. However, it has remained inconclusive if M2 endocytosis is dependent on clathrin or the large GTPase dynamin. We here show by means of knocking down the clathrin heavy chain that M2 uptake upon agonist stimulation requires clathrin. The expression of various dominant-negative dynamin-2 mutants and the use of chemical inhibitors of dynamin function revealed that dynamin expression and membrane localization as such appear to be necessary for M2 endocytosis, whereas dynamin GTPase activity is not required for this process. Based on the data from the present and from previous studies, we propose that M2 endocytosis takes place by means of an atypical clathrin-mediated pathway that may involve a specific subset of clathrin-coated pits/vesicles.

Arrestins: Critical Players in Trafficking of Many GPCRs

Arrestins specifically bind active phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Receptor binding induces the release of the arrestin C-tail, which in non-visual arrestins contains high-affinity binding sites for clathrin and its adaptor AP2. Thus, serving as a physical link between the receptor and key components of the internalization machinery of the coated pit is the best-characterized function of non-visual arrestins in GPCR trafficking. However, arrestins also regulate GPCR trafficking less directly by orchestrating their ubiquitination and deubiquitination. Several reports suggest that arrestins play additional roles in receptor trafficking. Non-visual arrestins appear to be required for the recycling of internalized GPCRs, and the mechanisms of their function in this case remain to be elucidated. Moreover, visual and non-visual arrestins were shown to directly bind N-ethylmaleimide-sensitive factor, an important ATPase involved in vesicle trafficking, but neither molecular details nor the biological role of these interactions is clear. Considering how many different proteins arrestins appear to bind, we can confidently expect the elucidation of additional trafficking-related functions of these versatile signaling adaptors.

Role of the third intracellular loop in the subtype-specific internalization and recycling of muscarinic M2 and M4 receptors

Muscarinic M2, M4, and M2-M4 chimera receptors were transiently expressed in HEK-293 tsA201 cells, and agonist-dependent internalization of these receptors and recycling of internalized receptors were examined by measuring the amount of cell-surface receptors as [3H]N-methylscopolamine (NMS) binding activity. Coexpression of a dominant negative form of dynamin (DN-dynamin,dynamin K44A) greatly reduced the agonist-dependent internalization of M4 receptors but not of M2 receptors, as was reported by Vögler et al. (J Biol Chem 273, 12155-12160, 1998).The agonist-dependent internalization of M2/M4-i3/M2 chimera receptors (M2 receptors with the i3 loop replaced by that of M4 receptors) was greatly reduced by co-expression of DN-dynamin as was the case for M4 receptors, whereas the agonist-dependent internalization of M4/M2-i3/M4 chimera receptors was hardly affected by co-expression of DN-dynamin as was the case for M2 receptors.Internalized M2/M4-i3/M2 receptors as well as internalized M4 receptors were shown to be recycled back to the cell surface after removal of agonists, whereas no recycling was observed for M4/M2-i3/M4 receptors as well as M2 receptors. These results indicate that the i3 loops of M2 and M4 receptors take a major role in their agonist-dependent internalization and recycling.

Identification of serine 348 on the apelin receptor as a novel regulatory phosphorylation site in apelin-13-induced G protein-independent biased signaling

Phosphorylation plays vital roles in the regulation of G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) functions. The apelin and apelin receptor (APJ) system is involved in the regulation of cardiovascular function and central control of body homeostasis. Here, using tandem mass spectrometry, we first identified phosphorylated serine residues in the C terminus of APJ. To determine the role of phosphorylation sites in APJ-mediated G protein-dependent and -independent signaling and function, we induced a mutation in the C-terminal serine residues and examined their effects on the interaction between APJ with G protein or GRK/β-arrestin and their downstream signaling. Mutation of serine 348 led to an elimination of both GRK and β-arrestin recruitment to APJ induced by apelin-13. Moreover, APJ internalization and G protein-independent ERK signaling were also abolished by point mutation at serine 348. In contrast, this mutant at serine residues had no demonstrable impact on apelin-13-induced G protein activation and its intracellular signaling. These findings suggest that mutation of serine 348 resulted in inactive GRK/β-arrestin. However, there was no change in the active G protein thus, APJ conformation was biased. These results provide important information on the molecular interplay and impact of the APJ function, which may be extrapolated to design novel drugs for cardiac hypertrophy based on this biased signal pathway.

Mechanisms that underlie the internalization and extracellular signal regulated kinase 1/2 activation by PKR2 receptor

Prokineticins (PKs) are a pair of signal factors involved in many physiological processes by binding to two closely related G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), PKR1 and PKR2. We recently demonstrated that PKR2 undergoes rapid ligand-induced endocytosis, and PKR2 recycles back to the plasma membrane after the removal of ligand. However, little is known about the molecular mechanisms underlying the PKR2 endocytosis. Here, we studied the involvement of GPCR kinase 2 (GRK2), β-arrestins, clathrin and protein kinase C (PKC) in the PKR2 endocytosis. Our results indicated that PK2-induced PKR2 endocytosis is GRK2- and clathrin-dependent, but β-arrestin-independent. PKC activation also induced PKR2 endocytosis; however, PKC activation is not necessary for the PK2-induced PKR2 endocytosis. PK2 stimulation induced a transient activation of extracellular signal regulated kinase 1/2 (ERK1/2) on PKR2 expressing cells. The internalization and PKC activation are not required for the PK2-induced ERK1/2 activation. Our results indicated that PK2-induced ERK1/2 activation may involve the released βγ subunits of G-protein, phospholipase C β and MEK activation.

Targeting individual GPCRs with redesigned nonvisual arrestins

Numerous human diseases are caused by excessive signaling of mutant G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) or receptors that are overstimulated due to upstream signaling imbalances. The feasibility of functional compensation by arrestins with enhanced ability to quench receptor signaling was recently tested in the visual system. The results showed that even in this extremely demanding situation of rods that have no ability to phosphorylate rhodopsin, enhanced arrestin improved rod morphology, light sensitivity, survival, and accelerated photoresponse recovery. Structurally distinct enhanced mutants of arrestins that bind phosphorylated and non-phosphorylated active GPCRs with much higher affinity than parental wild-type (WT) proteins have been constructed. These "super-arrestins" are likely to have the power to dampen the signaling by hyperactive GPCRs. However, most cells express 5-20 GPCR subtypes, only one of which would be overactive, while nonvisual arrestins are remarkably promiscuous, binding hundreds of different GPCRs. Thus, to be therapeutically useful, enhanced versions of nonvisual arrestins must be made fairly specific for particular receptors. Recent identification of very few arrestin residues as key receptor discriminators paves the way to the construction of receptor subtype-specific nonvisual arrestins.

Arrestin interactions with G protein-coupled receptors

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the primary interaction partners for arrestins. The visual arrestins, arrestin1 and arrestin4, physiologically bind to only very few receptors, i.e., rhodopsin and the color opsins, respectively. In contrast, the ubiquitously expressed nonvisual variants β-arrestin1 and 2 bind to a large number of receptors in a fairly nonspecific manner. This binding requires two triggers, agonist activation and receptor phosphorylation by a G-protein-coupled receptor kinase (GRK). These two triggers are mediated by two different regions of the arrestins, the "phosphorylation sensor" in the core of the protein and a less well-defined "activation sensor." Binding appears to occur mostly in a 1:1 stoichiometry, involving the N-terminal domain of GPCRs, but in addition a second GPCR may loosely bind to the C-terminal domain when active receptors are abundant.Arrestin binding initially uncouples GPCRs from their G-proteins. It stabilizes receptors in an active conformation and also induces a conformational change in the arrestins that involves a rotation of the two domains relative to each other plus changes in the polar core. This conformational change appears to permit the interaction with further downstream proteins. The latter interaction, demonstrated mostly for β-arrestins, triggers receptor internalization as well as a number of nonclassical signaling pathways.Open questions concern the exact stoichiometry of the interaction, possible specificity with regard to the type of agonist and of GRK involved, selective regulation of downstream signaling (=biased signaling), and the options to use these mechanisms as therapeutic targets.

Desensitization and internalization of endothelin receptor A: impact of G protein-coupled receptor kinase 2 (GRK2)-mediated phosphorylation

Endothelin receptor A (ETA), a G protein-coupled receptor, mediates endothelin signaling, which is regulated by GRK2. Three Ser and seven Thr residues recently proven to be phosphoacceptor sites are located in the C-terminal extremity (CTE) of the receptor following its palmitoylation site. We created various phosphorylation-deficient ETA mutants. The phospholipase C activity of mutant receptors in HEK-293 cells was analyzed during continuous endothelin stimulation to investigate the impact of phosphorylation sites on ETA desensitization. Total deletion of phosphoacceptor sites in the CTE affected proper receptor regulation. However, proximal and distal phosphoacceptor sites both turned out to be sufficient to induce WT-like desensitization. Overexpression of the Gαq coupling-deficient mutant GRK2-D110A suppressed ETA-WT signaling but failed to decrease phospholipase C activity mediated by the phosphorylation-deficient mutant ETA-6PD. In contrast, GRK2-WT acted on both receptors, whereas the kinase-inactive mutant GRK2-D110A/K220R failed to inhibit signaling of ETA-WT and ETA-6PD. This demonstrates that ETA desensitization involves at least two autonomous GRK2-mediated components: 1) a phosphorylation-independent signal decrease mediated by blocking of Gαq and 2) a mechanism involving phosphorylation of Ser and Thr residues in the CTE of the receptor in a redundant fashion, able to incorporate either proximal or distal phosphoacceptor sites. High level transfection of GRK2 variants influenced signaling of ETA-WT and ETA-6PD and hints at an additional phosphorylation-independent regulatory mechanism. Furthermore, internalization of mRuby-tagged receptors was observed with ETA-WT and the phosphorylation-deficient mutant ETA-14PD (lacking 14 phosphoacceptor sites) and turned out to be based on a phosphorylation-independent mechanism.

Differential regulation of muscarinic M2 and M3 receptor signaling in gastrointestinal smooth muscle by caveolin-1

Caveolae act as scaffolding proteins for several G protein-coupled receptor signaling molecules to regulate their activity. Caveolin-1, the predominant isoform in smooth muscle, drives the formation of caveolae. The precise role of caveolin-1 and caveolae as scaffolds for G protein-coupled receptor signaling and contraction in gastrointestinal muscle is unclear. Thus the aim of this study was to examine the role of caveolin-1 in the regulation of Gq- and Gi-coupled receptor signaling. RT-PCR, Western blot, and radioligand-binding studies demonstrated the selective expression of M2 and M3 receptors in gastric smooth muscle cells. Carbachol (CCh) stimulated phosphatidylinositol (PI) hydrolysis, Rho kinase and zipper-interacting protein (ZIP) kinase activity, induced myosin phosphatase 1 (MYPT1) phosphorylation (at Thr(696)) and 20-kDa myosin light chain (MLC20) phosphorylation (at Ser(19)) and muscle contraction, and inhibited cAMP formation. Stimulation of PI hydrolysis, Rho kinase, and ZIP kinase activity, phosphorylation of MYPT1 and MLC20, and muscle contraction in response to CCh were attenuated by methyl β-cyclodextrin (MβCD) or caveolin-1 small interfering RNA (siRNA). Similar inhibition of PI hydrolysis, Rho kinase, and ZIP kinase activity and muscle contraction in response to CCh and gastric emptying in vivo was obtained in caveolin-1-knockout mice compared with wild-type mice. Agonist-induced internalization of M2, but not M3, receptors was blocked by MβCD or caveolin-1 siRNA. Stimulation of PI hydrolysis, Rho kinase, and ZIP kinase activities in response to other Gq-coupled receptor agonists such as histamine and substance P was also attenuated by MβCD or caveolin-1 siRNA. Taken together, these results suggest that caveolin-1 facilitates signaling by Gq-coupled receptors and contributes to enhanced smooth muscle function.

Non-neuronal functions of the m2 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor

Acetylcholine is an important neurotransmitter whose effects are mediated by two classes of receptors. The nicotinic acetylcholine receptors are ion channels, whereas the muscarinic receptors belong to the large family of G protein coupled seven transmembrane helix receptors. Beyond its function in neuronal systems, it has become evident that acetylcholine also plays an important role in non-neuronal cells such as epithelial and immune cells. Furthermore, many cell types in the periphery are capable of synthesizing acetylcholine and express at least some of the receptors. In this review, we summarize the non-neuronal functions of the muscarinic acetylcholine receptors, especially those of the M₂ muscarinic receptor in epithelial cells. We will review the mechanisms of signaling by the M₂ receptor but also the cellular trafficking and ARF6 mediated endocytosis of this receptor, which play an important role in the regulation of signaling events. In addition, we provide an overview of the M₂ receptor in human pathological conditions such as autoimmune diseases and cancer.

Structural determinants of arrestin functions

Arrestins are a small protein family with only four members in mammals. Arrestins demonstrate an amazing versatility, interacting with hundreds of different G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) subtypes, numerous nonreceptor signaling proteins, and components of the internalization machinery, as well as cytoskeletal elements, including regular microtubules and centrosomes. Here, we focus on the structural determinants that mediate various arrestin functions. The receptor-binding elements in arrestins were mapped fairly comprehensively, which set the stage for the construction of mutants targeting particular GPCRs. The elements engaged by other binding partners are only now being elucidated and in most cases we have more questions than answers. Interestingly, even very limited and imprecise identification of structural requirements for the interaction with very few other proteins has enabled the development of signaling-biased arrestin mutants. More comprehensive understanding of the structural underpinning of different arrestin functions will pave the way for the construction of arrestins that can link the receptor we want to the signaling pathway of our choosing.

Catecholamine receptors: prototypes for GPCR-based drug discovery

Drugs acting at G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) constitute ~40% of those in current clinical use. GPCR-based drug discovery remains at the forefront of drug development, especially for new treatments for psychiatric illness and neurological disease. Here, the basic framework of GPCR signaling learned through the elucidation of catecholamine receptor signaling through G proteins and β-arrestins, and X-ray crystallographic structure determination is reviewed. In silico docking studies developed in tandem with confirmatory empirical data gathering from binding and signaling experiments have allowed this basic framework to be expanded to drug hunting through predictive in silico searching as well as high-throughput and high-content screening approaches. For efforts moving forward for the deployment of new GPCR-acting drugs, collaborative efforts between industry and government/academic research in target validation at the molecular and cellular levels have become progressively more common. Polypharmacological approaches have become increasingly available for learning more about the mechanisms of GPCR-targeted drugs, based on interaction not with a single, but with a wide range of GPCR targets. These approaches are likely to aid in drug repurposing efforts, yield valuable insight on the side effects of currently employed drugs, and allow for a clearer picture of the actual targets of "atypical" drugs used in a variety of therapeutic contexts.

Arrestins: role in the desensitization, sequestration, and vesicular trafficking of G protein-coupled receptors

Over the years, β-arrestins have emerged as multifunctional molecular scaffolding proteins regulating almost every imaginable G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) function. Originally discovered as GPCR-desensitizing molecules, they have been shown to also serve as important regulators of GPCR signaling, sequestration, and vesicular trafficking. This broad functional role implicates β-arrestins as key regulatory proteins for cellular function. Hence, this chapter summarizes the current understanding of the β-arrestin family's unique ability to control the kinetics as well as the extent of GPCR activity at the level of desensitization, sequestration, and subsequent intracellular trafficking.

Tracing the endocytic pathways and trafficking kinetics of cell signaling receptors using single QD nanoparticles

Cellular signaling is the fundamental process through which cells communicate with each other and respond to their environment. Regulation of this cellular signaling is crucial for healthy cellular function. Malfunctions in signaling are the cause for many diseases and disorders and therefore are under heavy investigation. The molecular mechanisms that underlie cellular signaling rely upon complex and dynamic processes of receptor intracellular trafficking. The specific endosomal pathways and kinetics through which receptors are intracellularly transported regulate the strength and duration of cellular signaling. In even more subtle and complex aspects, the cell orchestrates the individual motions of many receptors, through multiple different pathways, simultaneously. Despite the fundamental role of endosomal trafficking in signal regulation, it has been technically challenging to study since intracellular trafficking is complex and dynamic, with millions of individual receptors simultaneously undergoing trafficking in different endocytic stages. Here, we describe the use of single nanoparticle quantum dot (QD) probes to quantitatively investigate the endocytic trafficking pathways that receptors undergo following ligand activation. This new capability to directly visualize and quantitate cellular signaling at the level of individual receptors inside the cell has broad and important value for understanding fundamental cell signaling processes and the action and effect of therapeutics upon signaling.

ßarrestin1-biased agonism at human δ-opioid receptor by peptidic and alkaloid ligands

We have previously reported on the differential regulation of the human δ-opioid receptor (hDOR) by alkaloid (etorphine) and peptidic (DPDPE and deltorphin I) ligands, in terms of both receptor desensitization and post-endocytic sorting. Since ßarrestins are well known to regulate G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) signaling and trafficking, we therefore investigated the role of ßarrestin1 (the only isoform expressed in our cellular model) in the context of the hDOR. We established clonal cell lines of SK-N-BE cells over-expressing ßarrestin1, its dominant negative mutant (ßarrestin1(319-418)), and shRNA directed against endogenous ßarrestin1. Interestingly, both binding and confocal microscopy approaches demonstrated that ßarrestin1 is required for hDOR endocytosis only when activated by etorphine. Conversely, functional experiments revealed that ßarrestin1 is exclusively involved in hDOR desensitization promoted by the peptides. Taken together, these results provide substantial evidence for a ßarrestin1-biased agonism at hDOR, where ßarrestin1 is differentially involved during receptor desensitization and endocytosis depending on the ligand.

Dual mode of glucagon receptor internalization: role of PKCα, GRKs and β-arrestins

Glucagon levels are elevated in diabetes and some liver diseases. Increased glucagon secretion leads to abnormal stimulation of glucagon receptors (GRs) and consequent elevated glucose production in the liver. Blocking glucagon receptor signaling has been proposed as a potential treatment option for diabetes and other conditions associated with hyperglycemia. Elucidating mechanisms of GR desensitization and downregulation may help identify new drug targets besides GR itself. The present study explores the mechanisms of GR internalization and the role of PKCα, GPCR kinases (GRKs) and β-arrestins therein. We have reported previously that PKCα mediates GR phosphorylation and desensitization. While the PKC agonist, PMA, did not affect GR internalization when tested alone, it increased glucagon-mediated GR internalization by 25-40% in GR-expressing HEK-293 cells (HEK-GR cells). In both primary hepatocytes and HEK-GR cells, glucagon treatment recruited PKCα to the plasma membrane where it colocalized with GR. We also observed that overexpression of GRK2, GRK3, or GRK5 enhanced GR internalization. In addition, we found that GR utilizes both clathrin- and caveolin-mediated endocytosis in HEK-GR cells. Glucagon triggered translocation of both β-arrestin1 and β-arrestin2 from the cytosol to the perimembrane region, and overexpression of β-arrestin1 and β-arrestin2 increased GR internalization. Furthermore, both β-arrestin1 and β-arrestin2 colocalized with GR and with Cav-1, suggesting the possible involvement of these arrestins in GR internalization.

Role of Phosphorylation in the Control of Clathrin-Mediated Internalization of GPCR

The process by which G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are internalized through the clathrin-coated vesicles involves interactions of multifunctional adaptor proteins. These interactions are tightly controlled by phosphorylation and dephosphorylation mechanisms resulting in the regulation of receptor endocytosis. However, the identities of the kinases involved in this process remained largely unknown until recently. This paper discusses advances in our knowledge of the important role played by protein phosphorylation in the regulation of the endocytic machinery and how phosphorylation controls the coated vesicle cycle.

Few residues within an extensive binding interface drive receptor interaction and determine the specificity of arrestin proteins

Arrestins bind active phosphorylated forms of G protein-coupled receptors, terminating G protein activation, orchestrating receptor trafficking, and redirecting signaling to alternative pathways. Visual arrestin-1 preferentially binds rhodopsin, whereas the two non-visual arrestins interact with hundreds of G protein-coupled receptor subtypes. Here we show that an extensive surface on the concave side of both arrestin-2 domains is involved in receptor binding. We also identified a small number of residues on the receptor binding surface of the N- and C-domains that largely determine the receptor specificity of arrestins. We show that alanine substitution of these residues blocks the binding of arrestin-1 to rhodopsin in vitro and of arrestin-2 and -3 to β2-adrenergic, M2 muscarinic cholinergic, and D2 dopamine receptors in intact cells, suggesting that these elements critically contribute to the energy of the interaction. Thus, in contrast to arrestin-1, where direct phosphate binding is crucial, the interaction of non-visual arrestins with their cognate receptors depends to a lesser extent on phosphate binding and more on the binding to non-phosphorylated receptor elements.

Endocytosis in the mouse oocyte and its contribution to cAMP signaling during meiotic arrest

Mammalian oocytes are arrested at prophase I of meiosis until a preovulatory surge of LH stimulates them to resume meiosis. Prior to the LH surge, high levels of cAMP within the oocyte maintain meiotic arrest; this cAMP is generated in the oocyte through the activity of the constitutively active, G(s)-coupled receptor, G-protein-coupled receptor 3 (GPR3) or GPR12. Activated GPRs are typically targeted for desensitization through receptor-mediated endocytosis, but a continuously high level of cAMP is needed for meiotic arrest. The aim of this study was to examine whether receptor-mediated endocytosis occurs in the mouse oocyte and whether this could affect the maintenance of meiotic arrest. We found that constitutive endocytosis occurs in the mouse oocyte. Inhibitors of receptor-mediated endocytosis, monodansylcadaverine and dynasore, inhibited the formation of early endosomes and completely inhibited spontaneous meiotic resumption. A red fluorescent protein-tagged GPR3 localized in the plasma membrane and within early endosomes in the oocyte, demonstrating that GPR3 is endocytosed. However, overexpression of G-protein receptor kinase 2 and β-arrestin-2 had only a modest effect on stimulating meiotic resumption, suggesting that these proteins do not play a major role in GPR3 endocytosis. Inhibition of endocytosis elevated cAMP levels within oocytes, suggesting that there is an accumulation of GPR3 at the plasma membrane. These results show that endocytosis occurs in the oocyte, leading to a decrease in cAMP production, and suggest that there is a balance between cAMP production and degradation in the arrested oocyte that maintains cAMP levels at an appropriate level during the maintenance of meiotic arrest.

Temporal profiling of orexin receptor-arrestin-ubiquitin complexes reveals differences between receptor subtypes

Orexin G protein-coupled receptors (OxRs) and their cognate agonists have been implicated in a number of disorders since their recent discovery, ranging from narcolepsy to formation of addictive behavior. Bioluminescence resonance energy transfer assays of agonist-occupied OxRs provided evidence for a strong dose-dependent interaction with both trafficking proteins β-arrestin 1 and 2 that required unusually high agonist concentrations compared with inositol phosphate signaling. This appears to be reflected in functional differences in potency with respect to orexin A (OxA) and OxR2-dependent ERK1/2 phosphorylation after 90 min compared with 2 min, potentially consistent with β-arrestin-mediated versus G protein-mediated signaling, respectively. Furthermore, extended bioluminescence resonance energy transfer kinetic data monitoring OxA-dependent receptor-β-arrestin and β-arrestin-ubiquitin proximity suggested subtype-specific differences in receptor trafficking, with OxR2 activation resulting in more sustained receptor-β-arrestin-ubiquitin complex formation than elicited by OxR1 activation. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) data also revealed that OxR1 underwent significantly more rapid recycling compared with OxR2. Finally, we have observed sustained OxA-dependent ERK1/2 phosphorylation in the presence of OxR2 compared with OxR1. Although both OxR subtypes could be classified as class B receptors for β-arrestin usage based on the initial strength of interaction with both β-arrestins, our temporal profiling revealed tangible differences between OxR subtypes. Consequently, OxR1 appears to fit uneasily into the commonly used β-arrestin classification scheme. More importantly, it is hoped that this improved profiling capability, enabling the subtleties of protein complex formation, stability, and duration to be assessed in live cells, will help unlock the therapeutic potential of targeting these receptors.