Selective uncoupling of RGS action by a single point mutation in the G protein alpha-subunit

The association of GNB5 with Alzheimer disease revealed by genomic analysis restricted to variants impacting gene function

Disease-associated variants identified from genome-wide association studies (GWASs) frequently map to non-coding areas of the genome such as introns and intergenic regions. An exclusive reliance on gene-agnostic methods of genomic investigation could limit the identification of relevant genes associated with polygenic diseases such as Alzheimer disease (AD). To overcome such potential restriction, we developed a gene-constrained analytical method that considers only moderate- and high-risk variants that affect gene coding sequences. We report here the application of this approach to publicly available datasets containing 181,388 individuals without and with AD and the resulting identification of 660 genes potentially linked to the higher AD prevalence among Africans/African Americans. By integration with transcriptome analysis of 23 brain regions from 2,728 AD case-control samples, we concentrated on nine genes that potentially enhance the risk of AD: AACS, GNB5, GNS, HIPK3, MED13, SHC2, SLC22A5, VPS35, and ZNF398. GNB5, the fifth member of the heterotrimeric G protein beta family encoding Gβ5, is primarily expressed in neurons and is essential for normal neuronal development in mouse brain. Homozygous or compound heterozygous loss of function of GNB5 in humans has previously been associated with a syndrome of developmental delay, cognitive impairment, and cardiac arrhythmia. In validation experiments, we confirmed that Gnb5 heterozygosity enhanced the formation of both amyloid plaques and neurofibrillary tangles in the brains of AD model mice. These results suggest that gene-constrained analysis can complement the power of GWASs in the identification of AD-associated genes and may be more broadly applicable to other polygenic diseases.

A regulatory node involving Gαq, PLCβ, and RGS proteins modulates platelet reactivity to critical agonists

BACKGROUND

Most platelet agonists work through G protein-coupled receptors, activating pathways that involve members of the Gq, Gi, and G12/G13 families of heterotrimeric G proteins. Gq signaling has been shown to be critical for efficient platelet activation. Growing evidence suggests that regulatory mechanisms converge on G protein-coupled receptors and Gq to prevent overly robust platelet reactivity.

OBJECTIVES

To identify and characterize mechanisms by which Gq signaling is regulated in platelets.

METHODS

Based on our prior experience with a Gαi2 variant that escapes regulation by regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins, a Gαq variant was designed with glycine 188 replaced with serine (G188S) and then incorporated into a mouse line so that its effects on platelet activation and thrombus formation could be studied in vitro and in vivo.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

As predicted, the G188S substitution in Gαq disrupted its interaction with RGS18. Unexpectedly, it also uncoupled PLCβ-3 from activation by platelet agonists as evidenced by a loss rather than a gain of platelet function in vitro and in vivo. Binding studies showed that in addition to preventing the binding of RGS18 to Gαq, the G188S substitution also prevented the binding of PLCβ-3 to Gαq. Structural analysis revealed that G188 resides in the region that is also important for Gαq binding to PLCβ-3 in platelets. We conclude that the Gαq signaling node is more complex than that has been previously understood, suggesting that there is cross-talk between RGS proteins and PLCβ-3 in the context of Gαq signaling.

The G-alpha Gpa1 directs septin localization in the mating projection of Saccharomyces cerevisiae through its Ubiquitination Domain and Endocytic Machinery

The yeast mating response uses a G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR), Ste2, to detect mating pheromone and initiate mating projection morphogenesis. The septin cytoskeleton plays a key role in the formation of the mating projection, forming structures at the base of the projection. Desensitization of the Gα, Gpa1, by the Regulator of G-protein Signaling (RGS), Sst2, is required for proper septin organization and morphogenesis. In cells where the Gα is hyperactive, septins are mislocalized to the site of polarity, and the cells are unable to track a pheromone gradient. We set out to identify the proteins that mediate Gα control of septins during the Saccharomyces cerevisiae mating response by making mutations to rescue septin localization in cells expressing the hyperactive Gα mutant gpa1G302S. We found that single deletions of the septin chaperone Gic1, the Cdc42 GAP Bem3, and the epsins Ent1 and Ent2 rescued the polar cap accumulation of septins in the hyperactive Gα. We created an agent-based model of vesicle trafficking that predicts how changes in endocytic cargo licensing alters localization of endocytosis that mirrors the septin localization we see experimentally. We hypothesized that hyperactive Gα may increase the rate of endocytosis of a pheromone responsive cargo, thereby altering where septins are localized. Both the GPCR and the Gα are known to be internalized by clathrin-mediated endocytosis during the pheromone response. Deletion of the GPCR C-terminus to block internalization partially rescued septin organization. However, deletion of the Gpa1 ubiquitination domain required for its endocytosis completely abrogated septin accumulation at the polarity site. Our data support a model where the location of endocytosis serves as a spatial mark for septin structure assembly and that desensitization of the Gα delays its endocytosis sufficiently that septins are placed peripheral to the site of Cdc42 polarity.

Phosphorylation of RGS regulates MAP kinase localization and promotes completion of cytokinesis

Phosphorylation of the RGS Sst2 alters its subcellular distribution, MAPK localization, and interaction with Kel1, which promotes coordination of polarized growth with completion of cytokinesis.

Yeast use the G-protein–coupled receptor signaling pathway to detect and track the mating pheromone. The G-protein–coupled receptor pathway is inhibited by the regulator of G-protein signaling (RGS) Sst2 which induces Gα GTPase activity and inactivation of downstream signaling. G-protein signaling activates the MAPK Fus3, which phosphorylates the RGS; however, the role of this modification is unknown. We found that pheromone-induced RGS phosphorylation peaks early; the phospho-state of RGS controls its localization and influences MAPK spatial distribution. Surprisingly, phosphorylation of the RGS promotes completion of cytokinesis before pheromone-induced growth. Completion of cytokinesis in the presence of pheromone is promoted by the kelch-repeat protein, Kel1 and antagonized by the formin Bni1. We found that RGS complexes with Kel1 and prefers the unphosphorylatable RGS mutant. We also found overexpression of unphosphorylatable RGS exacerbates cytokinetic defects, whereas they are rescued by overexpression of Kel1. These data lead us to a model where Kel1 promotes completion of cytokinesis before pheromone-induced polarity but is inhibited by unphosphorylated RGS binding.

Gαi2-induced conductin/axin2 condensates inhibit Wnt/β-catenin signaling and suppress cancer growth

Conductin/axin2 is a scaffold protein negatively regulating the pro-proliferative Wnt/β-catenin signaling pathway. Accumulation of scaffold proteins in condensates frequently increases their activity, but whether condensation contributes to Wnt pathway inhibition by conductin remains unclear. Here, we show that the Gαi2 subunit of trimeric G-proteins induces conductin condensation by targeting a polymerization-inhibiting aggregon in its RGS domain, thereby promoting conductin-mediated β-catenin degradation. Consistently, transient Gαi2 expression inhibited, whereas knockdown activated Wnt signaling via conductin. Colorectal cancers appear to evade Gαi2-induced Wnt pathway suppression by decreased Gαi2 expression and inactivating mutations, associated with shorter patient survival. Notably, the Gαi2-activating drug guanabenz inhibited Wnt signaling via conductin, consequently reducing colorectal cancer growth in vitro and in mouse models. In summary, we demonstrate Wnt pathway inhibition via Gαi2-triggered conductin condensation, suggesting a tumor suppressor function for Gαi2 in colorectal cancer, and pointing to the FDA-approved drug guanabenz for targeted cancer therapy.

Dissociation of the G protein βγ from the Gq-PLCβ complex partially attenuates PIP2 hydrolysis

Phospholipase C β (PLCβ), which is activated by the Gq family of heterotrimeric G proteins, hydrolyzes the inner membrane lipid phosphatidylinositol 4,5-bisphosphate (PIP2), generating diacylglycerol and inositol 1,4,5-triphosphate (IP3). Because Gq and PLCβ regulate many crucial cellular processes and have been identified as major disease drivers, activation and termination of PLCβ signaling by the Gαq subunit have been extensively studied. Gq-coupled receptor activation induces intense and transient PIP2 hydrolysis, which subsequently recovers to a low-intensity steady-state equilibrium. However, the molecular underpinnings of this equilibrium remain unclear. Here, we explored the influence of signaling crosstalk between Gq and Gi/o pathways on PIP2 metabolism in living cells using single-cell and optogenetic approaches to spatially and temporally constrain signaling. Our data suggest that the Gβγ complex is a component of the highly efficient lipase Gαq_GTP-PLCβ-Gβγ. We found that over time, Gβγ dissociates from this lipase complex, leaving the less-efficient Gαq_GTP-PLCβ lipase complex and allowing the significant partial recovery of PIP2 levels. Our findings also indicate that the subtype of the Gγ subunit in Gβγ fine-tunes the lipase activity of Gq-PLCβ, in which cells expressing Gγ with higher plasma membrane interaction show lower PIP2 recovery. Given that Gγ shows cell- and tissue-specific subtype expression, our findings suggest the existence of tissue-specific distinct Gq-PLCβ signaling paradigms. Furthermore, these results also outline a molecular process that likely safeguards cells from excessive Gq signaling.

A Global Map of G Protein Signaling Regulation by RGS Proteins

The control over the extent and timing of G protein signaling is provided by the regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins that deactivate G protein α subunits (Gα). Mammalian genomes encode 20 canonical RGS and 16 Gα genes with key roles in physiology and disease. To understand the principles governing the selectivity of Gα regulation by RGS, we examine the catalytic activity of all canonical human RGS proteins and their selectivity for a complete set of Gα substrates using real-time kinetic measurements in living cells. The data reveal rules governing RGS-Gα recognition, the structural basis of its selectivity, and provide principles for engineering RGS proteins with defined selectivity. The study also explores the evolution of RGS-Gα selectivity through ancestral reconstruction and demonstrates how naturally occurring non-synonymous variants in RGS alter signaling. These results provide a blueprint for decoding signaling selectivity and advance our understanding of molecular recognition principles.

•

Systematic analysis reveals G protein selectivity of all canonical RGS proteins

•

RGS proteins rely on selectivity bar codes for selective G protein recognition

•

Transplantation of bar codes across RGS proteins switches their G protein preferences

•

Natural variants, mutations, and evolution shape RGS selectivity

Regulator of G-protein signaling (RGS) proteins as drug targets: Progress and future potentials

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) play critical roles in regulating processes such as cellular homeostasis, responses to stimuli, and cell signaling. Accordingly, GPCRs have long served as extraordinarily successful drug targets. It is therefore not surprising that the discovery in the mid-1990s of a family of proteins that regulate processes downstream of GPCRs generated great excitement in the field. This finding enhanced the understanding of these critical signaling pathways and provided potentially new targets for pharmacological intervention. These regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS) proteins were viewed by many as nodes downstream of GPCRs that could be targeted with small molecules to tune signaling processes. In this review, we provide a brief overview of the discovery of RGS proteins and of the gradual and continuing discovery of their roles in disease states, focusing particularly on cancer and neurological disorders. We also discuss high-throughput screening efforts that have led to the discovery first of peptide-based and then of small-molecule inhibitors targeting a subset of the RGS proteins. We explore the unique mechanisms of RGS inhibition these chemical tools have revealed and highlight the most up-to-date studies using these tools in animal experiments. Finally, we discuss the future opportunities in the field, as there are clearly more avenues left to be explored and potentials to be realized.

Quantitative analysis of the yeast pheromone pathway

The pheromone response pathway of the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae is a well-established model for the study of G proteins and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) cascades. Our longstanding ability to combine sophisticated genetic approaches with established functional assays has provided a thorough understanding of signalling mechanisms and regulation. In this report, we compare new and established methods used to quantify pheromone-dependent MAPK phosphorylation, transcriptional induction, mating morphogenesis, and gradient tracking. These include both single-cell and population-based assays of activity. We describe several technical advances, provide example data for benchmark mutants, highlight important differences between newer and established methodologies, and compare the advantages and disadvantages of each as applied to the yeast model. Quantitative measurements of pathway activity have been used to develop mathematical models and reveal new regulatory mechanisms in yeast. It is our expectation that experimental and computational approaches developed in yeast may eventually be adapted to human systems biology and pharmacology.

Mouse models of GNAO1-associated movement disorder: Allele- and sex-specific differences in phenotypes

BACKGROUND

Infants and children with dominant de novo mutations in GNAO1 exhibit movement disorders, epilepsy, or both. Children with loss-of-function (LOF) mutations exhibit Epileptiform Encephalopathy 17 (EIEE17). Gain-of-function (GOF) mutations or those with normal function are found in patients with Neurodevelopmental Disorder with Involuntary Movements (NEDIM). There is no animal model with a human mutant GNAO1 allele.

OBJECTIVES

Here we develop a mouse model carrying a human GNAO1 mutation (G203R) and determine whether the clinical features of patients with this GNAO1 mutation, which includes both epilepsy and movement disorder, would be evident in the mouse model.

METHODS

A mouse Gnao1 knock-in GOF mutation (G203R) was created by CRISPR/Cas9 methods. The resulting offspring and littermate controls were subjected to a battery of behavioral tests. A previously reported GOF mutant mouse knock-in (Gnao1+/G184S), which has not been found in patients, was also studied for comparison.

RESULTS

Gnao1+/G203R mutant mice are viable and gain weight comparably to controls. Homozygotes are non-viable. Grip strength was decreased in both males and females. Male Gnao1+/G203R mice were strongly affected in movement assays (RotaRod and DigiGait) while females were not. Male Gnao1+/G203R mice also showed enhanced seizure propensity in the pentylenetetrazole kindling test. Mice with a G184S GOF knock-in also showed movement-related behavioral phenotypes but females were more strongly affected than males.

CONCLUSIONS

Gnao1+/G203R mice phenocopy children with heterozygous GNAO1 G203R mutations, showing both movement disorder and a relatively mild epilepsy pattern. This mouse model should be useful in mechanistic and preclinical studies of GNAO1-related movement disorders.

The Role of G-proteins and G-protein Regulating Proteins in Depressive Disorders

Progress toward new antidepressant therapies has been relatively slow over the past few decades, with the result that individuals suffering from depression often struggle to find an effective treatment – a process often requiring months. Furthermore, the neural factors that contribute to depression remain poorly understood, and there are many open questions regarding the mechanism of action of existing antidepressants. A better understanding of the molecular processes that underlie depression and contribute to antidepressant efficacy is therefore badly needed. In this review we highlight research investigating the role of G-proteins and the regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS) proteins, two protein families that are intimately involved in both the genesis of depressive states and the action of antidepressant drugs. Many antidepressants are known to indirectly affect the function of these proteins. Conversely, dysfunction of the G-protein and RGS systems can affect antidepressant efficacy. However, a great deal remains unknown about how these proteins interact with antidepressants. Findings pertinent to each individual G-protein and RGS protein are summarized from in vitro, in vivo, and clinical studies.

The evolution of regulators of G protein signalling proteins as drug targets - 20 years in the making: IUPHAR Review 21

Regulators of G protein signalling (RGS) proteins are celebrating the 20th anniversary of their discovery. The unveiling of this new family of negative regulators of G protein signalling in the mid-1990s solved a persistent conundrum in the G protein signalling field, in which the rate of deactivation of signalling cascades in vivo could not be replicated in exogenous systems. Since then, there has been tremendous advancement in the knowledge of RGS protein structure, function, regulation and their role as novel drug targets. RGS proteins play an important modulatory role through their GTPase-activating protein (GAP) activity at active, GTP-bound Gα subunits of heterotrimeric G proteins. They also possess many non-canonical functions not related to G protein signalling. Here, an update on the status of RGS proteins as drug targets is provided, highlighting advances that have led to the inclusion of RGS proteins in the IUPHAR/BPS Guide to PHARMACOLOGY database of drug targets.

Roles for Regulator of G Protein Signaling Proteins in Synaptic Signaling and Plasticity

The regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) family of proteins serves critical roles in G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) and heterotrimeric G protein signal transduction. RGS proteins are best understood as negative regulators of GPCR/G protein signaling. They achieve this by acting as GTPase activating proteins (GAPs) for Gα subunits and accelerating the turnoff of G protein signaling. Many RGS proteins also bind additional signaling partners that either regulate their functions or enable them to regulate other important signaling events. At neuronal synapses, GPCRs, G proteins, and RGS proteins work in coordination to regulate key aspects of neurotransmitter release, synaptic transmission, and synaptic plasticity, which are necessary for central nervous system physiology and behavior. Accumulating evidence has revealed key roles for specific RGS proteins in multiple signaling pathways at neuronal synapses, regulating both pre- and postsynaptic signaling events and synaptic plasticity. Here, we review and highlight the current knowledge of specific RGS proteins (RGS2, RGS4, RGS7, RGS9-2, and RGS14) that have been clearly demonstrated to serve critical roles in modulating synaptic signaling and plasticity throughout the brain, and we consider their potential as future therapeutic targets.

R4 Regulator of G Protein Signaling (RGS) Proteins in Inflammation and Immunity

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) have important functions in both innate and adaptive immunity, with the capacity to bridge interactions between the two arms of the host responses to pathogens through direct recognition of secreted microbial products or the by-products of host cells damaged by pathogen exposure. In the mid-1990s, a large group of intracellular proteins was discovered, the regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) family, whose main, but not exclusive, function appears to be to constrain the intensity and duration of GPCR signaling. The R4/B subfamily--the focus of this review--includes RGS1-5, 8, 13, 16, 18, and 21, which are the smallest RGS proteins in size, with the exception of RGS3. Prominent roles in the trafficking of B and T lymphocytes and macrophages have been described for RGS1, RGS13, and RGS16, while RGS18 appears to control platelet and osteoclast functions. Additional G protein independent functions of RGS13 have been uncovered in gene expression in B lymphocytes and mast cell-mediated allergic reactions. In this review, we discuss potential physiological roles of this RGS protein subfamily, primarily in leukocytes having central roles in immune and inflammatory responses. We also discuss approaches to target RGS proteins therapeutically, which represents a virtually untapped strategy to combat exaggerated immune responses leading to inflammation.

Modulation of receptor dynamics by the regulator of G protein signaling Sst2

G protein–coupled receptor signaling is negatively regulated by both receptor internalization and regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) protein–stimulated inactivation of the G protein. The RGS protein can also positively regulate receptor signaling by binding to the receptor, thereby reducing receptor internalization.

G protein–coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling is fundamental to physiological processes such as vision, the immune response, and wound healing. In the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, GPCRs detect and respond to gradients of pheromone during mating. After pheromone stimulation, the GPCR Ste2 is removed from the cell membrane, and new receptors are delivered to the growing edge. The regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) protein Sst2 acts by accelerating GTP hydrolysis and facilitating pathway desensitization. Sst2 is also known to interact with the receptor Ste2. Here we show that Sst2 is required for proper receptor recovery at the growing edge of pheromone-stimulated cells. Mathematical modeling suggested pheromone-induced synthesis of Sst2 together with its interaction with the receptor function to reestablish a receptor pool at the site of polarized growth. To validate the model, we used targeted genetic perturbations to selectively disrupt key properties of Sst2 and its induction by pheromone. Together our results reveal that a regulator of G protein signaling can also regulate the G protein–coupled receptor. Whereas Sst2 negatively regulates G protein signaling, it acts in a positive manner to promote receptor retention at the growing edge.

RGS-Insensitive G Proteins as In Vivo Probes of RGS Function

Guanine nucleotide-binding proteins of the inhibitory (Gi/o) class play critical physiological roles and the receptors that activate them are important therapeutic targets (e.g., mu opioid, serotonin 5HT1a, etc.). Gi/o proteins are negatively regulated by regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins. The redundant actions of the 20 different RGS family members have made it difficult to establish their overall physiological role. A unique G protein mutation (G184S in Gαi/o) prevents RGS binding to the Gα subunit and blocks all RGS action at that particular Gα subunit. The robust phenotypes of mice expressing these RGS-insensitive (RGSi) mutant G proteins illustrate the profound action of RGS proteins in cardiovascular, metabolic, and central nervous system functions. Specifically, the enhanced Gαi2 signaling through the RGSi Gαi2(G184S) mutant knock-in mice shows protection against cardiac ischemia/reperfusion injury and potentiation of serotonin-mediated antidepressant actions. In contrast, the RGSi Gαo mutant knock-in produces enhanced mu-opioid receptor-mediated analgesia but also a seizure phenotype. These genetic models provide novel insights into potential therapeutic strategies related to RGS protein inhibitors and/or G protein subtype-biased agonists at particular GPCRs.

RGS proteins and septins cooperate to promote chemotropism by regulating polar cap mobility

BACKGROUND

Septins are well known to form a boundary between mother and daughter cells in mitosis, but their role in other morphogenic states is poorly understood.

RESULTS

Using microfluidics and live-cell microscopy, coupled with new computational methods for image analysis, we investigated septin function during pheromone-dependent chemotropic growth in yeast. We show that septins colocalize with the regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) Sst2, a GTPase-activating protein that dampens pheromone receptor signaling. We show further that the septin structure surrounds the polar cap, ensuring that cell growth is directed toward the source of pheromone. When RGS activity is abrogated, septins are partially disorganized. Under these circumstances, the polar cap travels toward septin structures and away from sites of exocytosis, resulting in a loss of gradient tracking.

CONCLUSIONS

Septin organization is dependent on RGS protein activity. When assembled correctly, septins promote turning of the polar cap and proper tracking of a pheromone gradient.

Opioid receptor interacting proteins and the control of opioid signaling

Opioid receptors are seven-transmembrane domain receptors that couple to intracellular signaling molecules by activating heterotrimeric G proteins. However, the receptor and G protein do not function in isolation but their activities are modulated by several accessory and scaffolding proteins. Examples include arrestins, kinases, and regulators of G protein signaling proteins. Accessory proteins contribute to the observed potency and efficacy of agonists, but also to the direction of signaling and the phenomenon of biased agonism. This review will present current knowledge of such proteins and how they may provide targets for future drug design.

Soya bean Gα proteins with distinct biochemical properties exhibit differential ability to complement Saccharomyces cerevisiae gpa1 mutant

Signalling pathways mediated by heterotrimeric G-proteins are common to all eukaryotes. Plants have a limited number of each of the G-protein subunits, with the most elaborate G-protein network discovered so far in soya bean (Glycine max, also known as soybean) which has four Gα, four Gβ and ten Gγ proteins. Biochemical characterization of Gα proteins from plants suggests significant variation in their properties compared with the well-characterized non-plant proteins. Furthermore, the four soya bean Gα (GmGα) proteins exhibit distinct biochemical activities among themselves, but the extent to which such biochemical differences contribute to their in vivo function is also not known. We used the yeast gpa1 mutant which displays constitutive signalling and growth arrest in the pheromone-response pathway as an in vivo model to evaluate the effect of distinct biochemical activities of GmGα proteins. We showed that specific GmGα proteins can be activated during pheromone-dependent receptor-mediated signalling in yeast and they display different strengths towards complementation of yeast gpa1 phenotypes. We also identified amino acids that are responsible for differential complementation abilities of specific Gα proteins. These data establish that specific plant Gα proteins are functional in the receptor-mediated pheromone-response pathway in yeast and that the subtle biochemical differences in their activity are physiologically relevant.

Cellular noise suppression by the regulator of G protein signaling Sst2

G proteins and their associated receptors process information from a variety of environmental stimuli to induce appropriate cellular responses. Generally speaking, each cell in a population responds within defined limits, despite large variation in the expression of protein signaling components. Therefore, we postulated that noise suppression is encoded within the signaling system. Using the yeast mating pathway as a model, we evaluated the ability of a regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) protein to suppress noise. We found that the RGS protein Sst2 limits variability in transcription and morphogenesis in response to pheromone stimulation. While signal suppression is a result of both the GAP (GTPase accelerating) and receptor binding functions of Sst2, noise suppression requires only the GAP activity. Taken together, our findings reveal a hitherto overlooked role of RGS proteins as noise suppressors and demonstrate an ability to uncouple signal and noise in a prototypical stimulus-response pathway.

Association of Rgs7/Gβ5 complexes with Girk channels and GABAB receptors in hippocampal CA1 pyramidal neurons

In the hippocampus, signaling through G protein-coupled receptors is modulated by Regulators of G protein signaling (Rgs) proteins, which act to stimulate the rate of GTP hydrolysis, and consequently, G protein inactivation. The R7-Rgs subfamily selectively deactivates the G(i/o)-class of Gα subunits that mediate the action of several GPCRs. Here, we used co-immunoprecipitation, electrophysiology and immunoelectron microscopy techniques to investigate the formation of macromolecular complexes and spatial relationship of Rgs7/Gβ5 complexes and its prototypical signaling partners, the GABAB receptor and Girk channel. Co-expression of recombinant GABAB receptors and Girk channels in combination with co-immunoprecipitation experiments established that the Rgs7/Gβ5 forms complexes with GABAB receptors or Girk channels. Using electrophysiological experiments, we found that GABAB -Girk current deactivation kinetics was markedly faster in cells coexpressing Rgs7/Gβ5. At the electron microscopic level, immunolabeling for Rgs7 and Gβ5 proteins was found primarily in the dendritic layers of the hippocampus and showed similar distribution patterns. Immunoreactivity was mostly localized along the extrasynaptic plasma membrane of dendritic shafts and spines of pyramidal cells and, to a lesser extent, to that of presynaptic terminals. Quantitative analysis of immunogold particles for Rgs7 and Gβ5 revealed an enrichment of the two proteins around excitatory synapses on dendritic spines, virtually identical to that of Girk2 and GABAB1 . These data support the existence of macromolecular complexes composed of GABAB receptor-G protein-Rgs7-Girk channels in which Rgs7 and Gβ5 proteins may preferentialy modulate GABAB receptor signaling through the deactivation of Girk channels on dendritic spines. In contrast, Rgs7 and Girk2 were associated but mainly segregated from GABAB1 in dendritic shafts, where Rgs7/Gβ5 signaling complexes might modulate Girk-dependent signaling via a different metabotropic receptor(s).

Structural and functional analysis of the regulator of G protein signaling 2-gαq complex

The heterotrimeric G protein Gαq is a key regulator of blood pressure, and excess Gαq signaling leads to hypertension. A specific inhibitor of Gαq is the GTPase activating protein (GAP) known as regulator of G protein signaling 2 (RGS2). The molecular basis for how Gαq/11 subunits serve as substrates for RGS proteins and how RGS2 mandates its selectivity for Gαq is poorly understood. In crystal structures of the RGS2-Gαq complex, RGS2 docks to Gαq in a different orientation from that observed in RGS-Gαi/o complexes. Despite its unique pose, RGS2 maintains canonical interactions with the switch regions of Gαq in part because its α6 helix adopts a distinct conformation. We show that RGS2 forms extensive interactions with the α-helical domain of Gαq that contribute to binding affinity and GAP potency. RGS subfamilies that do not serve as GAPs for Gαq are unlikely to form analogous stabilizing interactions.

Control of striatal signaling by g protein regulators

Signaling via heterotrimeric G proteins plays a crucial role in modulating the responses of striatal neurons that ultimately shape core behaviors mediated by the basal ganglia circuitry, such as reward valuation, habit formation, and movement coordination. Activation of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) by extracellular signals activates heterotrimeric G proteins by promoting the binding of GTP to their α subunits. G proteins exert their effects by influencing the activity of key effector proteins in this region, including ion channels, second messenger enzymes, and protein kinases. Striatal neurons express a staggering number of GPCRs whose activation results in the engagement of downstream signaling pathways and cellular responses with unique profiles but common molecular mechanisms. Studies over the last decade have revealed that the extent and duration of GPCR signaling are controlled by a conserved protein family named regulator of G protein signaling (RGS). RGS proteins accelerate GTP hydrolysis by the α subunits of G proteins, thus promoting deactivation of GPCR signaling. In this review, we discuss the progress made in understanding the roles of RGS proteins in controlling striatal G protein signaling and providing integration and selectivity of signal transmission. We review evidence on the formation of a macromolecular complex between RGS proteins and other components of striatal signaling pathways, their molecular regulatory mechanisms and impacts on GPCR signaling in the striatum obtained from biochemical studies and experiments involving genetic mouse models. Special emphasis is placed on RGS9-2, a member of the RGS family that is highly enriched in the striatum and plays critical roles in drug addiction and motor control.

Regulators of G-protein signaling and their Gα substrates: promises and challenges in their use as drug discovery targets

Because G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) continue to represent excellent targets for the discovery and development of small-molecule therapeutics, it is posited that additional protein components of the signal transduction pathways emanating from activated GPCRs themselves are attractive as drug discovery targets. This review considers the drug discovery potential of two such components: members of the "regulators of G-protein signaling" (RGS protein) superfamily, as well as their substrates, the heterotrimeric G-protein α subunits. Highlighted are recent advances, stemming from mouse knockout studies and the use of "RGS-insensitivity" and fast-hydrolysis mutations to Gα, in our understanding of how RGS proteins selectively act in (patho)physiologic conditions controlled by GPCR signaling and how they act on the nucleotide cycling of heterotrimeric G-proteins in shaping the kinetics and sensitivity of GPCR signaling. Progress is documented regarding recent activities along the path to devising screening assays and chemical probes for the RGS protein target, not only in pursuits of inhibitors of RGS domain-mediated acceleration of Gα GTP hydrolysis but also to embrace the potential of finding allosteric activators of this RGS protein action. The review concludes in considering the Gα subunit itself as a drug target, as brought to focus by recent reports of activating mutations to GNAQ and GNA11 in ocular (uveal) melanoma. We consider the likelihood of several strategies for antagonizing the function of these oncogene alleles and their gene products, including the use of RGS proteins with Gα(q) selectivity.

RGS-insensitive Gα subunits: probes of Gα subtype-selective signaling and physiological functions of RGS proteins

The Regulator of G protein Signaling (RGS) proteins were identified as a family in 1996 and humans have more than 30 such proteins. Their best known function is to suppress G Protein-Coupled Receptors (GPCR) signaling by increasing the rate of Gα turnoff through stimulation of GTPase activity (i.e., GTPase acceleration protein or GAP activity). The GAP activity of RGS proteins on the Gαi and Gαq family of G proteins can terminate signals initiated by both α and βγ subunits. RGS proteins also serve as scaffolds, assembling signal-regulating modules. Understanding the physiological roles of RGS proteins is of great importance, as GPCRs are major targets for drug development. The traditional method of using RGS knockout mice has provided some information about the role of RGS proteins but in many cases effects are modest, perhaps because of redundancy in RGS protein function. As an alternative approach, we have utilized a glycine-to-serine mutation in the switch 1 region of Gα subunits that prevents RGS binding. The mutation has no known effects on Gα binding to receptor, Gβγ, or effectors. Alterations in function resulting from the G>S mutation imply a role for both the specific mutated Gα subunit and its regulation by RGS protein activity. Mutant rodents expressing these G>S mutant Gα subunits have strong phenotypes and provide important information about specific physiological functions of Gαi2 and Gαo and their control by RGS. The conceptual framework behind this approach and a summary of recent results is presented in this chapter.

Chemical gradients and chemotropism in yeast

Chemical gradients of peptide mating pheromones are necessary for directional growth, which is critical for yeast mating. These gradients are generated by cell-type specific secretion or export and specific degradation in receiving cells. Spatial information is sensed by dedicated seven-transmembrane G-protein coupled receptors and yeast cells are able to detect extremely small differences in ligand concentration across their approximately 5-microm cell surface. Here, I will discuss our current knowledge of how cells detect and respond to such shallow chemical gradients and in particular what is known about the proteins that are involved in directional growth and the establishment of the polarity axis during yeast mating.

RGS/Gi2alpha interactions modulate platelet accumulation and thrombus formation at sites of vascular injury

Although much is known about extrinsic regulators of platelet function such as nitric oxide and prostaglandin I(2) (PGI(2)), considerably less is known about intrinsic mechanisms that prevent overly robust platelet activation after vascular injury. Here we provide the first evidence that regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS) proteins serve this role in platelets, using mice with a G184S substitution in G(i2α) that blocks RGS/G(i2) interactions to examine the consequences of lifting constraints on G(i2)-dependent signaling without altering receptor:effector coupling. The results show that the G(i2α)(G184S) allele enhances platelet aggregation in vitro and increases platelet accumulation after vascular injury when expressed either as a global knock-in or limited to hematopoietic cells. Biochemical studies show that these changes occur in concert with an attenuated rise in cyclic adenosine monophosphate levels in response to prostacyclin and a substantial increase in basal Akt activation. In contrast, basal cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) levels, agonist-stimulated increases in [Ca(++)](i), Rap1 activation, and α-granule secretion were unaffected. Collectively, these observations (1) demonstrate an active role for RGS proteins in regulating platelet responsiveness, (2) show that this occurs in a pathway-selective manner, and (3) suggest that RGS proteins help to prevent unwarranted platelet activation as well as limiting the magnitude of the normal hemostatic response.

Regulation of the AGS3·G{alpha}i signaling complex by a seven-transmembrane span receptor

G-protein signaling modulators (GPSM) play diverse functional roles through their interaction with G-protein subunits. AGS3 (GPSM1) contains four G-protein regulatory motifs (GPR) that directly bind Gα(i) free of Gβγ providing an unusual scaffold for the "G-switch" and signaling complexes, but the mechanism by which signals track into this scaffold are not well understood. We report the regulation of the AGS3·Gα(i) signaling module by a cell surface, seven-transmembrane receptor. AGS3 and Gα(i1) tagged with Renilla luciferase or yellow fluorescent protein expressed in mammalian cells exhibited saturable, specific bioluminescence resonance energy transfer indicating complex formation in the cell. Activation of α(2)-adrenergic receptors or μ-opioid receptors reduced AGS3-RLuc·Gα(i1)-YFP energy transfer by over 30%. The agonist-mediated effects were inhibited by pertussis toxin and co-expression of RGS4, but were not altered by Gβγ sequestration with the carboxyl terminus of GRK2. Gα(i)-dependent and agonist-sensitive bioluminescence resonance energy transfer was also observed between AGS3 and cell-surface receptors typically coupled to Gα(i) and/or Gα(o) indicating that AGS3 is part of a larger signaling complex. Upon receptor activation, AGS3 reversibly dissociates from this complex at the cell cortex. Receptor coupling to both Gαβγ and GPR-Gα(i) offer additional flexibility for systems to respond and adapt to challenges and orchestrate complex behaviors.

Regulators of G-protein signaling accelerate GPCR signaling kinetics and govern sensitivity solely by accelerating GTPase activity

G-protein heterotrimers, composed of a guanine nucleotide-binding G alpha subunit and an obligate G betagamma dimer, regulate signal transduction pathways by cycling between GDP- and GTP-bound states. Signal deactivation is achieved by G alpha-mediated GTP hydrolysis (GTPase activity) which is enhanced by the GTPase-accelerating protein (GAP) activity of "regulator of G-protein signaling" (RGS) proteins. In a cellular context, RGS proteins have also been shown to speed up the onset of signaling, and to accelerate deactivation without changing amplitude or sensitivity of the signal. This latter paradoxical activity has been variably attributed to GAP/enzymatic or non-GAP/scaffolding functions of these proteins. Here, we validated and exploited a G alpha switch-region point mutation, known to engender increased GTPase activity, to mimic in cis the GAP function of RGS proteins. While the transition-state, GDP x AlF(4)(-)-bound conformation of the G202A mutant was found to be nearly identical to wild-type, G alpha(i1)(G202A) x GDP assumed a divergent conformation more closely resembling the GDP x AlF(4)(-)-bound state. When placed within Saccharomyces cerevisiae G alpha subunit Gpa1, the fast-hydrolysis mutation restored appropriate dose-response behaviors to pheromone signaling in the absence of RGS-mediated GAP activity. A bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) readout of heterotrimer activation with high temporal resolution revealed that fast intrinsic GTPase activity could recapitulate in cis the kinetic sharpening (increased onset and deactivation rates) and blunting of sensitivity also engendered by RGS protein action in trans. Thus G alpha-directed GAP activity, the first biochemical function ascribed to RGS proteins, is sufficient to explain the activation kinetics and agonist sensitivity observed from G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling in a cellular context.

Structure and function of regulator of G protein signaling homology domains

All regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins contain a conserved domain of approximately 130 amino acids that binds to activated heterotrimeric G protein α subunits (Gα) and accelerates their rate of GTP hydrolysis. Homologous domains are found in at least six other protein families, including a family of Rho guanine nucleotide exchange factors (RhoGEFs) and the G protein-coupled receptor kinases (GRKs). Although some of the RhoGEF and GRK RGS-like domains can also bind to activated Gα subunits, they do so in distinct ways and with much lower levels of GTPase activation. In other protein families, the domains have as of yet no obvious relationship to heterotrimeric G protein signaling. These RGS homology (RH) domains are now recognized as mediators of extraordinarily diverse protein-protein interactions. Through these interactions, they play roles that range from enzyme to molecular scaffold to signal transducing module. In this review, the atomic structures of RH domains from RGS proteins, Axins, RhoGEFs, and GRKs are compared in light of what is currently known about their functional roles.

Structure, function, and localization of Gβ5-RGS complexes

Members of the R7 subfamily of regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins (RGS6, 7, 9, and 11) exist as heterodimers with the G protein beta subunit Gβ5. These protein complexes are only found in neurons and are defined by the presence of three domains: DEP/DHEX, Gβ5/GGL, and RGS. This article summarizes published work in the following areas: (1) the functional significance of structural organization of Gβ5-R7 complexes, (2) regional distribution of Gβ5-R7 in the nervous system and regulation of R7 family expression, (3) subcellular localization of Gβ5-R7 complexes, and (4) novel binding partners of Gβ5-R7 proteins. The review points out some contradictions between observations made by different research groups and highlights the importance of using alternative experimental approaches to obtain conclusive information about Gβ5-R7 function in vivo.

Activation of the JAK-STAT pathway is necessary for desensitization of 5-HT2A receptor-stimulated phospholipase C signalling by olanzapine, clozapine and MDL 100907

We have previously demonstrated that olanzapine-induced desensitization of 5-HT2A receptor-stimulated phospholipase C (PLC) activity is associated with increases in RGS7 protein levels both in vivo and in cells in culture, and the increase in RGS7 is dependent on activation of the JAK-STAT pathway in cells in culture. In the present study, we found that desensitization of 5-HT2A receptor-stimulated PLC activity induced by olanzapine is dependent on activation of the JAK-STAT pathway. Similar to olanzapine, clozapine-induced desensitization of 5-HT2A receptor signalling is accompanied by increases in RGS7 and activation of JAK2. Treatment with the selective 5-HT2A receptor antagonist MDL 100907 also increased RGS7 protein levels and JAK2 activation. Using a JAK2 inhibitor AG490, we found that clozapine and MDL 100907-induced increases in RGS7 are dependent on activation of the JAK-STAT pathway. Olanzapine, clozapine, and MDL 100907 treatment increased mRNA levels of RGS7. Using a chromatin immunoprecipitation assay we found STAT3 binding to the putative RGS7 promoter region. Taken together, olanzapine-induced activation of the JAK-STAT pathway, and STAT3 binding to the RGS7 gene could underlie the increase in RGS7 mRNA which could subsequently increase protein expression. Furthermore, the increase in RGS7 protein could play a role in the desensitization of 5-HT2A receptor signalling by terminating the activated Galphaq/11 proteins more rapidly. Overall, our data suggest that the complete desensitization of 5-HT2A receptor-stimulated PLC activity by olanzapine, clozapine and MDL 100907 requires activation of the JAK-STAT pathway, which in turn increases RGS7 expression probably by direct transcriptional activity of STAT3.

GNAI2 and regulators of G protein signaling as a potential Noonan syndrome mechanism

Noonan syndrome (NS OMIM 163950) is a relatively common autosomal dominant developmental disorder characterized by short stature, specific facial features, and congenital cardiac anomalies. Approximately 50-66% of cases have defined mutations in the K-ras/Raf/MEK/ERK pathway that lead to constitutive signaling, but a significant number remain unexplained. We hypothesize that enhanced signaling through Galpha(i2) (from the GNAI2 gene) may also produce a NS-like phenotype. This is based on a recently described mouse model in which RGS-mediated inhibition of Galpha(i2) is prevented by a knock-in mutation (G184S) that blocks RGS binding [Huang et al., Mol. Cell. Biol. 2006;26:6870-9]. The mice have short body length, cardiac hypertrophy, a triangular face with wide-set eyes and ears, and hematologic alterations. There is a slight increase in ERK activation and a pronounced enhancement of PI3K/Akt phosphorylation in MEFs from these mice suggesting that abnormal increases in Galpha(i2) signaling could represent a novel upstream mechanism for NS. This suggests a novel set of candidate genes for NS (GNAI2 and RGS proteins) and if validated could have important implications for therapy as well.

Dual positive and negative regulation of GPCR signaling by GTP hydrolysis

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) regulate a variety of intracellular pathways through their ability to promote the binding of GTP to heterotrimeric G proteins. Regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) proteins increases the intrinsic GTPase activity of Galpha-subunits and are widely regarded as negative regulators of G protein signaling. Using yeast we demonstrate that GTP hydrolysis is not only required for desensitization, but is essential for achieving a high maximal (saturated level) response. Thus RGS-mediated GTP hydrolysis acts as both a negative (low stimulation) and positive (high stimulation) regulator of signaling. To account for this we generated a new kinetic model of the G protein cycle where Galpha(GTP) enters an inactive GTP-bound state following effector activation. Furthermore, in vivo and in silico experimentation demonstrates that maximum signaling output first increases and then decreases with RGS concentration. This unimodal, non-monotone dependence on RGS concentration is novel. Analysis of the kinetic model has revealed a dynamic network motif that shows precisely how inclusion of the inactive GTP-bound state for the Galpha produces this unimodal relationship.

A point mutation to Galphai selectively blocks GoLoco motif binding: direct evidence for Galpha.GoLoco complexes in mitotic spindle dynamics

Heterotrimeric G-protein Galpha subunits and GoLoco motif proteins are key members of a conserved set of regulatory proteins that influence invertebrate asymmetric cell division and vertebrate neuroepithelium and epithelial progenitor differentiation. GoLoco motif proteins bind selectively to the inhibitory subclass (Galphai) of Galpha subunits, and thus it is assumed that a Galphai.GoLoco motif protein complex plays a direct functional role in microtubule dynamics underlying spindle orientation and metaphase chromosomal segregation during cell division. To address this hypothesis directly, we rationally identified a point mutation to Galphai subunits that renders a selective loss-of-function for GoLoco motif binding, namely an asparagine-to-isoleucine substitution in the alphaD-alphaE loop of the Galpha helical domain. This GoLoco-insensitivity ("GLi") mutation prevented Galphai1 association with all human GoLoco motif proteins and abrogated interaction between the Caenorhabditis elegans Galpha subunit GOA-1 and the GPR-1 GoLoco motif. In contrast, the GLi mutation did not perturb any other biochemical or signaling properties of Galphai subunits, including nucleotide binding, intrinsic and RGS protein-accelerated GTP hydrolysis, and interactions with Gbetagamma dimers, adenylyl cyclase, and seven transmembrane-domain receptors. GoLoco insensitivity rendered Galphai subunits unable to recruit GoLoco motif proteins such as GPSM2/LGN and GPSM3 to the plasma membrane, and abrogated the exaggerated mitotic spindle rocking normally seen upon ectopic expression of wild type Galphai subunits in kidney epithelial cells. This GLi mutation should prove valuable in establishing the physiological roles of Galphai.GoLoco motif protein complexes in microtubule dynamics and spindle function during cell division as well as to delineate potential roles for GoLoco motifs in receptor-mediated signal transduction.

Endogenous RGS proteins attenuate Galpha(i)-mediated lysophosphatidic acid signaling pathways in ovarian cancer cells

Lysophosphatidic acid is a bioactive phospholipid that is produced by and stimulates ovarian cancer cells, promoting proliferation, migration, invasion, and survival. Effects of LPA are mediated by cell surface G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) that activate multiple heterotrimeric G-proteins. G-proteins are deactivated by Regulator of G-protein Signaling (RGS) proteins. This led us to hypothesize that RGS proteins may regulate G-protein signaling pathways initiated by LPA in ovarian cancer cells. To determine the effect of endogenous RGS proteins on LPA signaling in ovarian cancer cells, we compared LPA activity in SKOV-3 ovarian cancer cells expressing G(i) subunit constructs that are either insensitive to RGS protein regulation (RGSi) or their RGS wild-type (RGSwt) counterparts. Both forms of the G-protein contained a point mutation rendering them insensitive to inhibition with pertussis toxin, and cells were treated with pertussis toxin prior to experiments to eliminate endogenous G(i/o) signaling. The potency and efficacy of LPA-mediated inhibition of forskolin-stimulated adenylyl cyclase activity was enhanced in cells expressing RGSi G(i) proteins as compared to RGSwt G(i). We further showed that LPA signaling that is subject to RGS regulation terminates much faster than signaling thru RGS insensitive G-proteins. Finally, LPA-stimulated SKOV-3 cell migration, as measured in a wound-induced migration assay, was enhanced in cells expressing Galpha(i2) RGSi as compared to cells expressing Galpha(i2) RGSwt, suggesting that endogenous RGS proteins in ovarian cancer cells normally attenuate this LPA effect. These data establish RGS proteins as novel regulators of LPA signaling in ovarian cancer cells.

Intramolecular interaction between the DEP domain of RGS7 and the Gbeta5 subunit

The R7 family of RGS proteins (RGS6, -7, -9, -11) is characterized by the presence of three domains: DEP, GGL, and RGS. The RGS domain interacts with Galpha subunits and exhibits GAP activity. The GGL domain permanently associates with Gbeta5. The DEP domain interacts with the membrane anchoring protein, R7BP. Here we provide evidence for a novel interaction within this complex: between the DEP domain and Gbeta5. GST fusion of the RGS7 DEP domain (GST-R7DEP) binds to both native and recombinant Gbeta5-RGS7, recombinant Gbetagamma complexes, and monomeric Gbeta5 and Gbeta1 subunits. Co-immunoprecipitation and FRET assays supported the GST pull-down experiments. GST-R7DEP reduced FRET between CFP-Gbeta5 and YFP-RGS7, indicating that the DEP-Gbeta5 interaction is dynamic. In transfected cells, R7BP had no effect on the Gbeta5/RGS7 pull down by GST-R7DEP. The DEP domain of RGS9 did not bind to Gbeta5. Substitution of RGS7 Glu-73 and Asp-74 for the corresponding Ser and Gly residues (ED/SG mutation) of RGS9 diminished the DEP-Gbeta5 interaction. In the absence of R7BP both the wild-type RGS7 and the ED/SG mutant attenuated muscarinic M3 receptor-mediated Ca2+ mobilization. In the presence of R7BP, wild-type RGS7 lost this inhibitory activity, whereas the ED/SG mutant remained active. Taken together, our results are consistent with the following model. The Gbeta5-RGS7 molecule can exist in two conformations: "closed" and "open", when the DEP domain and Gbeta5 subunit either do or do not interact. The closed conformation appears to be less active with respect to its effect on Gq-mediated signaling than the open conformation.

Olanzapine increases RGS7 protein expression via stimulation of the Janus tyrosine kinase-signal transducer and activator of transcription signaling cascade

Atypical antipsychotics such as olanzapine have high affinity for multiple monoamine neurotransmitter receptors and are the mainstay of pharmacological therapy for treatment of schizophrenia. In addition to blocking monoamine receptors, these drugs also affect intracellular signaling cascades. We now report that 24-h treatment with 300 nM olanzapine causes desensitization of serotonin (5-HT)(2A) receptors in A1A1v cells, a rat cortical cell line, as indicated by a reduction in inositol phosphate accumulation following stimulation with a 5-HT(2A/2C) receptor agonist (-)-1-(2,5-dimethoxy-4-lodophenyl)-2-aminopropane HCl. Olanzapine treatment for 24 h increased the levels of 5-HT(2A) receptors in both cytosol (234 +/- 34% of control level) and membrane fractions (206 +/- 14% of control levels) and RGS7 proteins in both cytosol (193 +/- 32% of control levels) and membrane fractions (160 +/- 18% of control levels) as measured on Western blots. Increased phosphorylation of Janus tyrosine kinase (JAK) 2 and increased phosphorylation and nuclear translocation of signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT) 3 with 24-h olanzapine treatment demonstrate activation of the JAK-STAT signaling cascade. Pretreatment with a JAK inhibitor, AG490 [alpha-cyano-(3,4-dihydroxy)-N-benzylcinnamide], prevented the olanzapine-induced increase in membrane RGS7 protein levels; AG490 alone had no effect on RGS7 protein levels. We verified that treatment with AG490 reduced phosphorylation of JAK2 and inhibited the nuclear localization of phospho-STAT3. Interestingly, treatment with the JAK inhibitor had no effect on 5-HT(2A) receptor protein levels. These data suggest that olanzapine-induced activation of the JAK-STAT signaling cascade causes increased expression of RGS7 protein, which in turn could mediate desensitization of 5-HT(2A) receptor signaling caused by olanzapine because RGS7 binds to Galpha(q) protein and accelerates GTP hydrolysis.

Rgs1 regulates multiple Galpha subunits in Magnaporthe pathogenesis, asexual growth and thigmotropism

Regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS proteins) negatively regulate heterotrimeric G-protein cascades that enable eukaryotic cells to perceive and respond to external stimuli. The rice-blast fungus Magnaporthe grisea forms specialized infection structures called appressoria in response to inductive surface cues. We isolated Magnaporthe RGS1 in a screen for mutants that form precocious appressoria on non-inductive surfaces. We report that a thigmotropic cue is necessary for initiating appressoria and for accumulating cAMP. Similar to an RGS1-deletion strain, magA(G187S) (RGS-insensitive Galpha(s)) and magA(Q208L) (GTPase-dead) mutants accumulated excessive cAMP and elaborated appressoria on non-inductive surfaces, suggesting that Rgs1 regulates MagA during pathogenesis. Rgs1 was also found to negatively regulate the Galpha(i) subunit MagB during asexual development. Deficiency of MAGB suppressed the hyper-conidiation defect in RGS1-deletion strain, whereas magB(G183S) and magB(Q204L) mutants produced more conidia, similar to the RGS1-deletion strain. Rgs1 physically interacted with GDP.AlF(4)(-)-activated forms of MagA, MagB and MagC (a Galpha(II) subunit). Thus, Rgs1 serves as a negative regulator of all Galpha subunits in Magnaporthe and controls important developmental events during asexual and pathogenic development.

Structural basis of effector regulation and signal termination in heterotrimeric Galpha proteins

This chapter addresses, from a molecular structural perspective gained from examination of x-ray crystallographic and biochemical data, the mechanisms by which GTP-bound Galpha subunits of heterotrimeric G proteins recognize and regulate effectors. The mechanism of GTP hydrolysis by Galpha and rate acceleration by GAPs are also considered. The effector recognition site in all Galpha homologues is formed almost entirely of the residues extending from the C-terminal half of alpha2 (Switch II) together with the alpha3 helix and its junction with the beta5 strand. Effector binding does not induce substantial changes in the structure of Galpha*GTP. Effectors are structurally diverse. Different effectors may recognize distinct subsets of effector-binding residues of the same Galpha protein. Specificity may also be conferred by differences in the main chain conformation of effector-binding regions of Galpha subunits. Several Galpha regulatory mechanisms are operative. In the regulation of GMP phospodiesterase, Galphat sequesters an inhibitory subunit. Galphas is an allosteric activator and inhibitor of adenylyl cyclase, and Galphai is an allosteric inhibitor. Galphaq does not appear to regulate GRK, but is rather sequestered by it. GTP hydrolysis terminates the signaling state of Galpha. The binding energy of GTP that is used to stabilize the Galpha:effector complex is dissipated in this reaction. Chemical steps of GTP hydrolysis, specifically, formation of a dissociative transition state, is rate limiting in Ras, a model G protein GTPase, even in the presence of a GAP; however, the energy of enzyme reorganization to produce a catalytically active conformation appears to be substantial. It is possible that the collapse of the switch regions, associated with Galpha deactivation, also encounters a kinetic barrier, and is coupled to product (Pi) release or an event preceding formation of the GDP*Pi complex. Evidence for a catalytic intermediate, possibly metaphosphate, is discussed. Galpha GAPs, whether exogenous proteins or effector-linked domains, bind to a discrete locus of Galpha that is composed of Switch I and the N-terminus of Switch II. This site is immediately adjacent to, but does not substantially overlap, the Galpha effector binding site. Interactions of effectors and exogenous GAPs with Galpha proteins can be synergistic or antagonistic, mediated by allosteric interactions among the three molecules. Unlike GAPs for small GTPases, Galpha GAPs supply no catalytic residues, but rather appear to reduce the activation energy for catalytic activation of the Galpha catalytic site.

Differential effects of RGS proteins on Gαq and Gα11 activity

Heterotrimeric G proteins play a pivotal role in GPCR signalling; they link receptors to intracellular effectors and their inactivation by RGS proteins is a key factor in resetting the pathway following stimulation. The precise GPCR:G protein:RGS combination determines the nature and duration of the response. Investigating the activity of particular combinations is difficult in cells which contain multiples of each component. We have therefore utilised a previously characterised yeast system to express mammalian proteins in isolation. Human G alpha(q) and G alpha(11) spontaneously activated the yeast pheromone-response pathway by a mechanism which required the formation of G alpha-GTP. This provided an assay for the specific activity of human RGS proteins. RGS1, RGS2, RGS3 and RGS4 inhibited the spontaneous activity of both G alpha(q) and G alpha(11) but, in contrast, RGS5 and RGS16 were much less effective against G alpha(11) than G alpha(q). Interestingly, RGS2 and RGS3 were able to inhibit signalling from the constitutively active G alpha(q)QL/G alpha(11)QL mutants, confirming the GAP-independent activity of these RGS proteins. To determine if the RGS-G alpha specificity was maintained under conditions of GPCR stimulation, minor modifications to the C-terminus of G alpha(q)/G alpha(11) enabled coupling to an endogenous receptor. RGS2 and RGS3 were effective inhibitors of both G alpha subunits even at high levels of receptor stimulation, emphasising their GAP-independent activity. At low levels of stimulation RGS5 and RGS16 retained their differential G alpha activity, further highlighting that RGS proteins can discriminate between two very closely related G alpha subunits.

Inhibition of Gαq-dependent PLC-β1 activity by PKG and PKA is mediated by phosphorylation of RGS4 and GRK2

In smooth muscle of the gut, Gq-coupled receptor agonists activate preferentially PLC-β1 to stimulate phosphoinositide (PI) hydrolysis and inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphate (IP3) generation and induce IP3-dependent Ca2+ release. Inhibition of Ca2+ mobilization by cAMP- (PKA) and cGMP-dependent (PKG) protein kinases reflects inhibition of PI hydrolysis by both kinases and PKG-specific inhibitory phosphorylation of IP3 receptor type I. The mechanism of inhibition of PLC-β1-dependent PI hydrolysis has not been established. Neither Gq nor PLC-β1 was directly phosphorylated by PKA or PKG in gastric smooth muscle cells. However, both kinases 1) phosphorylated regulator of G protein signaling 4 (RGS4) and induced its translocation from cytosol to plasma membrane, 2) enhanced ACh-stimulated association of RGS4 and Gαq·GTP and intrinsic Gαq·GTPase activity, and 3) inhibited ACh-stimulated PI hydrolysis. RGS4 phosphorylation and inhibition of PI hydrolysis were blocked by selective PKA and PKG inhibitors. Expression of RGS4(S52A), which lacks a PKA/PKG phosphorylation site, blocked the increase in GTPase activity and the decrease in PI hydrolysis induced by PKA and PKG. Blockade of PKA-dependent effects was only partial. Selective phosphorylation of G protein-coupled receptor kinase 2 (GRK2), which contains a RGS domain, by PKA augmented ACh-stimulated GRK2:Gαq·GTP association; both effects were blocked in cells expressing GRK2(S685A), which lacks a PKA phosphorylation site. Inhibition of PI hydrolysis induced by PKA was partly blocked in cells expressing GRK2(S685A) and completely blocked in cells coexpressing GRK2(S685A) and RGS4(S52A) or Gαq(G188S), a Gαq mutant that binds GRK2 but not RGS4. The results demonstrate that inhibition of PLC-β1-dependent PI hydrolysis by PKA is mediated via stimulatory phosphorylation of RGS4 and GRK2, leading to rapid inactivation of Gαq·GTP. PKG acts only via phosphorylation of RGS4.

DEP-domain-mediated regulation of GPCR signaling responses

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) mediate cellular responses to a variety of stimuli, but how specific responses are regulated has been elusive, as the types of GPCRs vastly outnumber the classes of G protein heterotrimers available to initiate downstream signaling. In our analysis of signaling proteins containing DEP domains ( approximately 90 residue sequence motifs first recognized in fly Dishevelled, worm EGL-10, and mammalian Pleckstrin), we find that DEP domains are responsible for specific recognition of GPCRs. We examined the yeast regulator of G protein signaling (RGS) protein Sst2 and demonstrate that the DEP domains in Sst2 mediate binding to its cognate GPCR (Ste2). DEP-domain-mediated tethering promotes downregulation by placing the RGS protein in proximity to its substrate (receptor-activated Galpha subunit). Sst2 docks to the Ste2 cytosolic tail, but only its unphosphorylated state, allowing for release and recycling of this regulator upon receptor desensitization and internalization. DEP-domain-mediated targeting of effectors and regulators to specific GPCRs provides a means to dictate the nature, duration, and specificity of the response.

Pleiotropic phenotype of a genomic knock-in of an RGS-insensitive G184S Gnai2 allele

Signal transduction via guanine nucleotide binding proteins (G proteins) is involved in cardiovascular, neural, endocrine, and immune cell function. Regulators of G protein signaling (RGS proteins) speed the turn-off of G protein signals and inhibit signal transduction, but the in vivo roles of RGS proteins remain poorly defined. To overcome the redundancy of RGS functions and reveal the total contribution of RGS regulation at the Galpha(i2) subunit, we prepared a genomic knock-in of the RGS-insensitive G184S Gnai2 allele. The Galpha(i2)(G184S) knock-in mice show a dramatic and complex phenotype affecting multiple organ systems (heart, myeloid, skeletal, and central nervous system). Both homozygotes and heterozygotes demonstrate reduced viability and decreased body weight. Other phenotypes include shortened long bones, a markedly enlarged spleen, elevated neutrophil counts, an enlarged heart, and behavioral hyperactivity. Heterozygous Galpha(i2)(+/G184S) mice show some but not all of these abnormalities. Thus, loss of RGS actions at Galpha(i2) produces a dramatic and pleiotropic phenotype which is more evident than the phenotype seen for individual RGS protein knockouts.

Alterations in 5-HT2A receptor signaling in male and female transgenic rats over-expressing either Gq or RGS-insensitive Gq protein

Serotonin 2A (5-HT2A) receptors are coupled to Galphaq and Galpha11 proteins to activate phospholipase C (PLC). Regulators of G-protein signaling proteins (RGS) modulate G-protein signaling by accelerating the intrinsic GTPase activity of Galphaq and Galpha11. This study investigated the effects of over-expression of wild-type Galphaq proteins (Gq-Tg) and over-expression of RGS-insensitive Galphaq proteins (G188S, RGSi-Tg) on 5-HT2A receptor mediated signaling in transgenic rats. Over-expression of wild-type Galphaq and RGS insensitive mutant Galphaq did not produce significant alterations in the levels of Galpha11, RGS2, RGS4, RGS7, RGS16 or 5-HT2A proteins. RGSi-Tg rats had higher oxytocin and corticosterone responses to (-)DOI, a 5-HT2A/2C receptor agonist, compared to Gq-Tg rats. RGSi-Tg and Gq-Tg rats had higher ACTH responses to (-)DOI compared to control rats. Similarly, 5-HT-stimulated PLC activity in the frontal cortex was higher in RGSi-Tg and Gq-Tg rats compared to control rats. In contrast, GTPgammaS-stimulated PLC activity was higher in Gq-Tg rats but not in RGSi-Tg rats compared to control rats. There was a small but statistically significant increase in the affinity of [125I]-DOI labeled 5-HT2A receptors in RGSi-Tg rats and Gq-Tg rats compared to controls. There were no significant differences in Bmax and Kd of [3H] ketanserin labeled 5-HT2A receptors among the three groups. These data suggest that the effect of RGS proteins on 5-HT2A receptor signaling is cell type specific. In transgenic rats over-expressing Galphaq, endogenous RGS proteins have a negative effect on 5-HT2A receptor-mediated oxytocin release. In contrast, endogenous RGS protein had no impact on 5-HT2A receptor-mediated ACTH release in transgenic rats.

Investigating RGS proteins in yeast

Regulator of G protein signalling (RGS) proteins are vital in the adaptation of cells to stimulation via G protein-coupled receptors. Yeast have been integral in elucidating the important role that RGS proteins play within cellular processes. In addition to extensive characterisation of the endogenous RGS proteins, these organisms have enabled the identification and analysis of numerous mammalian homologues. The simplicity and plasticity of the yeast pheromone-response pathway has facilitated studies which would have been impossible in mammalian systems and it is certain that yeast will continue to have a great impact on this field of research in the future.

Genome-scale analysis reveals Sst2 as the principal regulator of mating pheromone signaling in the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae

A common property of G protein-coupled receptors is that they become less responsive with prolonged stimulation. Regulators of G protein signaling (RGS proteins) are well known to accelerate G protein GTPase activity and do so by stabilizing the transition state conformation of the G protein alpha subunit. In the yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae there are four RGS-homologous proteins (Sst2, Rgs2, Rax1, and Mdm1) and two Galpha proteins (Gpa1 and Gpa2). We show that Sst2 is the only RGS protein that binds selectively to the transition state conformation of Gpa1. The other RGS proteins also bind Gpa1 and modulate pheromone signaling, but to a lesser extent and in a manner clearly distinct from Sst2. To identify other candidate pathway regulators, we compared pheromone responses in 4,349 gene deletion mutants representing nearly all nonessential genes in yeast. A number of mutants produced an increase (sst2, bar1, asc1, and ygl024w) or decrease (cla4) in pheromone sensitivity or resulted in pheromone-independent signaling (sst2, pbs2, gas1, and ygl024w). These findings suggest that Sst2 is the principal regulator of Gpa1-mediated signaling in vivo but that other proteins also contribute in distinct ways to pathway regulation.

Chemical genetics reveals an RGS/G-protein role in the action of a compound

We report here on a chemical genetic screen designed to address the mechanism of action of a small molecule. Small molecules that were active in models of urinary incontinence were tested on the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans, and the resulting phenotypes were used as readouts in a genetic screen to identify possible molecular targets. The mutations giving resistance to compound were found to affect members of the RGS protein/G-protein complex. Studies in mammalian systems confirmed that the small molecules inhibit muscarinic G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling involving G-αq (G-protein alpha subunit). Our studies suggest that the small molecules act at the level of the RGS/G-αq signaling complex, and define new mutations in both RGS and G-αq, including a unique hypo-adapation allele of G-αq. These findings suggest that therapeutics targeted to downstream components of GPCR signaling may be effective for treatment of diseases involving inappropriate receptor activation.

The authors have utilized Caenorhabditis elegans, and yeast genetics, combined with mammalian tissue and cell culture experiments to investigate the mechanism of action of a unique set of small molecules. These molecules are active in tissue models of urinary incontinence and allow for increased bladder filling. In the course of studying sensitivity and resistance to these compounds, Fitzgerald et al. uncovered novel alleles of RGS and Gq proteins. Further characterization of one such allele identified that its action conferred a hypo-adaptive phenotype on yeast during pheromone signaling assays. Their data as a whole indicate that these small molecules are able to diminish signaling from G-protein coupled receptors (GPCR) downstream of the receptors themselves. Since GPCR signaling is very important in many diseases in humans, the novel mechanism of these compounds may offer new ways to treat human disease.

Regulator of G-protein signaling 2 (RGS2) inhibits androgen-independent activation of androgen receptor in prostate cancer cells

Hormones acting through G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) can cause androgen-independent activation of androgen receptor (AR) in prostate cancer cells. Regulators of G-protein signaling (RGS) proteins, through their GTPase activating protein (GAP) activities, inhibit GPCR-mediated signaling by inactivating G proteins. Here, we identified RGS2 as a gene specifically downregulated in androgen-independent prostate cancer cells. Expression of RGS2, but not other RGS proteins, abolished androgen-independent AR activity in androgen-independent LNCaP cells and CWR22Rv1 cells. In LNCaP cells, RGS2 inhibited G(q)-coupled GPCR signaling. Expression of exogenous wild-type RGS2, but not its GAP-deficient mutant, significantly reduced AR activation by constitutively activated G(q)Q209L mutant whereas silencing endogenous RGS2 by siRNA enhanced G(q)Q209L-stimulated AR activity. RGS2 had no effect on RGS-insensitive G(q)Q209L/G188S-induced AR activation. Furthermore, extracellular signal-regulated kinase 1/2 (ERK1/2) was found to be involved in RGS2-mediated regulation of androgen-independent AR activity. In addition, RGS2 functioned as a growth suppressor for androgen-independent LNCaP cells whereas androgen-sensitive LNCaP cells with RGS2 silencing had a growth advantage under steroid-reduced conditions. Finally, RGS2 expression level was significantly decreased in human prostate tumor specimens. Taken together, our results suggest RGS2 as a novel regulator of AR signaling and its repression may be an important step during prostate tumorigenesis and progression.