Manipulation of very few receptor discriminator residues greatly enhances receptor specificity of non-visual arrestins

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.

Convergent evolution of dim light vision in owls and deep-diving whales

Animals with enhanced dim-light sensitivity are at higher risk of light-induced retinal degeneration when exposed to bright light conditions.1,2,3,4 This trade-off is mediated by the rod photoreceptor sensory protein, rhodopsin (RHO), and its toxic vitamin A chromophore by-product, all-trans retinal.5,6,7,8 Rod arrestin (Arr-1) binds to RHO and promotes sequestration of excess all-trans retinal,9,10 which has recently been suggested as a protective mechanism against photoreceptor cell death.2,11 We investigated Arr-1 evolution in animals at high risk of retinal damage due to periodic bright-light exposure of rod-dominated retinas. Here, we find the convergent evolution of enhanced Arr-1/RHO all-trans-retinal sequestration in owls and deep-diving whales. Statistical analyses reveal a parallel acceleration of Arr-1 evolutionary rates in these lineages, which is associated with the introduction of a rare Arr-1 mutation (Q69R) into the RHO-Arr-1 binding interface. Using in vitro assays, we find that this single mutation significantly enhances RHO-all-trans-retinal sequestration by ∼30%. This functional convergence across 300 million years of evolutionary divergence suggests that Arr-1 and RHO may play an underappreciated role in the photoprotection of the eye, with potentially vast clinical significance.

β-Arrestins: Structure, Function, Physiology, and Pharmacological Perspectives

The two β-arrestins, β-arrestin-1 and -2 (systematic names: arrestin-2 and -3, respectively), are multifunctional intracellular proteins that regulate the activity of a very large number of cellular signaling pathways and physiologic functions. The two proteins were discovered for their ability to disrupt signaling via G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) via binding to the activated receptors. However, it is now well recognized that both β-arrestins can also act as direct modulators of numerous cellular processes via either GPCR-dependent or -independent mechanisms. Recent structural, biophysical, and biochemical studies have provided novel insights into how β-arrestins bind to activated GPCRs and downstream effector proteins. Studies with β-arrestin mutant mice have identified numerous physiologic and pathophysiological processes regulated by β-arrestin-1 and/or -2. Following a short summary of recent structural studies, this review primarily focuses on β-arrestin-regulated physiologic functions, with particular focus on the central nervous system and the roles of β-arrestins in carcinogenesis and key metabolic processes including the maintenance of glucose and energy homeostasis. This review also highlights potential therapeutic implications of these studies and discusses strategies that could prove useful for targeting specific β-arrestin-regulated signaling pathways for therapeutic purposes. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: The two β-arrestins, structurally closely related intracellular proteins that are evolutionarily highly conserved, have emerged as multifunctional proteins able to regulate a vast array of cellular and physiological functions. The outcome of studies with β-arrestin mutant mice and cultured cells, complemented by novel insights into β-arrestin structure and function, should pave the way for the development of novel classes of therapeutically useful drugs capable of regulating specific β-arrestin functions.

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.

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.

The finger loop as an activation sensor in arrestin

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

PAR4 activation involves extracellular loop 3 and transmembrane residue Thr153

Protease-activated receptor 4 (PAR4) mediates sustained thrombin signaling in platelets and is required for a stable thrombus. PAR4 is activated by proteolysis of the N terminus to expose a tethered ligand. The structural basis for PAR4 activation and the location of its ligand binding site (LBS) are unknown. Using hydrogen/deuterium exchange (H/D exchange), computational modeling, and signaling studies, we determined the molecular mechanism for tethered ligand-mediated PAR4 activation. H/D exchange identified that the LBS is composed of transmembrane 3 (TM3) domain and TM7. Unbiased computational modeling further predicted an interaction between Gly48 from the tethered ligand and Thr153 from the LBS. Mutating Thr153 significantly decreased PAR4 signaling. H/D exchange and modeling also showed that extracellular loop 3 (ECL3) serves as a gatekeeper for the interaction between the tethered ligand and LBS. A naturally occurring sequence variant (P310L, rs2227376) and 2 experimental mutations (S311A and P312L) determined that the rigidity conferred by prolines in ECL3 are essential for PAR4 activation. Finally, we examined the role of the polymorphism at position 310 in venous thromboembolism (VTE) using the International Network Against Venous Thrombosis (INVENT) consortium multi-ancestry genome-wide association study (GWAS) meta-analysis. Individuals with the PAR4 Leu310 allele had a 15% reduction in relative risk for VTE (odds ratio, 0.85; 95% confidence interval, 0.77-0.94) compared with the Pro310 allele. These data are consistent with our H/D exchange, molecular modeling, and signaling studies. In conclusion, we have uncovered the structural basis for PAR4 activation and identified a previously unrecognized role for PAR4 in VTE.

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

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

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.

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

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

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.

GPCR Signaling Regulation: The Role of GRKs and Arrestins

Every animal species expresses hundreds of different G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) that respond to a wide variety of external stimuli. GPCRs-driven signaling pathways are involved in pretty much every physiological function and in many pathologies. Therefore, GPCRs are targeted by about a third of clinically used drugs. The signaling of most GPCRs via G proteins is terminated by the phosphorylation of active receptor by specific kinases (GPCR kinases, or GRKs) and subsequent binding of arrestin proteins, that selectively recognize active phosphorylated receptors. In addition, GRKs and arrestins play a role in multiple signaling pathways in the cell, both GPCR-initiated and receptor-independent. Here we focus on the mechanisms of GRK- and arrestin-mediated regulation of GPCR signaling, which includes homologous desensitization and redirection of signaling to additional pathways by bound arrestins.

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

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

Arrestin mutations: Some cause diseases, others promise cure

Arrestins play a key role in homologous desensitization of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and regulate several other vital signaling pathways in cells. Considering the critical roles of these proteins in cellular signaling, surprisingly few disease-causing mutations in human arrestins were described. Most of these are loss-of-function mutations of visual arrestin-1 that cause excessive rhodopsin signaling and hence night blindness. Only one dominant arrestin-1 mutation was discovered so far. It reduces the thermal stability of the protein, which likely results in photoreceptor death via unfolded protein response. In case of the two nonvisual arrestins, only polymorphisms were described, some of which appear to be associated with neurological disorders and altered response to certain treatments. Structure-function studies revealed several ways of enhancing arrestins' ability to quench GPCR signaling. These enhanced arrestins have potential as tools for gene therapy of disorders associated with excessive signaling of mutant GPCRs.

Arrestins: Introducing Signaling Bias Into Multifunctional Proteins

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

A Novel Polar Core and Weakly Fixed C-Tail in Squid Arrestin Provide New Insight into Interaction with Rhodopsin

Photoreceptors of the squid Loligo pealei contain a G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling system that activates phospholipase C in response to light. Analogous to the mammalian visual system, signaling of the photoactivated GPCR rhodopsin is terminated by binding of squid arrestin (sArr). sArr forms a light-dependent, high-affinity complex with squid rhodopsin, which does not require prior receptor phosphorylation for interaction. This is at odds with classical mammalian GPCR desensitization where an agonist-bound phosphorylated receptor is needed to break stabilizing constraints within arrestins, the so-called "three-element interaction" and "polar core" network, before a stable receptor-arrestin complex can be established. Biophysical and mass spectrometric analysis of the squid rhodopsin-arrestin complex indicates that in contrast to mammalian arrestins, the sArr C-tail is not involved in a stable three-element interaction. We determined the crystal structure of C-terminally truncated sArr that adopts a basal conformation common to arrestins and is stabilized by a series of weak but novel polar core interactions. Unlike mammalian arrestin-1, deletion of the sArr C-tail does not influence kinetic properties of complex formation of sArr with the receptor. Hydrogen-deuterium exchange studies revealed the footprint of the light-activated rhodopsin on sArr. Furthermore, double electron-electron resonance spectroscopy experiments provide evidence that receptor-bound sArr adopts a conformation different from the one known for arrestin-1 and molecular dynamics simulations reveal the residues that account for the weak three-element interaction. Insights gleaned from studying this system add to our general understanding of GPCR-arrestin interaction.

Structure and dynamics of GPCR signaling complexes

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

The Diverse Roles of Arrestin Scaffolds in G Protein-Coupled Receptor Signaling

The visual/β-arrestins, a small family of proteins originally described for their role in the desensitization and intracellular trafficking of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), have emerged as key regulators of multiple signaling pathways. Evolutionarily related to a larger group of regulatory scaffolds that share a common arrestin fold, the visual/β-arrestins acquired the capacity to detect and bind activated GPCRs on the plasma membrane, which enables them to control GPCR desensitization, internalization, and intracellular trafficking. By acting as scaffolds that bind key pathway intermediates, visual/β-arrestins both influence the tonic level of pathway activity in cells and, in some cases, serve as ligand-regulated scaffolds for GPCR-mediated signaling. Growing evidence supports the physiologic and pathophysiologic roles of arrestins and underscores their potential as therapeutic targets. Circumventing arrestin-dependent GPCR desensitization may alleviate the problem of tachyphylaxis to drugs that target GPCRs, and find application in the management of chronic pain, asthma, and psychiatric illness. As signaling scaffolds, arrestins are also central regulators of pathways controlling cell growth, migration, and survival, suggesting that manipulating their scaffolding functions may be beneficial in inflammatory diseases, fibrosis, and cancer. In this review we examine the structure-function relationships that enable arrestins to perform their diverse roles, addressing arrestin structure at the molecular level, the relationship between arrestin conformation and function, and sites of interaction between arrestins, GPCRs, and nonreceptor-binding partners. We conclude with a discussion of arrestins as therapeutic targets and the settings in which manipulating arrestin function might be of clinical benefit.

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.

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

BACKGROUND

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Differential manipulation of arrestin-3 binding to basal and agonist-activated G protein-coupled receptors

Non-visual arrestins interact with hundreds of different G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Here we show that by introducing mutations into elements that directly bind receptors, the specificity of arrestin-3 can be altered. Several mutations in the two parts of the central "crest" of the arrestin molecule, middle-loop and C-loop, enhanced or reduced arrestin-3 interactions with several GPCRs in receptor subtype and functional state-specific manner. For example, the Lys139Ile substitution in the middle-loop dramatically enhanced the binding to inactive M₂ muscarinic receptor, so that agonist activation of the M₂ did not further increase arrestin-3 binding. Thus, the Lys139Ile mutation made arrestin-3 essentially an activation-independent binding partner of M₂, whereas its interactions with other receptors, including the β₂-adrenergic receptor and the D₁ and D₂ dopamine receptors, retained normal activation dependence. In contrast, the Ala248Val mutation enhanced agonist-induced arrestin-3 binding to the β₂-adrenergic and D₂ dopamine receptors, while reducing its interaction with the D₁ dopamine receptor. These mutations represent the first example of altering arrestin specificity via enhancement of the arrestin-receptor interactions rather than selective reduction of the binding to certain subtypes.

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

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

Analyzing the roles of multi-functional proteins in cells: The case of arrestins and GRKs

Most proteins have multiple functions. Obviously, conventional methods of manipulating the level of the protein of interest in the cell, such as over-expression, knockout or knockdown, affect all of its functions simultaneously. The key advantage of these methods is that over-expression, knockout or knockdown does not require any knowledge of the molecular mechanisms of the function(s) of the protein of interest. The disadvantage is that these approaches are inadequate to elucidate the role of an individual function of the protein in a particular cellular process. An alternative is the use of re-engineered proteins, in which a single function is eliminated or enhanced. The use of mono-functional elements of a multi-functional protein can also yield cleaner answers. This approach requires detailed knowledge of the structural basis of each function of the protein in question. Thus, a lot of preliminary structure-function work is necessary to make it possible. However, when this information is available, replacing the protein of interest with a mutant in which individual functions are modified can shed light on the biological role of those particular functions. Here, we illustrate this point using the example of protein kinases, most of which have additional non-enzymatic functions, as well as arrestins, known multi-functional signaling regulators in the cell.

The β-Arrestins: Multifunctional Regulators of G Protein-coupled Receptors

The β-arrestins (βarrs) are versatile, multifunctional adapter proteins that are best known for their ability to desensitize G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), but also regulate a diverse array of cellular functions. To signal in such a complex fashion, βarrs adopt multiple conformations and are regulated at multiple levels to differentially activate downstream pathways. Recent structural studies have demonstrated that βarrs have a conserved structure and activation mechanism, with plasticity of their structural fold, allowing them to adopt a wide array of conformations. Novel roles for βarrs continue to be identified, demonstrating the importance of these dynamic regulators of cellular signaling.

A G Protein-biased Designer G Protein-coupled Receptor Useful for Studying the Physiological Relevance of Gq/11-dependent Signaling Pathways

Designerreceptorsexclusivelyactivated by adesignerdrug (DREADDs) are clozapine-N-oxide-sensitive designer G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) that have emerged as powerful novel chemogenetic tools to study the physiological relevance of GPCR signaling pathways in specific cell types or tissues. Like endogenous GPCRs, clozapine-N-oxide-activated DREADDs do not only activate heterotrimeric G proteins but can also trigger β-arrestin-dependent (G protein-independent) signaling. To dissect the relative physiological relevance of G protein-mediatedversusβ-arrestin-mediated signaling in different cell types or physiological processes, the availability of G protein- and β-arrestin-biased DREADDs would be highly desirable. In this study, we report the development of a mutationally modified version of a non-biased DREADD derived from the M3muscarinic receptor that can activate Gq/11with high efficacy but lacks the ability to interact with β-arrestins. We also demonstrate that this novel DREADD is activein vivoand that cell type-selective expression of this new designer receptor can provide novel insights into the physiological roles of G protein (Gq/11)-dependentversusβ-arrestin-dependent signaling in hepatocytes. Thus, this novel Gq/11-biased DREADD represents a powerful new tool to study the physiological relevance of Gq/11-dependent signaling in distinct tissues and cell types, in the absence of β-arrestin-mediated cellular effects. Such studies should guide the development of novel classes of functionally biased ligands that show high efficacy in various pathophysiological conditions but display a reduced incidence of side effects.

Using Bioluminescence Resonance Energy Transfer (BRET) to Characterize Agonist-Induced Arrestin Recruitment to Modified and Unmodified G Protein-Coupled Receptors

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) represent ∼25% of current drug targets. Ligand binding to these receptors activates G proteins and arrestins, which are involved in differential signaling pathways. Because functionally selective or biased ligands activate one of these two pathways, they may be superior medications for certain diseases states. The identification of such ligands requires robust drug screening assays for both G protein and arrestin activity. This unit describes protocols for two bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET)-based assays used to monitor arrestin recruitment to GPCRs. One assay requires modification of GPCRs by fusion to a BRET donor or acceptor moiety, whereas the other can detect arrestin recruitment to unmodified GPCRs.

Unraveling the molecular architecture of a G protein-coupled receptor/β-arrestin/Erk module complex

β-arrestins serve as signaling scaffolds downstream of G protein-coupled receptors, and thus play a crucial role in a plethora of cellular processes. Although it is largely accepted that the ability of β-arrestins to interact simultaneously with many protein partners is key in G protein-independent signaling of GPCRs, only the precise knowledge of these multimeric arrangements will allow a full understanding of the dynamics of these interactions and their functional consequences. However, current experimental procedures for the determination of the three-dimensional structures of protein-protein complexes are not well adapted to analyze these short-lived, multi-component assemblies. We propose a model of the receptor/β-arrestin/Erk1 signaling module, which is consistent with most of the available experimental data. Moreover, for the β-arrestin/Raf1 and the β-arrestin/ERK interactions, we have used the model to design interfering peptides and shown that they compete with both partners, hereby demonstrating the validity of the predicted interaction regions.

How genetic errors in GPCRs affect their function: Possible therapeutic strategies

Activating and inactivating mutations in numerous human G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are associated with a wide range of disease phenotypes. Here we use several class A GPCRs with a particularly large set of identified disease-associated mutations, many of which were biochemically characterized, along with known GPCR structures and current models of GPCR activation, to understand the molecular mechanisms yielding pathological phenotypes. Based on this mechanistic understanding we also propose different therapeutic approaches, both conventional, using small molecule ligands, and novel, involving gene therapy.

Salmeterol Efficacy and Bias in the Activation and Kinase-Mediated Desensitization of β2-Adrenergic Receptors

Salmeterol is a long-acting β2-adrenergic receptor (β2AR) agonist that is widely used as a bronchodilator for the treatment of persistent asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in conjunction with steroids. Previous studies demonstrated that salmeterol showed weak efficacy for activation of adenylyl cyclase; however, its efficacy in the complex desensitization of the β2AR remains poorly understood. In this work, we provide insights into the roles played by the G protein-coupled receptor kinase/arrestin and protein kinase A in salmeterol-mediated desensitization through bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) studies of liganded-β2AR binding to arrestin and through kinetic studies of cAMP turnover. First, BRET demonstrated a much reduced efficacy for salmeterol recruitment of arrestin to β2AR relative to isoproterenol. The ratio of BRETISO/BRETSALM after 5-minute stimulation was 20 and decreased to 5 after 35 minutes, reflecting a progressive decline in BRETISO and a stable BRETSALM. Second, to assess salmeterol efficacy for functional desensitization, we examined the kinetics of salmeterol-induced cAMP accumulation (0-30 minutes) in human airway smooth muscle cells in the presence and absence of phosphodiesterase inhibition. Analysis of shaping of cAMP turnover for both agonists demonstrated significant salmeterol desensitization, although it was reduced relative to isoproterenol. Using an isoproterenol rescue protocol after either short-term (10 minutes) or long-term (2 and 14 hours) salmeterol pretreatments, we found that salmeterol progressively depressed isoproterenol stimulation but did not prevent subsequent rescue by isoproterenol and additional isoproterenol-mediated desensitization. Our findings reveal a complex efficacy for functional desensitization, demonstrating that although salmeterol shows weak efficacy for adenylyl cyclase activation and G protein-coupled receptor kinase/arrestin-mediated desensitization, it acts as a strong agonist in highly amplified protein kinase A-mediated events.

GPCR structure, function, drug discovery and crystallography: report from Academia-Industry International Conference (UK Royal Society) Chicheley Hall, 1-2 September 2014

G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the targets of over half of all prescribed drugs today. The UniProt database has records for about 800 proteins classified as GPCRs, but drugs have only been developed against 50 of these. Thus, there is huge potential in terms of the number of targets for new therapies to be designed. Several breakthroughs in GPCRs biased pharmacology, structural biology, modelling and scoring have resulted in a resurgence of interest in GPCRs as drug targets. Therefore, an international conference, sponsored by the Royal Society, with world-renowned researchers from industry and academia was recently held to discuss recent progress and highlight key areas of future research needed to accelerate GPCR drug discovery. Several key points emerged. Firstly, structures for all three major classes of GPCRs have now been solved and there is increasing coverage across the GPCR phylogenetic tree. This is likely to be substantially enhanced with data from x-ray free electron sources as they move beyond proof of concept. Secondly, the concept of biased signalling or functional selectivity is likely to be prevalent in many GPCRs, and this presents exciting new opportunities for selectivity and the control of side effects, especially when combined with increasing data regarding allosteric modulation. Thirdly, there will almost certainly be some GPCRs that will remain difficult targets because they exhibit complex ligand dependencies and have many metastable states rendering them difficult to resolve by crystallographic methods. Subtle effects within the packing of the transmembrane helices are likely to mask and contribute to this aspect, which may play a role in species dependent behaviour. This is particularly important because it has ramifications for how we interpret pre-clinical data. In summary, collaborative efforts between industry and academia have delivered significant progress in terms of structure and understanding of GPCRs and will be essential for resolving problems associated with the more difficult targets in the future.

G Protein-coupled Receptor Kinases of the GRK4 Protein Subfamily Phosphorylate Inactive G Protein-coupled Receptors (GPCRs)

G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) kinases (GRKs) play a key role in homologous desensitization of GPCRs. It is widely assumed that most GRKs selectively phosphorylate only active GPCRs. Here, we show that although this seems to be the case for the GRK2/3 subfamily, GRK5/6 effectively phosphorylate inactive forms of several GPCRs, including β2-adrenergic and M2 muscarinic receptors, which are commonly used as representative models for GPCRs. Agonist-independent GPCR phosphorylation cannot be explained by constitutive activity of the receptor or membrane association of the GRK, suggesting that it is an inherent ability of GRK5/6. Importantly, phosphorylation of the inactive β2-adrenergic receptor enhanced its interactions with arrestins. Arrestin-3 was able to discriminate between phosphorylation of the same receptor by GRK2 and GRK5, demonstrating preference for the latter. Arrestin recruitment to inactive phosphorylated GPCRs suggests that not only agonist activation but also the complement of GRKs in the cell regulate formation of the arrestin-receptor complex and thereby G protein-independent signaling.

Bioluminescent tools for the analysis of G-protein-coupled receptor and arrestin interactions

New protein-based bioluminescent probes for monitoring GPCR interaction with β-arrestin are presented.

Mutations in arrestin-3 differentially affect binding to neuropeptide Y receptor subtypes

Based on the identification of residues that determine receptor selectivity in arrestins and the phylogenetic analysis of the arrestin (arr) family, we introduced fifteen mutations of receptor-discriminator residues in arr-3, which were identified previously using mutagenesis, in vitro binding, and BRET-based recruitment assay in intact cells. The effects of these mutations were tested using neuropeptide Y receptors Y1R and Y2R. NPY-elicited arr-3 recruitment to Y1R was not affected by these mutations, or even alanine substitution of all ten residues (arr-3-NCA), which prevented arr-3 binding to other receptors tested so far. However, NCA and two other mutations prevented agonist-independent arr-3 pre-docking to Y1R. In contrast, eight out of 15 mutations significantly reduced agonist-dependent arr-3 recruitment to Y2R. NCA eliminated arr-3 binding to active Y2R, whereas Tyr239Thr reduced it ~7-fold. Thus, manipulation of key residues on the receptor-binding surface generates arr-3 with high preference for Y1R over Y2R. Several mutations differentially affect arr-3 pre-docking and agonist-induced recruitment. Thus, arr-3 recruitment to the receptor involves several mechanistically distinct steps. Targeted mutagenesis can fine-tune arrestins directing them to specific receptors and particular activation states of the same receptor.

Visualization of arrestin recruitment by a G-protein-coupled receptor

G Protein Coupled Receptors (GPCRs) are critically regulated by β-arrestins (βarrs), which not only desensitize G protein signaling but also initiate a G protein independent wave of signaling^1-5. A recent surge of structural data on a number of GPCRs, including the β₂ adrenergic receptor (β₂AR)-G protein complex, has provided novel insights into the structural basis of receptor activation^6-11. Lacking however has been complementary information on recruitment of βarrs to activated GPCRs primarily due to challenges in obtaining stable receptor-βarr complexes for structural studies. Here, we devised a strategy for forming and purifying a functional β₂AR-βarr1 complex that allowed us to visualize its architecture by single particle negative stain electron microscopy (EM) and to characterize the interactions between β₂AR and βarr1 using hydrogen-deuterium exchange mass spectrometry (HDXMS) and chemical cross-linking. EM 2D averages and 3D reconstructions reveal bimodal binding of βarr1 to the β₂AR, involving two separate sets of interactions, one with the phosphorylated carboxy-terminus of the receptor and the other with its seven-transmembrane core. Areas of reduced HDX together with identification of cross-linked residues suggest engagement of the finger loop of βarr1 with the seven-transmembrane core of the receptor. In contrast, focal areas of increased HDX indicate regions of increased dynamics in both N and C domains of βarr1 when coupled to the β₂AR. A molecular model of the β₂AR-βarr signaling complex was made by docking activated βarr1 and β₂AR crystal structures into the EM map densities with constraints provided by HDXMS and cross-linking, allowing us to obtain valuable insights into the overall architecture of a receptor-arrestin complex. The dynamic and structural information presented herein provides a framework for better understanding the basis of GPCR regulation by arrestins.

Identification of receptor binding-induced conformational changes in non-visual arrestins

The non-visual arrestins, arrestin-2 and arrestin-3, belong to a small family of multifunctional cytosolic proteins. Non-visual arrestins interact with hundreds of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and regulate GPCR desensitization by binding active phosphorylated GPCRs and uncoupling them from heterotrimeric G proteins. Recently, non-visual arrestins have been shown to mediate G protein-independent signaling by serving as adaptors and scaffolds that assemble multiprotein complexes. By recruiting various partners, including trafficking and signaling proteins, directly to GPCRs, non-visual arrestins connect activated receptors to diverse signaling pathways. To investigate arrestin-mediated signaling, a structural understanding of arrestin activation and interaction with GPCRs is essential. Here we identified global and local conformational changes in the non-visual arrestins upon binding to the model GPCR rhodopsin. To detect conformational changes, pairs of spin labels were introduced into arrestin-2 and arrestin-3, and the interspin distances in the absence and presence of the receptor were measured by double electron electron resonance spectroscopy. Our data indicate that both non-visual arrestins undergo several conformational changes similar to arrestin-1, including the finger loop moving toward the predicted location of the receptor in the complex as well as the C-tail release upon receptor binding. The arrestin-2 results also suggest that there is no clam shell-like closure of the N- and C-domains and that the loop containing residue 136 (homolog of 139 in arrestin-1) has high flexibility in both free and receptor-bound states.

Therapeutic potential of small molecules and engineered proteins

Virtually all currently used therapeutic agents are small molecules, largely because the development and delivery of small molecule drugs is relatively straightforward. Small molecules have serious limitations: drugs of this type can be fairly good enzyme inhibitors, receptor ligands, or allosteric modulators. However, most cellular functions are mediated by protein interactions with other proteins, and targeting protein-protein interactions by small molecules presents challenges that are unlikely to be overcome with these compounds as the only tools. Recent advances in gene delivery techniques and characterization of cell type-specific promoters open the prospect of using reengineered signaling-biased proteins as next-generation therapeutics. The first steps in targeted engineering of proteins with desired functional characteristics look very promising. As quintessential scaffolds that act strictly via interactions with other proteins in the cell, arrestins represent a perfect model for the development of these novel therapeutic agents with enormous potential: custom-designed signaling proteins will allow us to tell the cell what to do and when to do it in a way it cannot disobey.

Functional map of arrestin-1 at single amino acid resolution

Arrestins function as adapter proteins that mediate G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) desensitization, internalization, and additional rounds of signaling. Here we have compared binding of the GPCR rhodopsin to 403 mutants of arrestin-1 covering its complete sequence. This comprehensive and unbiased mutagenesis approach provides a functional dimension to the crystal structures of inactive, preactivated p44 and phosphopeptide-bound arrestins and will guide our understanding of arrestin-GPCR complexes. The presented functional map quantitatively connects critical interactions in the polar core and along the C tail of arrestin. A series of amino acids (Phe375, Phe377, Phe380, and Arg382) anchor the C tail in a position that blocks binding of the receptor. Interaction of phosphates in the rhodopsin C terminus with Arg29 controls a C-tail exchange mechanism in which the C tail of arrestin is released and exposes several charged amino acids (Lys14, Lys15, Arg18, Lys20, Lys110, and Lys300) for binding of the phosphorylated receptor C terminus. In addition to this arrestin phosphosensor, our data reveal several patches of amino acids in the finger (Gln69 and Asp73-Met75) and the lariat loops (L249-S252 and Y254) that can act as direct binding interfaces. A stretch of amino acids at the edge of the C domain (Trp194-Ser199, Gly337-Gly340, Thr343, and Thr345) could act as membrane anchor, binding interface for a second rhodopsin, or rearrange closer to the central loops upon complex formation. We discuss these interfaces in the context of experimentally guided docking between the crystal structures of arrestin and light-activated rhodopsin.

Enhanced phosphorylation-independent arrestins and gene therapy

A variety of heritable and acquired disorders is associated with excessive signaling by mutant or overstimulated GPCRs. Since any conceivable treatment of diseases caused by gain-of-function mutations requires gene transfer, one possible approach is functional compensation. Several structurally distinct forms of enhanced arrestins that bind phosphorylated and even non-phosphorylated active GPCRs with much higher affinity than parental wild-type proteins have the ability to dampen the signaling by hyperactive GPCR, pushing the balance closer to normal. In vivo this approach was so far tested only in rod photoreceptors deficient in rhodopsin phosphorylation, where enhanced arrestin improved the morphology and light sensitivity of rods, prolonged their survival, and accelerated photoresponse recovery. Considering that rods harbor the fastest, as well as the most demanding and sensitive GPCR-driven signaling cascade, even partial success of functional compensation of defect in rhodopsin phosphorylation by enhanced arrestin demonstrates the feasibility of this strategy and its therapeutic potential.

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-dependent activation of JNK family kinases

The activity of all mitogen-activated protein kinases (MAPKs) is stimulated via phosphorylation by upstream MAPK kinases (MAPKK), which are in their turn activated via phosphorylation by MAPKK kinases (MAPKKKs). The cells ensure the specificity of signaling in these cascades by employing a variety of scaffolding proteins that bind matching MAPKKKs, MAPKKs, and MAPKs. All four vertebrate arrestin subtypes bind JNK3, but only arrestin-3 serves as a scaffold, promoting JNK3 activation in intact cells. Arrestin-3-mediated JNK3 activation does not depend on arrestin-3 interaction with G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), as demonstrated by the ability of some arrestin mutants that cannot bind receptors to activate JNK3, whereas certain mutants with enhanced GPCR binding fail to promote JNK3 activation. Recent findings suggest that arrestin-3 directly binds both MAPKKs necessary for JNK activation and facilitates JNK3 phosphorylation at both Thr (by MKK4) and Tyr (by MKK7). JNK3 is expressed in a limited set of cell types, whereas JNK1 and JNK2 isoforms are as ubiquitous as arrestin-3. Recent study showed that arrestin-3 facilitates the activation of JNK1 and JNK2, scaffolding MKK4/7-JNK1/2/3 signaling complexes. In all cases, arrestin-3 acts by bringing the kinases together: JNK phosphorylation shows biphasic dependence on arrestin-3, being enhanced at lower and suppressed at supraoptimal concentrations. Thus, arrestin-3 regulates the activity of multiple JNK isoforms, suggesting that it might play a role in survival and apoptosis of all cell types.

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.

Self-association of arrestin family members

Mammals express four arrestin subtypes, three of which have been shown to self-associate. Cone photoreceptor-specific arrestin-4 is the only one that is a constitutive monomer. Visual arrestin-1 forms tetramers both in crystal and in solution, but the shape of its physiologically relevant solution tetramer is very different from that in the crystal. The biological role of the self-association of arrestin-1, expressed at very high levels in rod and cone photoreceptors, appears to be protective, reducing the concentration of cytotoxic monomers. The two nonvisual arrestin subtypes are highly homologous, and self-association of both is facilitated by IP6, yet they form dramatically different oligomers. Arrestin-2 apparently self-associates into "infinite" chains, very similar to those observed in IP6-soaked crystals, where IP6 connects the concave sides of the N- and C-domains of adjacent protomers. In contrast, arrestin-3 only forms dimers, in which IP6 likely connects the C-domains of two arrestin-3 molecules. Thus, each of the three self-associating arrestins does it in its own way, forming three different types of oligomers. The physiological role of the oligomerization of arrestin-1 and both nonvisual arrestins might be quite different, and in each case it remains to be definitively elucidated.

Extensive shape shifting underlies functional versatility of arrestins

Among four vertebrate arrestins, only two are ubiquitously expressed. Arrestins specifically bind active phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), thereby precluding further G protein activation. Recent discoveries suggest that the formation of the arrestin-receptor complex initiates the second round of signaling with comparable biological importance. Despite having virtually no recognizable sequence motifs known to mediate protein-protein interactions, arrestins bind a surprising variety of signaling proteins with mind-boggling range of functional consequences. High conformational flexibility allows arrestins to show many distinct 'faces' to the world, which allows these relatively small ∼45kDa proteins to bind various partners under different physiological conditions, organizing multi-protein signaling complexes and localizing them to distinct subcellular compartments.

Constitutively active rhodopsin mutants causing night blindness are effectively phosphorylated by GRKs but differ in arrestin-1 binding

The effects of activating mutations associated with night blindness on the stoichiometry of rhodopsin interactions with G protein-coupled receptor kinase 1 (GRK1) and arrestin-1 have not been reported. Here we show that the monomeric form of WT rhodopsin and its constitutively active mutants M257Y, G90D, and T94I, reconstituted into HDL particles are effectively phosphorylated by GRK1, as well as two more ubiquitously expressed subtypes, GRK2 and GRK5. All versions of arrestin-1 tested (WT, pre-activated, and constitutively monomeric mutants) bind to monomeric rhodopsin and show the same selectivity for different functional forms of rhodopsin as in native disc membranes. Rhodopsin phosphorylation by GRK1 and GRK2 promotes arrestin-1 binding to a comparable extent, whereas similar phosphorylation by GRK5 is less effective, suggesting that not all phosphorylation sites on rhodopsin are equivalent in promoting arrestin-1 binding. The binding of WT arrestin-1 to phospho-opsin is comparable to the binding to its preferred target, P-Rh*, suggesting that in photoreceptors arrestin-1 only dissociates after opsin regeneration with 11-cis-retinal, which converts phospho-opsin into inactive phospho-rhodopsin that has lower affinity for arrestin-1. Reduced binding of arrestin-1 to the phospho-opsin form of G90D mutant likely contributes to night blindness caused by this mutation in humans.

Rapid degeneration of rod photoreceptors expressing self-association-deficient arrestin-1 mutant

Arrestin-1 binds light-activated phosphorhodopsin and ensures timely signal shutoff. We show that high transgenic expression of an arrestin-1 mutant with enhanced rhodopsin binding and impaired oligomerization causes apoptotic rod death in mice. Dark rearing does not prevent mutant-induced cell death, ruling out the role of arrestin complexes with light-activated rhodopsin. Similar expression of WT arrestin-1 that robustly oligomerizes, which leads to only modest increase in the monomer concentration, does not affect rod survival. Moreover, WT arrestin-1 co-expressed with the mutant delays retinal degeneration. Thus, arrestin-1 mutant directly affects cell survival via binding partner(s) other than light-activated rhodopsin. Due to impaired self-association of the mutant its high expression dramatically increases the concentration of the monomer. The data suggest that monomeric arrestin-1 is cytotoxic and WT arrestin-1 protects rods by forming mixed oligomers with the mutant and/or competing with it for the binding to non-receptor partners. Thus, arrestin-1 self-association likely serves to keep low concentration of the toxic monomer. The reduction of the concentration of harmful monomer is an earlier unappreciated biological function of protein oligomerization.

Critical role of the central 139-loop in stability and binding selectivity of arrestin-1

Arrestin-1 selectively binds active phosphorylated rhodopsin (P-Rh*), demonstrating much lower affinity for inactive phosphorylated (P-Rh) and unphosphorylated active (Rh*) forms. Receptor interaction induces significant conformational changes in arrestin-1, which include large movement of the previously neglected 139-loop in the center of the receptor binding surface, away from the incoming receptor. To elucidate the functional role of this loop, in mouse arrestin-1 we introduced deletions of variable lengths and made several substitutions of Lys-142 in it and Asp-72 in the adjacent loop. Several mutants with perturbations in the 139-loop demonstrate increased binding to P-Rh*, dark P-Rh, Rh*, and phospho-opsin. Enhanced binding of arrestin-1 mutants to non-preferred forms of rhodopsin correlates with decreased thermal stability. The 139-loop perturbations increase P-Rh* binding of arrestin-1 at low temperatures and further change its binding profile on the background of 3A mutant, where the C-tail is detached from the body of the molecule by triple alanine substitution. Thus, the 139-loop stabilizes basal conformation of arrestin-1 and acts as a brake, preventing its binding to non-preferred forms of rhodopsin. Conservation of this loop in other subtypes suggests that it has the same function in all members of the arrestin family.

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.