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

Protein Modeling with DEER Spectroscopy

Double electron-electron resonance (DEER) combined with site-directed spin labeling can provide distance distributions between selected protein residues to investigate protein structure and conformational heterogeneity. The utilization of the full quantitative information contained in DEER data requires effective protein and spin label modeling methods. Here, we review the application of DEER data to protein modeling. First, we discuss the significance of spin label modeling for accurate extraction of protein structural information and review the most popular label modeling methods. Next, we review several important aspects of protein modeling with DEER, including site selection, how DEER restraints are applied, common artifacts, and the unique potential of DEER data for modeling structural ensembles and conformational landscapes. Finally, we discuss common applications of protein modeling with DEER data and provide an outlook.

Dual targeting of CXC chemokine receptor 4 and multidrug resistance protein 1 by ZIN056 effectively combat daunorubicin resistance in acute myeloid leukemia cells

Drug resistance, associated with the overexpression of CXC chemokine receptor CXCR4 and multidrug resistance protein 1 (MDR1) remains a significant barrier to effective therapy in Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML). Targeting both CXCR4 and MDR1 could potentially enhance treatment efficacy in resistance. In silico computational screening of the Zinc natural product library using Discovery Studio Visualizer, Protein-Ligand Interaction Profiler, GROMACS, and GMX_MMPBSA techniques were used. THP-1, and SKM-1 cells were used for in vitro analysis. Flow cytometry was employed for target analysis and apoptosis enumerations. The virtual screening identified ZIN056 with favorable binding affinities of - 10.6 kcal/mol and - 9.1 kcal/mol for CXCR4 and MDR1, respectively. MD simulations demonstrated stable binding interactions, with Root Mean Square Deviation values around 0.2 nm for both proteins. The ΔG binding calculations further confirmed values of - 30.09 kcal/mol for CXCR4 and - 34.47 kcal/mol for MDR1, indicating energetically favorable binding. The compound inhibited the THP-1 and SKM-1 cell proliferation with GI50 values of 250.6 nM, and 346.7 nM, respectively. ZIN056 decreased CXCR-4 expression and MDR1-induced positive population (MDR1+) in THP-1 and SKM-1 cells. ZIN056 inhibited the proliferation of the regular and MDR1+ AML cells, while Daunorubicin exhibited a tenfold resistance in controlling MDR1+ AML cell proliferation. ZIN056-induced apoptosis in MDR1 + AML cells, whereas Daunorubicin failed to promote apoptosis in these cells. The findings suggest that dual targeting of CXCR4 and MDR1 using ZIN056 may offer a promising strategy to overcome drug resistance in AML and provide a foundation for further development of dual inhibitors for AML patients.

A small molecule enhances arrestin-3 binding to the β2-adrenergic receptor

G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling is terminated by arrestin binding to a phosphorylated receptor. Binding propensity has been shown to be modulated by stabilizing the pre-activated state of arrestin through point mutations or C-tail truncation. Here, we hypothesize that pre-activated rotated states can be stabilized by small molecules, and this can promote binding to phosphorylation-deficient receptors, which underly a variety of human disorders. We performed virtual screening on druggable pockets identified on pre-activated conformations in Molecular Dynamics trajectories of arrestin-3, and found a compound targeting an activation switch, the back loop at the inter-domain interface. According to our model, consistent with available biochemical and structural data, the compound destabilized the ionic lock between the finger and the back loop, and enabled transition of the `gate loop` towards the pre-activated state, which stabilizes pre-activated inter-domain rotation. The predicted binding pocket is consistent with saturation-transfer difference NMR data indicating close contact between the piperazine moiety of the compound and C/finger loops. The compound increases in-cell arrestin-3 binding to phosphorylation-deficient and wild-type β2-adrenergic receptor, but not to muscarinic M2 receptor, as verified by FRET and NanoBiT. This study demonstrates that the back loop can be targeted to modulate interaction of arrestin with phosphorylation-deficient GPCRs in a receptor-specific manner.

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.

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.

Expression of Untagged Arrestins in E. coli and Their Purification

Purified arrestin proteins are necessary for biochemical, biophysical, and structural studies of these versatile regulators of cell signaling. Described herein is a basic protocol for arrestin expression in Escherichia coli and purification of tag-free wild-type and mutant arrestins. The method includes ammonium sulfate precipitation of arrestins from cell lysates, followed by Heparin-Sepharose chromatography. Depending on the arrestin type and/or mutations, the next step is Q-Sepharose or SP-Sepharose chromatography. In many cases, the nonbinding column is used as a filter to bind contaminants without retaining arrestin. In some cases, both chromatographic steps must be performed sequentially to achieve high purity. Purified arrestins can be concentrated up to 10 mg/ml, remain fully functional, and withstand several cycles of freezing and thawing, provided that the overall salt concentration is maintained at or above physiological levels. © 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC. Basic Protocol: Large-scale expression and purification of arrestins Alternate Protocol: Purification of arrestin-3 and truncated form of arrestin-1-(1-378) Support Protocol: Small-scale test expression of wild-type and mutant arrestins in E. coli.

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

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

Mechanisms of Arrestin-Mediated Signaling

Arrestins were first discovered as proteins that selectively bind active phosphorylated GPCRs and suppress (arrest) their G protein-mediated signaling. Nonvisual arrestins are also recognized as signaling proteins regulating a variety of cellular pathways. Arrestins are highly flexible; they can assume many different conformations. In their receptor-bound conformation, arrestins have higher affinity for a subset of binding partners. This explains how receptor activation regulates certain branches of arrestin-dependent signaling via arrestin recruitment to GPCRs. However, free arrestins are also active molecular entities that regulate other signaling pathways and localize signaling proteins to particular subcellular compartments. Recent findings suggest that the two visuals, arrestin-1 and arrestin-4, which are expressed in photoreceptor cells, not only regulate signaling via binding to photopigments but also interact with several nonreceptor partners, critically affecting the health and survival of photoreceptor cells. Detailed in this overview are GPCR-dependent and independent modes of arrestin-mediated regulation of cellular signaling. © 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC.

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

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

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

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

Proximity Labeling to Identify β-Arrestin1 Binding Partners Downstream of Ligand-Activated G Protein-Coupled Receptors

β-arrestins are multifaceted adaptor proteins that regulate various aspects of G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling. β-arrestins are recruited to agonist-activated and phosphorylated GPCRs at the plasma membrane, thereby preventing G protein coupling, while also targeting GPCRs for internalization via clathrin-coated pits. In addition, β-arrestins can activate various effector molecules to prosecute their role in GPCR signaling; however, the full extent of their interacting partners remains unknown. To discover potentially novel β-arrestin interacting partners, we used APEX-based proximity labeling coupled with affinity purification and quantitative mass spectrometry. We appended APEX in-frame to the C-terminus of β-arrestin1 (βarr1-APEX), which we show does not impact its ability to support agonist-stimulated internalization of GPCRs. By using coimmunoprecipitation, we show that βarr1-APEX interacts with known interacting proteins. Furthermore, following agonist stimulation βarr1-APEX labeled known βarr1-interacting partners as assessed by streptavidin affinity purification and immunoblotting. Aliquots were prepared in a similar manner and analyzed by tandem mass tag labeling and high-content quantitative mass spectrometry. Several proteins were found to be increased in abundance following GPCR stimulation. Biochemical experiments confirmed two novel proteins that interact with β-arrestin1, which we predict are novel ligand-stimulated βarr1 interacting partners. Our study highlights that βarr1-APEX-based proximity labeling represents a valuable approach to identifying novel players involved in GPCR signaling.

The molecular associations in clathrin-coated pit regulate β-arrestin-mediated MAPK signaling downstream of μ-opioid receptor

It has been thought that μ-opioid receptors (MOPs) activate the G protein-mediated analgesic pathway and β-arrestin 2-mediated side effect pathway; however, ligands that only minimally recruit β-arrestin 2 to MOPs may also cause opioid side effects. Moreover, such side effects have been induced in mutant mice lacking β-arrestin 2 or expressing phosphorylation-deficient MOPs that do not recruit β-arrestin 2. These findings raise the critical question of whether β-arrestin 2 recruitment to MOP triggers side effects. Here, we show that β-arrestin 1 and 2 are essential in the efficient activation of the Gi/o-mediated MAPK signaling at MOP. Moreover, the magnitude of β-arrestin-mediated signals is not correlated with the magnitude of phosphorylation of the carboxyl-terminal of MOP, which is used to evaluate the β-arrestin bias of a ligand. Instead, the molecular association with β2-adaptin and clathrin heavy chain in the formation of clathrin-coated pits is essential for β-arrestin to activate MAPK signaling. Our findings provide insights into G protein-coupled receptor-mediated signaling and further highlight a concept that the accumulation of molecules required for endocytosis is critical for activating intracellular signaling.

Surveying nonvisual arrestins reveals allosteric interactions between functional sites

Arrestins are important scaffolding proteins that are expressed in all vertebrate animals. They regulate cell-signaling events upon binding to active G-protein coupled receptors (GPCR) and trigger endocytosis of active GPCRs. While many of the functional sites on arrestins have been characterized, the question of how these sites interact is unanswered. We used anisotropic network modeling (ANM) together with our covariance compliment techniques to survey all the available structures of the nonvisual arrestins to map how structural changes and protein-binding affect their structural dynamics. We found that activation and clathrin binding have a marked effect on arrestin dynamics, and that these dynamics changes are localized to a small number of distant functional sites. These sites include α-helix 1, the lariat loop, nuclear localization domain, and the C-domain β-sheets on the C-loop side. Our techniques suggest that clathrin binding and/or GPCR activation of arrestin perturb the dynamics of these sites independent of structural changes.

The Role of Arrestin-1 Middle Loop in Rhodopsin Binding

Arrestins preferentially bind active phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). The middle loop, highly conserved in all arrestin subtypes, is localized in the central crest on the GPCR-binding side. Upon receptor binding, it directly interacts with bound GPCR and demonstrates the largest movement of any arrestin element in the structures of the complexes. Comprehensive mutagenesis of the middle loop of rhodopsin-specific arrestin-1 suggests that it primarily serves as a suppressor of binding to non-preferred forms of the receptor. Several mutations in the middle loop increase the binding to unphosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin severalfold, which makes them candidates for improving enhanced phosphorylation-independent arrestins. The data also suggest that enhanced forms of arrestin do not bind GPCRs exactly like the wild-type protein. Thus, the structures of the arrestin-receptor complexes, in all of which different enhanced arrestin mutants and reengineered receptors were used, must be interpreted with caution.

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

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

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

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

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

The Two Non-Visual Arrestins Engage ERK2 Differently

Arrestin binding to active phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors terminates G protein coupling and initiates another wave of signaling. Among the effectors that bind directly to receptor-associated arrestins are extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1/2 (ERK1/2), which promote cellular proliferation and survival. Arrestins may also engage ERK1/2 in isolation in a pre- or post-signaling complex that is likely in equilibrium with the full signal initiation complex. Molecular details of these binary complexes remain unknown. Here, we investigate the molecular mechanisms whereby arrestin-2 and arrestin-3 (a.k.a. β-arrestin1 and β-arrestin2, respectively) engage ERK1/2 in pairwise interactions. We find that purified arrestin-3 binds ERK2 more avidly than arrestin-2. A combination of biophysical techniques and peptide array analysis demonstrates that the molecular basis in this difference of binding strength is that the two non-visual arrestins bind ERK2 via different parts of the molecule. We propose a structural model of the ERK2-arrestin-3 complex in solution using size-exclusion chromatography coupled to small angle X-ray scattering (SEC-SAXS). This binary complex exhibits conformational heterogeneity. We speculate that this drives the equilibrium either toward the full signaling complex with receptor-bound arrestin at the membrane or toward full dissociation in the cytoplasm. As ERK1/2 regulates cell migration, proliferation, and survival, understanding complexes that relate to its activation could be exploited to control cell fate.

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

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

An Eight Amino Acid Segment Controls Oligomerization and Preferred Conformation of the two Non-visual Arrestins

G protein coupled receptors signal through G proteins or arrestins. A long-standing mystery in the field is why vertebrates have two non-visual arrestins, arrestin-2 and arrestin-3. These isoforms are ~75% identical and 85% similar; each binds numerous receptors, and appear to have many redundant functions, as demonstrated by studies of knockout mice. We previously showed that arrestin-3 can be activated by inositol-hexakisphosphate (IP6). IP6 interacts with the receptor-binding surface of arrestin-3, induces arrestin-3 oligomerization, and this oligomer stabilizes the active conformation of arrestin-3. Here, we compared the impact of IP6 on oligomerization and conformational equilibrium of the highly homologous arrestin-2 and arrestin-3 and found that these two isoforms are regulated differently. In the presence of IP6, arrestin-2 forms "infinite" chains, where each promoter remains in the basal conformation. In contrast, full length and truncated arrestin-3 form trimers and higher-order oligomers in the presence of IP6; we showed previously that trimeric state induces arrestin-3 activation (Chen et al., 2017). Thus, in response to IP6, the two non-visual arrestins oligomerize in different ways in distinct conformations. We identified an insertion of eight residues that is conserved across arrestin-2 homologs, but absent in arrestin-3 that likely accounts for the differences in the IP6 effect. Because IP6 is ubiquitously present in cells, this suggests physiological consequences, including differences in arrestin-2/3 trafficking and JNK3 activation. The functional differences between two non-visual arrestins are in part determined by distinct modes of their oligomerization. The mode of oligomerization might regulate the function of other signaling proteins.

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.

The α-arrestin family of ubiquitin ligase adaptors links metabolism with selective endocytosis

The regulation of nutrient uptake into cells is important, as it allows to either increase biomass for cell growth or to preserve homoeostasis. A key strategy to adjust cellular nutrient uptake is the reconfiguration of the nutrient transporter repertoire at the plasma membrane by the addition of nutrient transporters through the secretory pathway and by their endocytic removal. In this review, we focus on the mechanisms that regulate selective nutrient transporter endocytosis, which is mediated by the α-arrestin protein family. In the budding yeast Saccharomyces cerevisiae, 14 different α-arrestins (also named arrestin-related trafficking adaptors, ARTs) function as adaptors for the ubiquitin ligase Rsp5. They instruct Rsp5 to ubiquitinate subsets of nutrient transporters to orchestrate their endocytosis. The ART proteins are under multilevel control of the major nutrient sensing systems, including amino acid sensing by the general amino acid control and target of rapamycin pathways, and energy sensing by 5'-adenosine-monophosphate-dependent kinase. The function of the six human α-arrestins is comparably under-characterised. Here, we summarise the current knowledge about the function, regulation and substrates of yeast ARTs and human α-arrestins, and highlight emerging communalities and general principles.

How GPCR Phosphorylation Patterns Orchestrate Arrestin-Mediated Signaling

Binding of arrestin to phosphorylated G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) controls many aspects of cell signaling. The number and arrangement of phosphates may vary substantially for a given GPCR, and different phosphorylation patterns trigger different arrestin-mediated effects. Here, we determine how GPCR phosphorylation influences arrestin behavior by using atomic-level simulations and site-directed spectroscopy to reveal the effects of phosphorylation patterns on arrestin binding and conformation. We find that patterns favoring binding differ from those favoring activation-associated conformational change. Both binding and conformation depend more on arrangement of phosphates than on their total number, with phosphorylation at different positions sometimes exerting opposite effects. Phosphorylation patterns selectively favor a wide variety of arrestin conformations, differently affecting arrestin sites implicated in scaffolding distinct signaling proteins. We also reveal molecular mechanisms of these phenomena. Our work reveals the structural basis for the long-standing "barcode" hypothesis and has important implications for design of functionally selective GPCR-targeted drugs.

Capturing Peptide-GPCR Interactions and Their Dynamics

Many biological functions of peptides are mediated through G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Upon ligand binding, GPCRs undergo conformational changes that facilitate the binding and activation of multiple effectors. GPCRs regulate nearly all physiological processes and are a favorite pharmacological target. In particular, drugs are sought after that elicit the recruitment of selected effectors only (biased ligands). Understanding how ligands bind to GPCRs and which conformational changes they induce is a fundamental step toward the development of more efficient and specific drugs. Moreover, it is emerging that the dynamic of the ligand–receptor interaction contributes to the specificity of both ligand recognition and effector recruitment, an aspect that is missing in structural snapshots from crystallography. We describe here biochemical and biophysical techniques to address ligand–receptor interactions in their structural and dynamic aspects, which include mutagenesis, crosslinking, spectroscopic techniques, and mass-spectrometry profiling. With a main focus on peptide receptors, we present methods to unveil the ligand–receptor contact interface and methods that address conformational changes both in the ligand and the GPCR. The presented studies highlight a wide structural heterogeneity among peptide receptors, reveal distinct structural changes occurring during ligand binding and a surprisingly high dynamics of the ligand–GPCR complexes.

A non-GPCR-binding partner interacts with a novel surface on β-arrestin1 to mediate GPCR signaling

The multifaceted adaptor protein β-arr1 (β-arrestin1) promotes activation of focal adhesion kinase (FAK) by the chemokine receptor CXCR4, facilitating chemotaxis. This function of β-arr1 requires the assistance of the adaptor protein STAM1 (signal-transducing adaptor molecule 1) because disruption of the interaction between STAM1 and β-arr1 reduces CXCR4-mediated activation of FAK and chemotaxis. To begin to understand the mechanism by which β-arr1 together with STAM1 activates FAK, we used site-directed spin-labeling EPR spectroscopy-based studies coupled with bioluminescence resonance energy transfer-based cellular studies to show that STAM1 is recruited to activated β-arr1 by binding to a novel surface on β-arr1 at the base of the finger loop, at a site that is distinct from the receptor-binding site. Expression of a STAM1-deficient binding β-arr1 mutant that is still able to bind to CXCR4 significantly reduced CXCL12-induced activation of FAK but had no impact on ERK-1/2 activation. We provide evidence of a novel surface at the base of the finger loop that dictates non-GPCR interactions specifying β-arrestin-dependent signaling by a GPCR. This surface might represent a previously unidentified switch region that engages with effector molecules to drive β-arrestin signaling.

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.

Not all arrestins are created equal: Therapeutic implications of the functional diversity of the β-arrestins in the heart

The two ubiquitous, outside the retina, G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) adapter proteins, β-arrestin-1 and -2 (also known as arrestin-2 and -3, respectively), have three major functions in cells: GPCR desensitization, i.e., receptor decoupling from G-proteins; GPCR internalization via clathrin-coated pits; and signal transduction independently of or in parallel to G-proteins. Both β-arrestins are expressed in the heart and regulate a large number of cardiac GPCRs. The latter constitute the single most commonly targeted receptor class by Food and Drug Administration-approved cardiovascular drugs, with about one-third of all currently used in the clinic medications affecting GPCR function. Since β-arrestin-1 and -2 play important roles in signaling and function of several GPCRs, in particular of adrenergic receptors and angiotensin II type 1 receptors, in cardiac myocytes, they have been a major focus of cardiac biology research in recent years. Perhaps the most significant realization coming out of their studies is that these two GPCR adapter proteins, initially thought of as functionally interchangeable, actually exert diametrically opposite effects in the mammalian myocardium. Specifically, the most abundant of the two β-arrestin-1 exerts overall detrimental effects on the heart, such as negative inotropy and promotion of adverse remodeling post-myocardial infarction (MI). In contrast, β-arrestin-2 is overall beneficial for the myocardium, as it has anti-apoptotic and anti-inflammatory effects that result in attenuation of post-MI adverse remodeling, while promoting cardiac contractile function. Thus, design of novel cardiac GPCR ligands that preferentially activate β-arrestin-2 over β-arrestin-1 has the potential of generating novel cardiovascular therapeutics for heart failure and other heart diseases.

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.

Arrestins: structural disorder creates rich functionality

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

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.

Molecular mechanism of modulating arrestin conformation by GPCR phosphorylation

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

Structural Basis of Arrestin-Dependent Signal Transduction

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

Heterologous phosphorylation-induced formation of a stability lock permits regulation of inactive receptors by β-arrestins

β-Arrestins are key regulators and signal transducers of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). The interaction between receptors and β-arrestins is generally believed to require both receptor activity and phosphorylation by GPCR kinases. In this study, we investigated whether β-arrestins are able to bind second messenger kinase-phosphorylated, but inactive receptors as well. Because heterologous phosphorylation is a common phenomenon among GPCRs, this mode of β-arrestin activation may represent a novel mechanism of signal transduction and receptor cross-talk. Here we demonstrate that activation of protein kinase C (PKC) by phorbol myristate acetate, Gq/11-coupled GPCR, or epidermal growth factor receptor stimulation promotes β-arrestin2 recruitment to unliganded AT1 angiotensin receptor (AT1R). We found that this interaction depends on the stability lock, a structure responsible for the sustained binding between GPCRs and β-arrestins, formed by phosphorylated serine-threonine clusters in the receptor's C terminus and two conserved phosphate-binding lysines in the β-arrestin2 N-domain. Using improved FlAsH-based serine-threonine clusters β-arrestin2 conformational biosensors, we also show that the stability lock not only stabilizes the receptor-β-arrestin interaction, but also governs the structural rearrangements within β-arrestins. Furthermore, we found that β-arrestin2 binds to PKC-phosphorylated AT1R in a distinct active conformation, which triggers MAPK recruitment and receptor internalization. Our results provide new insights into the activation of β-arrestins and reveal their novel role in receptor cross-talk.

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.

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.

Structural basis of arrestin-3 activation and signaling

A unique aspect of arrestin-3 is its ability to support both receptor-dependent and receptor-independent signaling. Here, we show that inositol hexakisphosphate (IP6) is a non-receptor activator of arrestin-3 and report the structure of IP6-activated arrestin-3 at 2.4-Å resolution. IP6-activated arrestin-3 exhibits an inter-domain twist and a displaced C-tail, hallmarks of active arrestin. IP6 binds to the arrestin phosphate sensor, and is stabilized by trimerization. Analysis of the trimerization surface, which is also the receptor-binding surface, suggests a feature called the finger loop as a key region of the activation sensor. We show that finger loop helicity and flexibility may underlie coupling to hundreds of diverse receptors and also promote arrestin-3 activation by IP6. Importantly, we show that effector-binding sites on arrestins have distinct conformations in the basal and activated states, acting as switch regions. These switch regions may work with the inter-domain twist to initiate and direct arrestin-mediated signaling.

β-Arrestin2 Improves Post-Myocardial Infarction Heart Failure via Sarco(endo)plasmic Reticulum Ca2+-ATPase-Dependent Positive Inotropy in Cardiomyocytes

Heart failure is the leading cause of death in the Western world, and new and innovative treatments are needed. The GPCR (G protein-coupled receptor) adapter proteins βarr (β-arrestin)-1 and βarr-2 are functionally distinct in the heart. βarr1 is cardiotoxic, decreasing contractility by opposing β1AR (adrenergic receptor) signaling and promoting apoptosis/inflammation post-myocardial infarction (MI). Conversely, βarr2 inhibits apoptosis/inflammation post-MI but its effects on cardiac function are not well understood. Herein, we sought to investigate whether βarr2 actually increases cardiac contractility. Via proteomic investigations in transgenic mouse hearts and in H9c2 rat cardiomyocytes, we have uncovered that βarr2 directly interacts with SERCA2a (sarco[endo]plasmic reticulum Ca2+-ATPase) in vivo and in vitro in a β1AR-dependent manner. This interaction causes acute SERCA2a SUMO (small ubiquitin-like modifier)-ylation, increasing SERCA2a activity and thus, cardiac contractility. βarr1 lacks this effect. Moreover, βarr2 does not desensitize β1AR cAMP-dependent procontractile signaling in cardiomyocytes, again contrary to βarr1. In vivo, post-MI heart failure mice overexpressing cardiac βarr2 have markedly improved cardiac function, apoptosis, inflammation, and adverse remodeling markers, as well as increased SERCA2a SUMOylation, levels, and activity, compared with control animals. Notably, βarr2 is capable of ameliorating cardiac function and remodeling post-MI despite not increasing cardiac βAR number or cAMP levels in vivo. In conclusion, enhancement of cardiac βarr2 levels/signaling via cardiac-specific gene transfer augments cardiac function safely, that is, while attenuating post-MI remodeling. Thus, cardiac βarr2 gene transfer might be a novel, safe positive inotropic therapy for both acute and chronic post-MI heart failure.

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.

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.

Distinct Phosphorylation Clusters Determine the Signaling Outcome of Free Fatty Acid Receptor 4/G Protein-Coupled Receptor 120

It is established that long-chain free fatty acids includingω-3 fatty acids mediate an array of biologic responses through members of the free fatty acid (FFA) receptor family, which includes FFA4. However, the signaling mechanisms and modes of regulation of this receptor class remain unclear. Here, we employed mass spectrometry to determine that phosphorylation of mouse (m)FFAR4 occurs at five serine and threonine residues clustered in two separable regions of the C-terminal tail, designated cluster 1 (Thr(347), Thr(349), and Ser(350)) and cluster 2 (Ser(357)and Ser(361)). Mutation of these phosphoacceptor sites to alanine completely prevented phosphorylation of mFFA4 but did not limit receptor coupling to extracellular signal regulated protein kinase 1 and 2 (ERK1/2) activation. Rather, an inhibitor of Gq/11proteins completely prevented receptor signaling to ERK1/2. By contrast, the recruitment of arrestin 3, receptor internalization, and activation of Akt were regulated by mFFA4 phosphorylation. The analysis of mFFA4 phosphorylation-dependent signaling was extended further by selective mutations of the phosphoacceptor sites. Mutations within cluster 2 did not affect agonist activation of Akt but instead significantly compromised receptor internalization and arrestin 3 recruitment. Distinctly, mutation of the phosphoacceptor sites within cluster 1 had no effect on receptor internalization and had a less extensive effect on arrestin 3 recruitment but significantly uncoupled the receptor from Akt activation. These unique observations define differential effects on signaling mediated by phosphorylation at distinct locations. This hallmark feature supports the possibility that the signaling outcome of mFFA4 activation can be determined by the pattern of phosphorylation (phosphorylation barcode) at the C terminus of the receptor.

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

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

Arrestins: Critical Players in Trafficking of Many GPCRs

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

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.