Pivotal role of extended linker 2 in the activation of Gα by G protein-coupled receptor

Distinct binding conformations of epinephrine with α- and β-adrenergic receptors

Agonists targeting α2-adrenergic receptors (ARs) are used to treat diverse conditions, including hypertension, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, pain, panic disorders, opioid and alcohol withdrawal symptoms, and cigarette cravings. These receptors transduce signals through heterotrimeric Gi proteins. Here, we elucidated cryo-EM structures that depict α2A-AR in complex with Gi proteins, along with the endogenous agonist epinephrine or the synthetic agonist dexmedetomidine. Molecular dynamics simulations and functional studies reinforce the results of the structural revelations. Our investigation revealed that epinephrine exhibits different conformations when engaging with α-ARs and β-ARs. Furthermore, α2A-AR and β1-AR (primarily coupled to Gs, with secondary associations to Gi) were compared and found to exhibit different interactions with Gi proteins. Notably, the stability of the epinephrine-α2A-AR-Gi complex is greater than that of the dexmedetomidine-α2A-AR-Gi complex. These findings substantiate and improve our knowledge on the intricate signaling mechanisms orchestrated by ARs and concurrently shed light on the regulation of α-ARs and β-ARs by epinephrine.

Structures of β1-adrenergic receptor in complex with Gs and ligands of different efficacies

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) receive signals from ligands with different efficacies, and transduce to heterotrimeric G-proteins to generate different degrees of physiological responses. Previous studies revealed how ligands with different efficacies activate GPCRs. Here, we investigate how a GPCR activates G-proteins upon binding ligands with different efficacies. We report the cryo-EM structures of β1-adrenergic receptor (β1-AR) in complex with Gs (GαsGβ1Gγ2) and a partial agonist or a very weak partial agonist, and compare them to the β1-AR-Gs structure in complex with a full agonist. Analyses reveal similar overall complex architecture, with local conformational differences. Cellular functional studies with mutations of β1-AR residues show effects on the cellular signaling from β1-AR to the cAMP response initiated by the three different ligands, with residue-specific functional differences. Biochemical investigations uncover that the intermediate state complex comprising β1-AR and nucleotide-free Gs is more stable when binding a full agonist than a partial agonist. Molecular dynamics simulations support the local conformational flexibilities and different stabilities among the three complexes. These data provide insights into the ligand efficacy in the activation of GPCRs and G-proteins.

Differential activation mechanisms of lipid GPCRs by lysophosphatidic acid and sphingosine 1-phosphate

Lysophospholipids are bioactive lipids and can signal through G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). The best studied lysophospholipids are lysophosphatidic acid (LPA) and sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P). The mechanisms of lysophospholipid recognition by an active GPCR, and the activations of lysophospholipid GPCR–G-protein complexes remain unclear. Here we report single-particle cryo-EM structures of human S1P receptor 1 (S1P₁) and heterotrimeric G_i complexes formed with bound S1P or the multiple sclerosis (MS) treatment drug Siponimod, as well as human LPA receptor 1 (LPA₁) and G_i complexes in the presence of LPA. Our structural and functional data provide insights into how LPA and S1P adopt different conformations to interact with their cognate GPCRs, the selectivity of the homologous lipid GPCRs for S1P versus LPA, and the different activation mechanisms of these GPCRs by LPA and S1P. Our studies also reveal specific optimization strategies to improve the MS-treating S1P₁-targeting drugs.

Liu et al. report structures of human sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P) receptor 1 (S1P₁) in complex with Gi and S1P or the multiple sclerosis (MS) drug Siponimod, as well as human lysophosphatidic acid (LPA) receptor 1 (LPA₁) in complex with Gi and LPA, revealing distinct conformations of the lysophospholipids interacting with their cognate GPCRs.

Structural Basis of the Activation of Heterotrimeric Gs-Protein by Isoproterenol-Bound β1-Adrenergic Receptor

Cardiac disease remains the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. The β₁-adrenergic receptor (β₁-AR) is a major regulator of cardiac functions and is downregulated in the majority of heart failure cases. A key physiological process is the activation of heterotrimeric G-protein Gs by β₁-ARs, leading to increased heart rate and contractility. Here, we use cryo-electron microscopy and functional studies to investigate the molecular mechanism by which β₁-AR activates Gs. We find that the tilting of α5-helix breaks a hydrogen bond between the sidechain of His373 in the C-terminal α5-helix and the backbone carbonyl of Arg38 in the N-terminal αN-helix of Gα_s. Together with the disruption of another interacting network involving Gln59 in the α1-helix, Ala352 in the β6-α5 loop, and Thr355 in the α5-helix, these conformational changes might lead to the deformation of the GDP-binding pocket. Our data provide molecular insights into the activation of G-proteins by G-protein-coupled receptors.

Beta2-adrenergic receptor homodimers: Role of transmembrane domain 1 and helix 8 in dimerization and cell surface expression

Even though there are hundreds of reports in the published literature supporting the hypothesis that G protein-coupled receptors (GPCR) form and function as dimers this remains a highly controversial area of research and mechanisms governing homodimer formation are poorly understood. Crystal structures revealing homodimers have been reported for many different GPCR. For adrenergic receptors, a potential dimer interface involving transmembrane domain 1 (TMD1) and helix 8 (H8) was identified in crystal structures of the beta₁-adrenergic (β₁-AR) and β₂-AR. The purpose of this study was to investigate a potential role for TMD1 and H8 in dimerization and plasma membrane expression of functional β₂-AR. Charged residues at the base of TMD1 and in the distal portion of H8 were replaced, singly and in combination, with non-polar residues or residues of opposite charge. Wild type and mutant β₂-AR, tagged with YFP and expressed in HEK293 cells, were evaluated for plasma membrane expression and function. Homodimer formation was evaluated using bioluminescence resonance energy transfer, bimolecular fluorescence complementation, and fluorescence correlation spectroscopy. Amino acid substitutions at the base of TMD1 and in the distal portion of H8 disrupted homodimer formation and caused receptors to be retained in the endoplasmic reticulum. Mutations in the proximal region of H8 did not disrupt dimerization but did interfere with plasma membrane expression. This study provides biophysical evidence linking a potential TMD1/H8 interface with ER export and the expression of functional β₂-AR on the plasma membrane. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: Interactions between membrane receptors in cellular membranes edited by Kalina Hristova.

Regulation, Signaling, and Physiological Functions of G-Proteins

Heterotrimeric guanine-nucleotide-binding regulatory proteins (G-proteins) mainly relay the information from G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) on the plasma membrane to the inside of cells to regulate various biochemical functions. Depending on the targeted cell types, tissues, and organs, these signals modulate diverse physiological functions. The basic schemes of heterotrimeric G-proteins have been outlined. In this review, we briefly summarize what is known about the regulation, signaling, and physiological functions of G-proteins. We then focus on a few less explored areas such as the regulation of G-proteins by non-GPCRs and the physiological functions of G-proteins that cannot be easily explained by the known G-protein signaling pathways. There are new signaling pathways and physiological functions for G-proteins to be discovered and further interrogated. With the advancements in structural and computational biological techniques, we are closer to having a better understanding of how G-proteins are regulated and of the specificity of G-protein interactions with their regulators.

Structural mechanism of G protein activation by G protein-coupled receptor

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are a family of membrane receptors that regulate physiology and pathology of various organs. Consequently, about 40% of drugs in the market targets GPCRs. Heterotrimeric G proteins are composed of α, β, and γ subunits, and act as the key downstream signaling molecules of GPCRs. The structural mechanism of G protein activation by GPCRs has been of a great interest, and a number of biochemical and biophysical studies have been performed since the late 80's. These studies investigated the interface between GPCR and G proteins and the structural mechanism of GPCR-induced G protein activation. Recently, arrestins are also reported to be important molecular switches in GPCR-mediated signal transduction, and the physiological output of arrestin-mediated signal transduction is different from that of G protein-mediated signal transduction. Understanding the structural mechanism of the activation of G proteins and arrestins would provide fundamental information for the downstream signaling-selective GPCR-targeting drug development. This review will discuss the structural mechanism of GPCR-induced G protein activation by comparing previous biochemical and biophysical studies.

Quantifying conformational changes in GPCRs: glimpse of a common functional mechanism

Background

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are important drug targets and a better understanding of their molecular mechanisms would be desirable. The crystallization rate of GPCRs has accelerated in recent years as techniques have become more sophisticated, particularly with respect to Class A GPCRs interacting with G-proteins. These developments have made it possible for a quantitative analysis of GPCR geometrical features and binding-site conformations, including a statistical comparison between Class A GPCRs in active (agonist-bound) and inactive (antagonist-bound) states.

Results

Here we implement algorithms for the analysis of interhelical angles, distances, interactions and binding-site volumes in the transmembrane domains of 25 Class A GPCRs (7 active and 18 inactive). Two interhelical angles change in a statistically significant way between average inactive and active states: TM3-TM6 (by -9°) and TM6-TM7 (by +12°). A third interhelical angle: TM5-TM6 shows a trend, changing by -9°. In the transition from inactive to active states, average van der Waals interactions between TM3 and TM7 significantly increase as the average distance between them decreases by >2 Å. Average H-bonding between TM3 and TM6 decreases but is seemingly compensated by an increase in H-bonding between TM5 and TM6. In five Class A GPCRs, crystallized in both active and inactive states, increased H-bonding of agonists to TM6 and TM7, relative to antagonists, is observed. These protein-agonist interactions likely favour a change in the TM6-TM7 angle, which creates a narrowing in the binding pocket of activated receptors and an average ~200 ų reduction in volume.

Conclusions

In terms of similar conformational changes and agonist binding pattern, Class A GPCRs appear to share a common mechanism of activation, which can be exploited in future drug development.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12859-015-0567-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.