Structural Elements in the Gαs and Gαq C Termini That Mediate Selective G Protein-coupled Receptor (GPCR) Signaling

Mechanistic insights into G-protein coupling with an agonist-bound G-protein-coupled receptor

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) activate heterotrimeric G proteins by promoting guanine nucleotide exchange. Here, we investigate the coupling of G proteins with GPCRs and describe the events that ultimately lead to the ejection of GDP from its binding pocket in the Gα subunit, the rate-limiting step during G-protein activation. Using molecular dynamics simulations, we investigate the temporal progression of structural rearrangements of GDP-bound Gs protein (Gs·GDP; hereafter GsGDP) upon coupling to the β2-adrenergic receptor (β2AR) in atomic detail. The binding of GsGDP to the β2AR is followed by long-range allosteric effects that significantly reduce the energy needed for GDP release: the opening of α1-αF helices, the displacement of the αG helix and the opening of the α-helical domain. Signal propagation to the Gs occurs through an extended receptor interface, including a lysine-rich motif at the intracellular end of a kinked transmembrane helix 6, which was confirmed by site-directed mutagenesis and functional assays. From this β2AR-GsGDP intermediate, Gs undergoes an in-plane rotation along the receptor axis to approach the β2AR-Gsempty state. The simulations shed light on how the structural elements at the receptor-G-protein interface may interact to transmit the signal over 30 Å to the nucleotide-binding site. Our analysis extends the current limited view of nucleotide-free snapshots to include additional states and structural features responsible for signaling and G-protein coupling specificity.

Bayesian network models identify cooperative GPCR:G protein interactions that contribute to G protein coupling

Cooperative interactions in protein-protein interfaces demonstrate the interdependency or the linked network-like behavior and their effect on the coupling of proteins. Cooperative interactions also could cause ripple or allosteric effects at a distance in protein-protein interfaces. Although they are critically important in protein-protein interfaces, it is challenging to determine which amino acid pair interactions are cooperative. In this work, we have used Bayesian network modeling, an interpretable machine learning method, combined with molecular dynamics trajectories to identify the residue pairs that show high cooperativity and their allosteric effect in the interface of G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) complexes with Gα subunits. Our results reveal six GPCR:Gα contacts that are common to the different Gα subtypes and show strong cooperativity in the formation of interface. Both the C terminus helix5 and the core of the G protein are codependent entities and play an important role in GPCR coupling. We show that a promiscuous GPCR coupling to different Gα subtypes, makes all the GPCR:Gα contacts that are specific to each Gα subtype (Gαs, Gαi, and Gαq). This work underscores the potential of data-driven Bayesian network modeling in elucidating the intricate dependencies and selectivity determinants in GPCR:G protein complexes, offering valuable insights into the dynamic nature of these essential cellular signaling components.

Molecular mechanism of muscarinic acetylcholine receptor M3 interaction with Gq

Muscarinic acetylcholine receptor M3 (M3) and its downstream effector Gq/11 are critical drug development targets due to their involvement in physiopathological processes. Although the structure of the M3-miniGq complex was recently published, the lack of information on the intracellular loop 3 (ICL3) of M3 and extensive modification of Gαq impedes the elucidation of the molecular mechanism of M3-Gq coupling under more physiological condition. Here, we describe the molecular mechanism underlying the dynamic interactions between full-length wild-type M3 and Gq using hydrogen-deuterium exchange mass spectrometry and NanoLuc Binary Technology-based cell systems. We propose a detailed analysis of M3-Gq coupling through examination of previously well-defined binding interfaces and neglected regions. Our findings suggest potential binding interfaces between M3 and Gq in pre-assembled and functionally active complexes. Furthermore, M3 ICL3 negatively affected M3-Gq coupling, and the Gαq AHD underwent unique conformational changes during M3-Gq coupling.

Direct interrogation of context-dependent GPCR activity with a universal biosensor platform

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the largest family of druggable proteins encoded in the human genome, but progress in understanding and targeting them is hindered by the lack of tools to reliably measure their nuanced behavior in physiologically relevant contexts. Here, we developed a collection of compact ONE vector G-protein Optical (ONE-GO) biosensor constructs as a scalable platform that can be conveniently deployed to measure G-protein activation by virtually any GPCR with high fidelity even when expressed endogenously in primary cells. By characterizing dozens of GPCRs across many cell types like primary cardiovascular cells or neurons, we revealed insights into the molecular basis for G-protein coupling selectivity of GPCRs, pharmacogenomic profiles of anti-psychotics on naturally occurring GPCR variants, and G-protein subtype signaling bias by endogenous GPCRs depending on cell type or upon inducing disease-like states. In summary, this open-source platform makes the direct interrogation of context-dependent GPCR activity broadly accessible.

Direct interrogation of context-dependent GPCR activity with a universal biosensor platform

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the largest family of druggable proteins in the human genome, but progress in understanding and targeting them is hindered by the lack of tools to reliably measure their nuanced behavior in physiologically-relevant contexts. Here, we developed a collection of compact ONE vector G-protein Optical (ONE-GO) biosensor constructs as a scalable platform that can be conveniently deployed to measure G-protein activation by virtually any GPCR with high fidelity even when expressed endogenously in primary cells. By characterizing dozens of GPCRs across many cell types like primary cardiovascular cells or neurons, we revealed new insights into the molecular basis for G-protein coupling selectivity of GPCRs, pharmacogenomic profiles of anti-psychotics on naturally-occurring GPCR variants, and G-protein subtype signaling bias by endogenous GPCRs depending on cell type or upon inducing disease-like states. In summary, this open-source platform makes the direct interrogation of context-dependent GPCR activity broadly accessible.

Bayesian network models identify co-operative GPCR:G protein interactions that contribute to G protein coupling

Cooperative interactions in protein-protein interfaces demonstrate the interdependency or the linked network-like behavior of interface interactions and their effect on the coupling of proteins. Cooperative interactions also could cause ripple or allosteric effects at a distance in protein-protein interfaces. Although they are critically important in protein-protein interfaces it is challenging to determine which amino acid pair interactions are cooperative. In this work we have used Bayesian network modeling, an interpretable machine learning method, combined with molecular dynamics trajectories to identify the residue pairs that show high cooperativity and their allosteric effect in the interface of G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) complexes with G proteins. Our results reveal a strong co-dependency in the formation of interface GPCR:G protein contacts. This observation indicates that cooperativity of GPCR:G protein interactions is necessary for the coupling and selectivity of G proteins and is thus critical for receptor function. We have identified subnetworks containing polar and hydrophobic interactions that are common among multiple GPCRs coupling to different G protein subtypes (Gs, Gi and Gq). These common subnetworks along with G protein-specific subnetworks together confer selectivity to the G protein coupling. This work underscores the potential of data-driven Bayesian network modeling in elucidating the intricate dependencies and selectivity determinants in GPCR:G protein complexes, offering valuable insights into the dynamic nature of these essential cellular signaling components.

Interplay of thermodynamics and evolution within the ternary ligand-GPCR-G protein complex

Recent studies on G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) dynamics report that GPCRs adopt a wide range of conformations that coexist in equilibrium, with the apo state of a GPCR having a high entropy. The formation of a ligand-GPCR-transducer complex comes with a reduction of conformational space and therefore with an entropic cost. We hypothesize that the availability of binding partners, their binding affinity and the rigidity of the respective binding sites are reflected in a distinct degree of sequence conservation to balance the energetic cost of intra- and extracellular binding events. Here, we outline the current findings in delineating the conformational space and include sequential conservation of many-to-many ligand-receptor systems to discuss the entropic cost that comes with GPCR signal transduction.

Mammalian type opsin 5 preferentially activates G14 in Gq-type G proteins triggering intracellular calcium response

Mammalian type opsin 5 (Opn5m), a UV-sensitive G protein-coupled receptor opsin highly conserved in vertebrates, would provide a common basis for UV sensing from lamprey to humans. However, G protein coupled with Opn5m remains controversial due to variations in assay conditions and the origin of Opn5m across different reports. Here, we examined Opn5m from diverse species using an aequorin luminescence assay and Gα-KO cell line. Beyond the commonly studied major Gα classes, Gαq, Gα11, Gα14, and Gα15 in the Gq class were individually investigated in this study, as they can drive distinct signaling pathways in addition to a canonical calcium response. UV light triggered a calcium response via all the tested Opn5m proteins in 293T cells, which was abolished by Gq-type Gα deletion and rescued by cotransfection with mouse and medaka Gq-type Gα proteins. Opn5m preferentially activated Gα14 and close relatives. Mutational analysis implicated specific regions, including α3-β5 and αG-α4 loops, αG and α4 helices, and the extreme C terminus, in the preferential activation of Gα14 by Opn5m. FISH revealed co-expression of genes encoding Opn5m and Gα14 in the scleral cartilage of medaka and chicken eyes, supporting their physiological coupling. This suggests that the preferential activation of Gα14 by Opn5m is relevant for UV sensing in specific cell types.

Advancements in G protein-coupled receptor biosensors to study GPCR-G protein coupling

Enzymatic and cellular signalling biosensors are used to decipher the activities of complex biological systems. Biosensors for monitoring G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), the most drugged class of proteins in the human body, are plentiful and vary in utility, form and function. Their applications have continually expanded our understanding of this important protein class. Here, we briefly summarize a subset of this field with accelerating importance: transducer biosensors measuring receptor-coupling and selectivity, with an emphasis on sensors measuring receptor association and activation of heterotrimeric signalling complexes.

Pan-cancer functional analysis of somatic mutations in G protein-coupled receptors

G Protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the most frequently exploited drug target family, moreover they are often found mutated in cancer. Here we used a dataset of mutations found in patient samples derived from the Genomic Data Commons and compared it to the natural human variance as exemplified by data from the 1000 genomes project. We explored cancer-related mutation patterns in all GPCR classes combined and individually. While the location of the mutations across the protein domains did not differ significantly in the two datasets, a mutation enrichment in cancer patients was observed among class-specific conserved motifs in GPCRs such as the Class A "DRY" motif. A Two-Entropy Analysis confirmed the correlation between residue conservation and cancer-related mutation frequency. We subsequently created a ranking of high scoring GPCRs, using a multi-objective approach (Pareto Front Ranking). Our approach was confirmed by re-discovery of established cancer targets such as the LPA and mGlu receptor families, but also discovered novel GPCRs which had not been linked to cancer before such as the P2Y Receptor 10 (P2RY10). Overall, this study presents a list of GPCRs that are amenable to experimental follow up to elucidate their role in cancer.

Dynamic spatiotemporal determinants modulate GPCR:G protein coupling selectivity and promiscuity

Recent studies have shown that G protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) show selective and promiscuous coupling to different Gα protein subfamilies and yet the mechanisms of the range of coupling preferences remain unclear. Here, we use Molecular Dynamics (MD) simulations on ten GPCR:G protein complexes and show that the location (spatial) and duration (temporal) of intermolecular contacts at the GPCR:Gα protein interface play a critical role in how GPCRs selectively interact with G proteins. We identify that some GPCR:G protein interface contacts are common across Gα subfamilies and others specific to Gα subfamilies. Using large scale data analysis techniques on the MD simulation snapshots we derive a spatio-temporal code for contacts that confer G protein selective coupling and validated these contacts using G protein activation BRET assays. Our results demonstrate that promiscuous GPCRs show persistent sampling of the common contacts more than G protein specific contacts. These findings suggest that GPCRs maintain contact with G proteins through a common central interface, while the selectivity comes from G protein specific contacts at the periphery of the interface.

Evolutionary association of receptor-wide amino acids with G protein-coupling selectivity in aminergic GPCRs

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) induce signal transduction pathways through coupling to four main subtypes of G proteins (Gs, Gi, Gq, and G12/13), selectively. However, G protein selective activation mechanisms and residual determinants in GPCRs have remained obscure. Herein, we performed extensive phylogenetic analysis and identified specifically conserved residues for the aminergic receptors having similar coupling profiles. By integrating our methodology of differential evolutionary conservation of G protein-specific amino acids with structural analyses, we identified specific activation networks for Gs, Gi1, Go, and Gq To validate that these networks could determine coupling selectivity we further analyzed Gs-specific activation network and its association with Gs selectivity. Through molecular dynamics simulations, we showed that previously uncharacterized Glycine at position 7x41 plays an important role in receptor activation and it may determine Gs coupling selectivity by facilitating a larger TM6 movement. Finally, we gathered our results into a comprehensive model of G protein selectivity called "sequential switches of activation" describing three main molecular switches controlling GPCR activation: ligand binding, G protein selective activation mechanisms, and G protein contact.

Genetically encoded fluorescent biosensors for GPCR research

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) regulate a wide range of physiological and pathophysiological cellular processes, thus it is important to understand how GPCRs are activated and function in various cellular contexts. In particular, the activation process of GPCRs is dynamically regulated upon various extracellular stimuli, and emerging evidence suggests the subcellular functions of GPCRs at endosomes and other organelles. Therefore, precise monitoring of the GPCR activation process with high spatiotemporal resolution is required to investigate the underlying molecular mechanisms of GPCR functions. In this review, we will introduce genetically encoded fluorescent biosensors that can precisely monitor the real-time GPCR activation process in live cells. The process includes the binding of extracellular GPCR ligands, conformational change of GPCR, recruitment of G proteins or β-arrestin, GPCR internalization and trafficking, and the GPCR-related downstream signaling events. We will introduce fluorescent GPCR biosensors based on a variety of strategies such as fluorescent resonance energy transfer (FRET), bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET), circular permuted fluorescent protein (cpFP), and nanobody. We will discuss the pros and cons of these GPCR biosensors as well as their applications in GPCR research.

Prostaglandin F2α and angiotensin II type 1 receptors exhibit differential cognate G protein coupling regulation

Promiscuous G protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs) engage multiple Gα subtypes with different efficacies to propagate signals in cells. A mechanistic understanding of Gα selectivity by GPCRs is critical for therapeutic design, since signaling can be restrained by ligand–receptor complexes to preferentially engage specific G proteins. However, details of GPCR selectivity are unresolved. Here, we investigated cognate G protein selectivity using the prototypical promiscuous Gαq/11 and Gα12/13 coupling receptors, angiotensin II type I receptor (AT1R) and prostaglandin F2α receptor (FP), bioluminescence resonance energy transfer–based G protein and pathway-selective sensors, and G protein knockout cells. We determined that competition between G proteins for receptor binding occurred in a receptor- and G protein–specific manner for AT1R and FP but not for other receptors tested. In addition, we show that while Gα12/13 competes with Gαq/11 for AT1R coupling, the opposite occurs for FP, and Gαq-mediated signaling regulated G protein coupling only at AT1R. In cells, the functional modulation of biased ligands at FP and AT1R was contingent upon cognate Gα availability. The efficacy of AT1R-biased ligands, which poorly signal through Gαq/11, increased in the absence of Gα12/13. Finally, we show that a positive allosteric modulator of Gαq/11 signaling that also allosterically decreases FP–Gα12/13 coupling, lost its negative modulation in the absence of Gαq/11 coupling to FP. Together, our findings suggest that despite preferential binding of similar subsets of G proteins, GPCRs follow distinct selectivity rules, which may contribute to the regulation of ligand-mediated G protein bias of AT1R and FP.

Structural insights into galanin receptor signaling

SignificanceGalanin exerts various physiological functions through galanin receptors, including antinociceptive activity, depression, and sleep. Here, we reveal a distinct binding mode of galanin peptide in galanin receptors from that of the published structures of peptide-bound GPCRs. Moreover, our work shows that the neuromodulator zinc ion negatively modulates galanin signaling in the central nervous system and further advances our understanding of mechanisms of G protein selectivity of GPCRs. These structures will provide a framework for rational design of ligands targeting GALRs for potential therapeutic applications.

The Conformational Dynamics of Heterotrimeric G Proteins During GPCR-Mediated Activation

Heterotrimeric G proteins (G proteins) are essential cellular signaling proteins that mediate extracellular signals to achieve various cellular functions. G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the major guanine nucleotide exchange factors (GEFs) that induce G proteins to release guanosine diphosphate and rapidly bind to guanosine triphosphate, resulting in G protein activation. G proteins undergo dynamic conformational changes during the activation/inactivation process, and the precise structural mechanism of GPCR-mediated G protein activation is of great interest. Over the last decade, a number of GPCR-G protein complex structures have been identified, yet an understanding of the mechanisms underlying allosteric conformational changes during receptor-mediated G protein activation and GPCR-G protein coupling selectivity is only now emerging. This review discusses recent studies on the dynamic conformational changes of G proteins and provides insight into the structural mechanism of GPCR-mediated G protein activation.

The conformational transition during G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) and G protein interaction

The precise structural mechanism of G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR)-G protein coupling has been of significant research interest because it provides fundamental knowledge on cellular signaling and valuable information for GPCR-targeted drug development. Over the last decade, several GPCR-G protein complex structures have been identified. However, these structures are mere snapshots of guanosine diphosphate (GDP)-released stable GPCR-G protein complexes, which have limited the understanding of the allosteric conformational transition during receptor binding to GDP release and the GPCR-G protein coupling selectivity. Recently, deeper insights into the mechanism underlying stepwise conformational changes during GPCR-G protein coupling were obtained using hydrogen/deuterium exchange mass spectrometry, hydroxyl radical footprinting-mass spectrometry, X-ray crystallography, cryoelectron microscopy, and molecular dynamics simulation techniques. This review summarizes these recent developments.

Coevolution underlies GPCR-G protein selectivity and functionality

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) regulate diverse physiological events, which makes them as the major targets for many approved drugs. G proteins are downstream molecules that receive signals from GPCRs and trigger cell responses. The GPCR-G protein selectivity mechanism on how they properly and timely interact is still unclear. Here, we analyzed model GPCRs (i.e. HTR, DAR) and Gα proteins with a coevolutionary tool, statistical coupling analysis. The results suggested that 5-hydroxytryptamine receptors and dopamine receptors have common conserved and coevolved residues. The Gα protein also have conserved and coevolved residues. These coevolved residues were implicated in the molecular functions of the analyzed proteins. We also found specific coevolving pairs related to the selectivity between GPCR and G protein were identified. We propose that these results would contribute to better understandings of not only the functional residues of GPCRs and Gα proteins but also GPCR-G protein selectivity mechanisms.

β2-adrenoceptor ligand efficacy is tuned by a two-stage interaction with the Gαs C terminus

Classical pharmacological models have incorporated an "intrinsic efficacy" parameter to capture system-independent effects of G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) ligands. However, the nonlinear serial amplification of downstream signaling limits quantitation of ligand intrinsic efficacy. A recent biophysical study has characterized a ligand "molecular efficacy" that quantifies the influence of ligand-dependent receptor conformation on G protein activation. Nonetheless, the structural translation of ligand molecular efficacy into G protein activation remains unclear and forms the focus of this study. We first establish a robust, accessible, and sensitive assay to probe GPCR interaction with G protein and the Gα C terminus (G-peptide), an established structural determinant of G protein selectivity. We circumvent the need for extensive purification protocols by the single-step incorporation of receptor and G protein elements into giant plasma membrane vesicles (GPMVs). We use previously established SPASM FRET sensors to control the stoichiometry and effective concentration of receptor-G protein interactions. We demonstrate that GPMV-incorporated sensors (v-SPASM sensors) provide enhanced dynamic range, expression-insensitive readout, and a reagent level assay that yields single point measurements of ligand molecular efficacy. Leveraging this technology, we establish the receptor-G-peptide interaction as a sufficient structural determinant of this receptor-level parameter. Combining v-SPASM measurements with molecular dynamics (MD) simulations, we elucidate a two-stage receptor activation mechanism, wherein receptor-G-peptide interactions in an intermediate orientation alter the receptor conformational landscape to facilitate engagement of a fully coupled orientation that tunes G protein activation.

The Gαi protein subclass selectivity to the dopamine D2 receptor is also decided by their location at the cell membrane

Background

G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling via heterotrimeric G proteins plays an important role in the cellular regulation of responses to external stimuli. Despite intensive structural research, the mechanism underlying the receptor–G protein coupling of closely related subtypes of Gαi remains unclear. In addition to the structural changes of interacting proteins, the interactions between lipids and proteins seem to be crucial in GPCR-dependent cell signaling due to their functional organization in specific membrane domains. In previous works, we found that Gαs and Gαi₃ subunits prefer distinct types of membrane-anchor lipid domains that also modulate the G protein trimer localization. In the present study, we investigated the functional selectivity of dopamine D₂ long receptor isoform (D₂R) toward the Gαi₁, Gαi₂, and Gαi₃ subunits, and analyzed whether the organization of Gαi heterotrimers at the plasma membrane affects the signal transduction.

Methods

We characterized the lateral diffusion and the receptor–G protein spatial distribution in living cells using two assays: fluorescence recovery after photobleaching microscopy and fluorescence resonance energy transfer detected by fluorescence-lifetime imaging microscopy. Depending on distribution of data differences between Gα subunits were investigated using parametric approach–unpaired T-test or nonparametric–Mann–Whitney U test.

Results

Despite the similarities between the examined subunits, the experiments conducted in the study revealed a significantly faster lateral diffusion of the Gαi₂ subunit and the singular distribution of the Gαi₁ subunit in the plasma membrane. The cell membrane partitioning of distinct Gαi heterotrimers with dopamine receptor correlated very well with the efficiency of D₂R-mediated inhibition the formation of cAMP.

Conclusions

This study showed that even closely related subunits of Gαi differ in their membrane-trafficking properties that impact on their signaling. The interactions between lipids and proteins seem to be crucial in GPCR-dependent cell signaling due to their functional organization in specific membrane domains, and should therefore be taken into account as one of the selectivity determinants of G protein coupling.

Allosteric modulation of adenosine A1 and cannabinoid 1 receptor signaling by G-peptides

While allosteric modulation of GPCR signaling has gained prominence to address the need for receptor specificity, efforts have mainly focused on allosteric sites adjacent to the orthosteric ligand-binding pocket and lipophilic molecules that target transmembrane helices. In this study, we examined the allosteric influence of native peptides derived from the C-terminus of the Gα subunit (G-peptides) on signaling from two Gi-coupled receptors, adenosine A1 receptor (A1 R) and cannabinoid receptor 1 (CB1 ). We expressed A1 R and CB1 fusions with G-peptides derived from Gαs, Gαi, and Gαq in HEK 293 cells using systematic protein affinity strength modulation (SPASM) and monitored the impact on downstream signaling in the cell compared to a construct lacking G-peptides. We used agonists N6 -Cyclopentyladenosine (CPA) and 5'-N-Ethylcarboxamidoadenosine (NECA) for A1 R and 2-Arachidonoylglycerol (2-AG) and WIN 55,212-2 mesylate (WN) for CB1 . G-peptides derived from Gαi and Gαq enhance agonist-dependent cAMP inhibition, demonstrating their effect as positive allosteric modulators of Gi-coupled signaling. In contrast, both G-peptides suppress agonist-dependent IP1 levels suggesting that they differentially function as negative allosteric modulators of Gq-coupled signaling. Taken together with our previous studies on Gs-coupled receptors, this study provides an extended model for the allosteric effects of G-peptides on GPCR signaling, and highlights their potential as probe molecules to enhance receptor specificity.

ER/K-link-Leveraging a native protein linker to probe dynamic cellular interactions

ER/K α-helices are a subset of single alpha helical domains, which exhibit unusual stability as isolated protein secondary structures. They adopt an elongated structural conformation, while regulating the frequency of interactions between proteins or polypeptides fused to their ends. Here we review recent advances on the structure, stability and function of ER/K α-helices as linkers (ER/K linkers) in native proteins. We describe methodological considerations in the molecular cloning, protein expression and measurement of interaction strengths, using sensors incorporating ER/K linkers. We highlight biological insights obtained over the last decade by leveraging distinct biophysical features of ER/K-linked sensors. We conclude with the outlook for the use of ER/K linkers in the selective modulation of dynamic cellular interactions.

How Do Molecular Dynamics Data Complement Static Structural Data of GPCRs

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are implicated in nearly every physiological process in the human body and therefore represent an important drug targeting class. Advances in X-ray crystallography and cryo-electron microscopy (cryo-EM) have provided multiple static structures of GPCRs in complex with various signaling partners. However, GPCR functionality is largely determined by their flexibility and ability to transition between distinct structural conformations. Due to this dynamic nature, a static snapshot does not fully explain the complexity of GPCR signal transduction. Molecular dynamics (MD) simulations offer the opportunity to simulate the structural motions of biological processes at atomic resolution. Thus, this technique can incorporate the missing information on protein flexibility into experimentally solved structures. Here, we review the contribution of MD simulations to complement static structural data and to improve our understanding of GPCR physiology and pharmacology, as well as the challenges that still need to be overcome to reach the full potential of this technique.

Structural mechanism underlying primary and secondary coupling between GPCRs and the Gi/o family

Heterotrimeric G proteins are categorized into four main families based on their function and sequence, Gs, Gi/o, Gq/11, and G12/13. One receptor can couple to more than one G protein subtype, and the coupling efficiency varies depending on the GPCR-G protein pair. However, the precise mechanism underlying different coupling efficiencies is unknown. Here, we study the structural mechanism underlying primary and secondary Gi/o coupling, using the muscarinic acetylcholine receptor type 2 (M2R) as the primary Gi/o-coupling receptor and the β₂-adrenergic receptor (β₂AR, which primarily couples to Gs) as the secondary Gi/o-coupling receptor. Hydrogen/deuterium exchange mass spectrometry and mutagenesis studies reveal that the engagement of the distal C-terminus of Gαi/o with the receptor differentiates primary and secondary Gi/o couplings. This study suggests that the conserved hydrophobic residue within the intracellular loop 2 of the receptor (residue 34.51) is not critical for primary Gi/o-coupling; however, it might be important for secondary Gi/o-coupling.

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) can couple to more than one G protein subtype, and the coupling efficiency varies depending on the GPCR-G protein pair. Here authors use hydrogen/deuterium exchange mass spectrometry and mutagenesis to study the structural mechanism underlying primary and secondary Gi/o coupling.

Novel M2 -selective, Gi -biased agonists of muscarinic acetylcholine receptors

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

More than 30% of currently marketed medications act via GPCRs. Thus, GPCRs represent one of the most important pharmacotherapeutic targets. In contrast to traditional agonists activating multiple signalling pathways, agonists activating a single signalling pathway represent a new generation of drugs with increased specificity and fewer adverse effects.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

We have synthesized novel agonists of muscarinic ACh receptors and tested their binding and function (on levels of cAMP and inositol phosphates) in CHO cells expressing individual subtypes of muscarinic receptors, primary cultures of rat aortic smooth muscle cells and suspensions of digested native tissues from rats. Binding of the novel compounds to M₂ receptors was modelled in silico.

KEY RESULTS

Two of the tested new compounds (1-(thiophen-2-ylmethyl)-3,6-dihydro-2H-pyridinium and 1-methyl-1-(thiophen-2-ylmethyl)-3,6-dihydro-2H-pyridinium) only inhibited cAMP synthesis in CHO cells, primary cultures, and native tissues, with selectivity for M₂ muscarinic receptors and displaying bias towards the G_i signalling pathway at all subtypes of muscarinic receptors. Molecular modelling revealed interactions with the orthosteric binding site in a way specific for a given agonist followed by agonist-specific changes in the conformation of the receptor.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

The identified compounds may serve as lead structures in the search for novel non-steroidal and non-opioid analgesics acting via M₂ and M₄ muscarinic receptors with reduced side effects associated with activation of the phospholipase C signalling pathway.

Minute-scale persistence of a GPCR conformation state triggered by non-cognate G protein interactions primes signaling

Despite the crowded nature of the cellular milieu, ligand-GPCR-G protein interactions are traditionally viewed as spatially and temporally isolated events. In contrast, recent reports suggest the spatial and temporal coupling of receptor-effector interactions, with the potential to diversify downstream responses. In this study, we combine protein engineering of GPCR-G protein interactions with affinity sequestration and photo-manipulation of the crucial Gα C terminus, to demonstrate the temporal coupling of cognate and non-cognate G protein interactions through priming of the GPCR conformation. We find that interactions of the Gαs and Gαq C termini with the β₂-adrenergic receptor (β₂-AR), targeted at the G-protein-binding site, enhance Gs activation and cyclic AMP levels. β₂-AR-Gα C termini interactions alter receptor conformation, which persists for ~90 s following Gα C terminus dissociation. Non-cognate G-protein expression levels impact cognate signaling in cells. Our study demonstrates temporal allostery in GPCRs, with implications for the modulation of downstream responses through the canonical G-protein-binding interface.

Conformational plasticity of the intracellular cavity of GPCR-G-protein complexes leads to G-protein promiscuity and selectivity

While the dynamics of the intracellular surface in agonist-stimulated GPCRs is well studied, the impact of GPCR dynamics on G-protein selectivity remains unclear. Here, we combine molecular dynamics simulations with live-cell FRET and secondary messenger measurements, for 21 GPCR-G-protein combinations, to advance a dynamic model of the GPCR-G-protein interface. Our data show C terminus peptides of Gαs, Gαi, and Gαq proteins assume a small ensemble of unique orientations when coupled to their cognate GPCRs, similar to the variations observed in 3D structures of GPCR-G-protein complexes. The noncognate G proteins interface with latent intracellular GPCR cavities but dissociate due to weak and unstable interactions. Three predicted mutations in β2-adrenergic receptor stabilize binding of noncognate Gαq protein in its latent cavity, allowing promiscuous signaling through both Gαs and Gαq in a dose-dependent manner. This demonstrates that latent GPCR cavities can be evolved, by design or nature, to tune G-protein selectivity, giving insights to pluridimensional GPCR signaling.

Variable G protein determinants of GPCR coupling selectivity

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) regulate a wide variety of important cellular processes and are targeted by a large fraction of approved drugs. GPCRs signal by activating heterotrimeric G proteins and must couple to a select subset of G proteins to produce appropriate intracellular responses. It is not known how GPCRs select G proteins, but it is generally accepted that the Gα subunit C terminus is the primary G protein determinant of coupling selectivity. We systematically studied coupling of GPCRs to four families of G proteins and chimeras with C terminal regions that were exchanged between families. We uncovered rules for coupling selectivity and found that different GPCRs can recognize different features of the same G protein for selective coupling.

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) activate four families of heterotrimeric G proteins, and individual receptors must select a subset of G proteins to produce appropriate cellular responses. Although the precise mechanisms of coupling selectivity are uncertain, the Gα subunit C terminus is widely believed to be the primary determinant recognized by cognate receptors. Here, we directly assess coupling between 14 representative GPCRs and 16 Gα subunits, including one wild-type Gα subunit from each of the four families and 12 chimeras with exchanged C termini. We use a sensitive bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) assay that provides control over both ligand and nucleotide binding, and allows direct comparison across G protein families. We find that the G_s- and G_q-coupled receptors we studied are relatively promiscuous and always couple to some extent to G_i1 heterotrimers. In contrast, G_i-coupled receptors are more selective. Our results with Gα subunit chimeras show that the Gα C terminus is important for coupling selectivity, but no more so than the Gα subunit core. The relative importance of the Gα subunit core and C terminus is highly variable and, for some receptors, the Gα core is more important for selective coupling than the C terminus. Our results suggest general rules for GPCR-G protein coupling and demonstrate that the critical G protein determinants of selectivity vary widely, even for different receptors that couple to the same G protein.

Cryo-EM structures of GPCRs coupled to Gs, Gi and Go

Advances in electron cryo-microscopy (cryo-EM) now permit the structure determination of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) coupled to heterotrimeric G proteins by single-particle imaging. A combination of G protein engineering and the development of antibodies that stabilise the heterotrimeric G protein facilitate the formation of stable GPCR-G protein complexes suitable for structural biology. Structures have been determined of GPCRs coupled to either heterotrimeric G proteins (G_s, G_i or G_o) or mini-G proteins (mini-G_s or mini-G_o) by single-particle cryo-EM and X-ray crystallography, respectively. This review describes the technical breakthroughs allowing their structure determination and compares the different techniques. In addition, we compare the structures of GPCRs coupled either to G_s, G_i or G_o and analyse the contributions of amino acid residues to the GPCR-G protein interface. There is no unique set of interactions that specifies coupling either to G_s, G_i or G_o. Instead, there is a common core of interactions between the C-terminal α-helix of the G protein α-subunit and helices H3, H5 and H6 of the receptor. In addition, there are varying degrees of interaction between all the other GPCR helices and intracellular loops to five regions of the α-subunit and four regions of the β-subunit. These data support the contention that there is not a simple linear barcode that defines the specificity of G protein coupling and thus how a G protein couples to a GPCR cannot currently be determined from simply analysing amino acid sequences. Although the overall architecture of GPCR-G protein complexes is conserved, there are significant differences in the molecular details. The number and type of molecular interactions between amino acid residues at the interfaces varies, resulting in subtly different orientation and position of the G protein with respect to the GPCR. This in turn affects the interface surface area that varies between 845 Ų and 1490 Ų, which could impact upon the lifetime of signalling complexes in the cell.

Structural Insights into the Process of GPCR-G Protein Complex Formation

The crystal structure of the β2-adrenergic receptor (β2AR) bound to the G protein adenylyl cyclase stimulatory G protein (Gs) captured the complex in a nucleotide-free state (β2AR-Gs^empty). Unfortunately, the β2AR-Gs^empty complex does not provide a clear explanation for G protein coupling specificity. Evidence from several sources suggests the existence of a transient complex between the β2AR and GDP-bound Gs protein (β2AR-Gs^GDP) that may represent an intermediate on the way to the formation of β2AR-Gs^empty and may contribute to coupling specificity. Here we present a structure of the β2AR in complex with the carboxyl terminal 14 amino acids from Gαs along with the structure of the GDP-bound Gs heterotrimer. These structures provide evidence for an alternate interaction between the β2AR and Gs that may represent an intermediate that contributes to Gs coupling specificity.

Molecular Dynamics Simulations of the Allosteric Modulation of the Adenosine A2A Receptor by a Mini-G Protein

Through their coupling to G proteins, G Protein-Coupled Receptors (GPCRs) trigger cellular responses to various signals. Some recent experiments have interestingly demonstrated that the G protein can also act on the receptor by favoring a closed conformation of its orthosteric site, even in the absence of a bound agonist. In this work, we explored such an allosteric modulation by performing extensive molecular dynamics simulations on the adenosine A2 receptor (A2aR) coupled to the Mini-Gs protein. In the presence of the Mini-Gs, we confirmed a restriction of the receptor’s agonist binding site that can be explained by a modulation of the intrinsic network of contacts of the receptor. Of interest, we observed similar effects with the C-terminal helix of the Mini-Gs, showing that the observed effect on the binding pocket results from direct local contacts with the bound protein partner that cause a rewiring of the whole receptor’s interaction network.

Receptor selectivity between the G proteins Gα12 and Gα13 is defined by a single leucine-to-isoleucine variation

Despite recent advances in structural definition of GPCR-G protein complexes, the basis of receptor selectivity between G proteins remains unclear. The Gα₁₂ and Gα₁₃ subtypes together form the least studied group of heterotrimeric G proteins. G protein-coupled receptor 35 (GPR35) has been suggested to couple efficiently to Gα₁₃ but weakly to Gα₁₂. Using combinations of cells genome-edited to not express G proteins and bioluminescence resonance energy transfer-based sensors, we confirmed marked selectivity of GPR35 for Gα₁₃. Incorporating Gα₁₂/Gα₁₃ chimeras and individual residue swap mutations into these sensors defined that selectivity between Gα₁₃ and Gα₁₂ was imbued largely by a single leucine-to-isoleucine variation at position G.H5.23. Indeed, leucine could not be substituted by other amino acids in Gα₁₃ without almost complete loss of GPR35 coupling. The critical importance of leucine at G.H5.23 for GPR35-G protein interaction was further demonstrated by introduction of this leucine into Gα_q, resulting in the gain of coupling to GPR35. These studies demonstrate that Gα₁₃ is markedly the most effective G protein for interaction with GPR35 and that selection between Gα₁₃ and Gα₁₂ is dictated largely by a single conservative amino acid variation.-Mackenzie, A. E., Quon, T., Lin, L.-C., Hauser, A. S., Jenkins, L., Inoue, A., Tobin, A. B., Gloriam, D. E., Hudson, B. D., Milligan, G. Receptor selectivity between the G proteins Gα₁₂ and Gα₁₃ is defined by a single leucine-to-isoleucine variation.

A single extracellular amino acid in Free Fatty Acid Receptor 2 defines antagonist species selectivity and G protein selection bias

Free Fatty Acid Receptor 2 is a GPCR activated by short chain fatty acids produced in high levels in the lower gut by microbial fermentation of non-digestible carbohydrates. A major challenge in studying this receptor is that the mouse ortholog does not have significant affinity for antagonists that are able to block the human receptor. Docking of exemplar antagonists from two chemical series to homology models of both human and mouse Free Fatty Acid Receptor 2 suggested that a single lysine - arginine variation at the extracellular face of the receptor might provide the basis for antagonist selectivity and mutational swap studies confirmed this hypothesis. Extending these studies to agonist function indicated that although the lysine - arginine variation between human and mouse orthologs had limited effect on G protein-mediated signal transduction, removal of positive charge from this residue produced a signalling-biased variant of Free Fatty Acid Receptor 2 in which G_i-mediated signalling by both short chain fatty acids and synthetic agonists was maintained whilst there was marked loss of agonist potency for signalling via G_q/11 and G_12/13 G proteins. A single residue at the extracellular face of the receptor thus plays key roles in both agonist and antagonist function.

ER/K linked GPCR-G protein fusions systematically modulate second messenger response in cells

FRET and BRET approaches are well established for detecting ligand induced GPCR-G protein interactions in cells. Currently, FRET/BRET assays rely on co-expression of GPCR and G protein, and hence depend on the stoichiometry and expression levels of the donor and acceptor probes. On the other hand, GPCR-G protein fusions have been used extensively to understand the selectivity of GPCR signaling pathways. However, the signaling properties of fusion proteins are not consistent across GPCRs. In this study, we describe and characterize novel sensors based on the Systematic Protein Affinity Strength Modulation (SPASM) technique. Sensors consist of a GPCR and G protein tethered by an ER/K linker flanked by FRET probes. SPASM sensors are tested for the β2-, α1-, and α2- adrenergic receptors, and adenosine type 1 receptor (A₁R), tethered to Gαs-XL, Gαi₂, or Gαq subunits. Agonist stimulation of β2-AR and α2-AR increases FRET signal comparable to co-expressed FRET/BRET sensors. SPASM sensors also retain signaling through the endogenous G protein milieu. Importantly, ER/K linker length systematically tunes the GPCR-G protein interaction, with consequent modulation of second messenger signaling for cognate interactions. SPASM GPCR sensors serve the dual purpose of detecting agonist-induced changes in GPCR-G protein interactions, and linking these changes to downstream signaling.

Mini-G proteins: Novel tools for studying GPCRs in their active conformation

Mini-G proteins are the engineered GTPase domains of Gα subunits. They couple to GPCRs and recapitulate the increase in agonist affinity observed upon coupling of a native heterotrimeric G protein. Given the small size and stability of mini-G proteins, and their ease of expression and purification, they are ideal for biophysical studies of GPCRs in their fully active state. The first mini-G protein developed was mini-G_s. Here we extend the family of mini-G proteins to include mini-G_olf, mini-G_i1, mini-G_o1 and the chimeras mini-G_s/q and mini-G_s/i. The mini-G proteins were shown to couple to relevant GPCRs and to form stable complexes with purified receptors that could be purified by size exclusion chromatography. Agonist-bound GPCRs coupled to a mini-G protein showed higher thermal stability compared to the agonist-bound receptor alone. Fusion of GFP at the N-terminus of mini-G proteins allowed receptor coupling to be monitored by fluorescence-detection size exclusion chromatography (FSEC) and, in a separate assay, the affinity of mini-G protein binding to detergent-solubilised receptors was determined. This work provides the foundation for the development of any mini-G protein and, ultimately, for the structure determination of GPCRs in a fully active state.

Priming GPCR signaling through the synergistic effect of two G proteins

Although individual G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are known to activate one or more G proteins, the GPCR-G-protein interaction is viewed as a bimolecular event involving the formation of a ternary ligand-GPCR-G-protein complex. Here, we present evidence that individual GPCR-G-protein interactions can reinforce each other to enhance signaling through canonical downstream second messengers, a phenomenon we term "GPCR priming." Specifically, we find that the presence of noncognate Gq protein enhances cAMP stimulated by two Gs-coupled receptors, β2-adrenergic receptor (β2-AR) and D₁ dopamine receptor (D₁-R). Reciprocally, Gs enhances IP₁ through vasopressin receptor (V_1A-R) but not α1 adrenergic receptor (α1-AR), suggesting that GPCR priming is a receptor-specific phenomenon. The C terminus of either the Gαs or Gαq subunit is sufficient to enhance Gα subunit activation and cAMP levels. Interaction of Gαs or Gαq C termini with the GPCR increases signaling potency, suggesting an altered GPCR conformation as the underlying basis for GPCR priming. We propose three parallel mechanisms involving (i) sequential G-protein interactions at the cognate site, (ii) G-protein interactions at distinct allosteric and cognate sites on the GPCR, and (iii) asymmetric GPCR dimers. GPCR priming suggests another layer of regulation in the classic GPCR ternary-complex model, with broad implications for the multiplicity inherent in signaling networks.