Background: Arrestins are responsible for the desensitization of many sequence-divergent G protein-coupled receptors. They compete with G proteins for binding to activated phosphorylated receptors, ...initiate receptor internalization, and activate additional signaling pathways.
Results: In order to understand the structural basis for receptor binding and arrestin's function as an adaptor molecule, we determined the X-ray crystal structure of two truncated forms of bovine β-arrestin in its cytosolic inactive state to 1.9 Å. Mutational analysis and chimera studies identify the regions in β-arrestin responsible for receptor binding specificity. β-arrestin demonstrates high structural homology with the previously solved visual arrestin. All key structural elements responsible for arrestin's mechanism of activation are conserved.
Conclusions: Based on structural analysis and mutagenesis data, we propose a previously unappreciated part in β-arrestin's mode of action by which a cationic amphipathic helix may function as a reversible membrane anchor. This novel activation mechanism would facilitate the formation of a high-affinity complex between β-arrestin and an activated receptor regardless of its specific subtype. Like the interaction between β-arrestin's polar core and the phosphorylated receptor, such a general activation mechanism would contribute to β-arrestin's versatility as a regulator of many receptors.
Arrestins specifically bind active and phosphorylated forms of their cognate G protein–coupled receptors, blocking G protein coupling and often redirecting the signaling to alternative pathways. ...High-affinity receptor binding is accompanied by two major structural changes in arrestin: release of the C-tail and rotation of the two domains relative to each other. The first requires detachment of the arrestin C-tail from the body of the molecule, whereas the second requires disruption of the network of charge-charge interactions at the interdomain interface, termed the polar core. These events can be facilitated by mutations destabilizing the polar core or the anchoring of the C-tail that yield “preactivated” arrestins that bind phosphorylated and unphosphorylated receptors with high affinity. Here we explored the functional role in arrestin activation of the three native cysteines in the N domain, which are conserved in all arrestin subtypes. Using visual arrestin-1 and rhodopsin as a model, we found that substitution of these cysteines with serine, alanine, or valine virtually eliminates the effects of the activating polar core mutations on the binding to unphosphorylated rhodopsin while only slightly reducing the effects of the C-tail mutations. Thus, these three conserved cysteines play a role in the domain rotation but not in the C-tail release.
Rod photoreceptors generate measurable responses to single-photon activation of individual molecules of the G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR), rhodopsin. Timely rhodopsin desensitization depends on ...phosphorylation and arrestin binding, which quenches G protein activation. Rhodopsin phosphorylation has been measured biochemically at C-terminal serine residues, suggesting that these residues are critical for producing fast, low-noise responses. The role of native threonine residues is unclear. We compared single-photon responses from rhodopsin lacking native serine or threonine phosphorylation sites. Contrary to expectation, serine-only rhodopsin generated prolonged step-like single-photon responses that terminated abruptly and randomly, whereas threonine-only rhodopsin generated responses that were only modestly slower than normal. We show that the step-like responses of serine-only rhodopsin reflect slow and stochastic arrestin binding. Thus, threonine sites play a privileged role in promoting timely arrestin binding and rhodopsin desensitization. Similar coordination of phosphorylation and arrestin binding may more generally permit tight control of the duration of GPCR activity.
Arrestins bind active phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors, terminating G protein activation. Receptor-bound non-visual arrestins interact with numerous partners, redirecting signaling to ...alternative pathways. Arrestins also have nuclear localization and nuclear exclusion signals and shuttle between the nucleus and the cytoplasm. Constitutively shuttling proteins often redistribute their interaction partners between the two compartments. Here we took advantage of the nucleoplasmic shuttling of free arrestins and used a “nuclear exclusion assay” to study their interactions with two proteins involved in “life-and-death” decisions in the cell, the kinase JNK3 and the ubiquitin ligase Mdm2. In human embryonic kidney 293 cells green fluorescent protein (GFP)-JNK3 and GFP-Mdm2 predominantly localize in the nucleus, whereas visual arrestin, arrestin2(Q394L) mutant equipped with the nuclear exclusion signal, and arrestin3 localize exclusively to the cytoplasm. Coexpression of arrestins moves both GFP-JNK3 and GFP-Mdm2 to the cytoplasm. Arrestin mutants “frozen” in the basal conformation are the most efficacious. Thus, arrestins in their basal state interact with JNK3 and Mdm2, suggesting that arrestins are likely “preloaded” with their interaction partners when they bind the receptor. Robust interaction of free arrestins with JNK3 and Mdm2 and their ability to regulate subcellular localization of these proteins may play an important role in the survival of photoreceptors and other neurons, as well as in retinal and neuronal degeneration.
Recently we found that visual arrestin binds microtubules and that this interaction plays an important role in arrestin localization in photoreceptor cells. Here we use site-directed mutagenesis and ...spin labeling to explore the molecular mechanism of this novel regulatory interaction. The microtubule binding site maps to the concave sides of the two arrestin domains, overlapping with the rhodopsin binding site, which makes arrestin interactions with rhodopsin and microtubules mutually exclusive. Arrestin interaction with microtubules is enhanced by several “activating mutations” and involves multiple positive charges and hydrophobic elements. The comparable affinity of visual arrestin for microtubules and unpolymerized tubulin (KD > 40 μm and >65 μm, respectively) suggests that the arrestin binding site is largely localized on the individual αβ-dimer. The changes in the spin-spin interaction of a double-labeled arrestin indicate that the conformation of microtubule-bound arrestin differs from that of free arrestin in solution. In sharp contrast to rhodopsin, where tight binding requires an extended interdomain hinge, arrestin binding to microtubules is enhanced by deletions in this region, suggesting that in the process of microtubule binding the domains may move in the opposite direction. Thus, microtubule and rhodopsin binding induce different conformational changes in arrestin, suggesting that arrestin assumes three distinct conformations in the cell, likely with different functional properties.
Arrestins serve as multi-functional regulators of G-protein coupled receptors, interacting with hundreds of different receptor subtypes and a variety of other signaling proteins. Here we identify ...calmodulin as a novel arrestin interaction partner using three independent methods
in vitro and in cells. Arrestin preferentially binds calcium-loaded calmodulin with a
K
d value of ∼
7 μM, which is within range of endogenous calmodulin concentrations. The calmodulin binding site is localized on the concave side of the C-domain and a loop in the center of the arrestin molecule, significantly overlapping with receptor and microtubule-binding sites. Using purified proteins, we found that arrestins sequester calmodulin, preventing its binding to microtubules. Nanomolar affinity of arrestins for their cognate receptors makes calmodulin an ineffective competitor for arrestin binding at relatively high receptor concentrations. The arrestin–calmodulin interaction likely regulates the localization of both proteins and their availability for other interaction partners.
Light-induced rhodopsin signaling is turned off with sub-second kinetics by rhodopsin phosphorylation followed by arrestin-1 binding. To test the availability of the arrestin-1 pool in dark-adapted ...outer segment (OS) for rhodopsin shutoff, we measured photoresponse recovery rates of mice with arrestin-1 content in the OS of 2.5%, 5%, 60%, and 100% of wild type (WT) level by two-flash ERG with the first (desensitizing) flash at 160, 400, 1000, and 2500 photons/rod. The time of half recovery (t(half)) in WT retinas increases with the intensity of the initial flash, becoming ∼2.5-fold longer upon activation of 2500 than after 160 rhodopsins/rod. Mice with 60% and even 5% of WT arrestin-1 level recovered at WT rates. In contrast, the mice with 2.5% of WT arrestin-1 had a dramatically slower recovery than the other three lines, with the t(half) increasing ∼28 fold between 160 and 2500 rhodopsins/rod. Even after the dimmest flash, the rate of recovery of rods with 2.5% of normal arrestin-1 was two times slower than in other lines, indicating that arrestin-1 level in the OS between 100% and 5% of WT is sufficient for rapid recovery, whereas with lower arrestin-1 the rate of recovery dramatically decreases with increased light intensity. Thus, the OS has two distinct pools of arrestin-1: cytoplasmic and a separate pool comprising ∼2.5% that is not immediately available for rhodopsin quenching. The observed delay suggests that this pool is localized at the periphery, so that its diffusion across the OS rate-limits the recovery. The line with very low arrestin-1 expression is the first where rhodopsin inactivation was made rate-limiting by arrestin manipulation.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
Arrestins play a key role in the homologous desensitization of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). These cytosolic proteins selectively bind to the agonist-activated and GPCR kinase-phosphorylated ...forms of the GPCR, precluding its further interaction with the G protein. Certain mutations in visual arrestin yield “constitutively active” proteins that bind with high affinity to the light-activated form of rhodopsin without requiring phosphorylation. The crystal structure of visual arrestin shows that these activating mutations perturb two groups of intramolecular interactions that keep arrestin in its basal (inactive) state. Here we introduced homologous mutations into arrestin2 and arrestin3 and found that the resulting mutants bind to the β2-adrenoreceptor in vitro in a phosphorylation-independent fashion. The same mutants effectively desensitize both the β2-adrenergic and δ-opioid receptors in the absence of receptor phosphorylation inXenopus oocytes. Moreover, the arrestin mutants also desensitize the truncated δ-opioid receptor from which the C terminus, containing critical phosphorylation sites, has been removed. Conservation of the phosphate-sensitive hot spots in non-visual arrestins suggests that the overall fold is similar to that of visual arrestin and that the mechanisms whereby receptor-attached phosphates drive arrestin transition into the active binding competent state are conserved throughout the arrestin family of proteins.
Arrestin-1 binds light-activated phosphorhodopsin and ensures timely signal shutoff. We show that high transgenic expression of an arrestin-1 mutant with enhanced rhodopsin binding and impaired ...oligomerization causes apoptotic rod death in mice. Dark rearing does not prevent mutant-induced cell death, ruling out the role of arrestin complexes with light-activated rhodopsin. Similar expression of WT arrestin-1 that robustly oligomerizes, which leads to only modest increase in the monomer concentration, does not affect rod survival. Moreover, WT arrestin-1 co-expressed with the mutant delays retinal degeneration. Thus, arrestin-1 mutant directly affects cell survival via binding partner(s) other than light-activated rhodopsin. Due to impaired self-association of the mutant its high expression dramatically increases the concentration of the monomer. The data suggest that monomeric arrestin-1 is cytotoxic and WT arrestin-1 protects rods by forming mixed oligomers with the mutant and/or competing with it for the binding to non-receptor partners. Thus, arrestin-1 self-association likely serves to keep low concentration of the toxic monomer. The reduction of the concentration of harmful monomer is an earlier unappreciated biological function of protein oligomerization.
Display omitted
•Monomeric arrestin-1 is cytotoxictoxic•Robust self-association of arestin-1 is a cytoprotective mechanism•Monomer toxicity might explain low expression of arrestin-4 in cones•Monomer toxicity might explain self-association of non-visual arrestins
Abstract In rod photoreceptors, signaling persists as long as rhodopsin remains catalytically active. Phosphorylation by rhodopsin kinase followed by arrestin-1 binding completely deactivates ...rhodopsin. Timely termination prevents excessive signaling and ensures rapid recovery. Mouse rods express arrestin-1 and rhodopsin at ∼0.8:1 ratio, making arrestin-1 the second most abundant protein in the rod. The biological significance of wild type arrestin-1 expression level remains unclear. Here we investigated the effects of varying arrestin-1 expression on its intracellular distribution in dark-adapted photoreceptors, rod functional performance, recovery kinetics, and morphology. We found that rod outer segments isolated from dark-adapted animals expressing arrestin-1 at wild type or higher level contain much greater fraction of arrestin-1 than previously estimated, 15–25% of the total. The fraction of arrestin-1 residing in the outer segments (OS) in animals with low expression (4–12% of wild type) is much lower, 5–7% of the total. Only 4% of wild type arrestin-1 level in the outer segments was sufficient to maintain near-normal retinal morphology, whereas rapid recovery required at least ∼12%. Supra-physiological arrestin-1 expression improved light sensitivity and facilitated photoresponse recovery, but was detrimental for photoreceptor health, particularly in the peripheral retina. Thus, physiological level of arrestin-1 expression in rods reflects the balance between short-term functional performance of photoreceptors and their long-term health.
PDF
