The luteinizing hormone receptor: influence of buffer composition on ligand binding and signaling of wild type and mutant receptors

Abstract

There is evidence that ligand binding to and ligand-mediated signaling by the luteinizing hormone receptor (LHR) are influenced by buffer conditions, including ionic type and strength, an issue that becomes important in comparing functional parameters obtained on receptor mutants under different conditions. In order to study this phenomenon, we performed binding (kinetic and saturation) and signaling studies of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) with wild type (wt) LHR and several mutants expressed in COS-7 cells using two common buffer systems. One buffer was of low ionic strength and contained a low concentration of Na +, while the other had a near-physiological concentration of Na +. Emphasis was placed on mutations of two amino acid residues in the hinge region of the ectodomain (E332 and D333). It was found that the buffer of higher ionic strength, primarily from Na +, led to an increase of about 4-fold in the K d of hCG binding to wt and mutant LHRs. The reduced binding affinities were attributable to a comparable reduction in the rate constants of association, with no significant differences in the calculated rate constants of dissociation in the two buffers. Analysis of the signaling properties of these mutants showed that, when corrected for the amount of hCG bound under the conditions of the signaling assay, the maximal ligand-mediated cAMP produced in cells maintained in the buffer of low ionic strength was comparable for wt LHR and the mutants, only the D333A mutant being somewhat elevated. In the buffer of higher ionic strength, however, the response by wt LHR was significantly greater than that of the mutants. These results show that E332 and D333 are important in hormone-mediated signaling, but only in the buffer of higher Na + concentration. In addition to mutants of these two residues, the buffer of higher ionic strength also led to reduced binding to a number of mutants throughout the receptor. Since these mutants included additional replacements in the ectodomain and transmembrane helices 6 and 7, the general nature of the buffer effect on wt and mutant LHRs suggests that electrostatic effects are contributing to ligand binding and/or that the LHR ectodomain may exist in two conformations, one being more accessible to ligand at reduced ionic strength.