Canonical G Protein-coupled Receptors Research Articles

GPR161 structure uncovers the redundant role of sterol-regulated ciliary cAMP signaling in the Hedgehog pathway.

The orphan G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) GPR161 plays a central role in development by suppressing Hedgehog signaling. The fundamental basis of how GPR161 is activated remains unclear. Here, we determined a cryogenic-electron microscopy structure of active human GPR161 bound to heterotrimeric Gs. This structure revealed an extracellular loop 2 that occupies the canonical GPCR orthosteric ligand pocket. Furthermore, a sterol that binds adjacent to transmembrane helices 6 and 7 stabilizes a GPR161 conformation required for Gs coupling. Mutations that prevent sterol binding to GPR161 suppress Gs-mediated signaling. These mutants retain the ability to suppress GLI2 transcription factor accumulation in primary cilia, a key function of ciliary GPR161. By contrast, a protein kinase A-binding site in the GPR161 C terminus is critical in suppressing GLI2 ciliary accumulation. Our work highlights how structural features of GPR161 interface with the Hedgehog pathway and sets a foundation to understand the role of GPR161 function in other signaling pathways.

Class VI G protein-coupled receptors in Aspergillus oryzae regulate sclerotia formation through GTPase-activating activity

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) comprise the largest family of transmembrane receptors in eukaryotes that sense and transduce extracellular signals into cells. In Aspergillus oryzae, 16 canonical GPCR genes are identified and classified into nine classes based on the sequence similarity and proposed functions. Class VI GPCRs (AoGprK-1, AoGprK-2, and AoGprR in A. oryzae), unlike other GPCRs, feature a unique hybrid structure containing both the seven transmembrane (7-TM) and regulator of G-protein signaling (RGS) domains, which is not found in animal GPCRs. We report here that the mutants with double or triple deletion of class VI GPCR genes produced significantly increased number of sclerotia compared to the control strain when grown on agar plates. Interestingly, complementation analysis demonstrated that the expression of the RGS domain without the 7-TM domain is sufficient to restore the phenotype. In line with this, among the three Gα subunits in A. oryzae, AoGpaA, AoGpaB, and AoGanA, forced expression of GTPase-deficient mutants of either AoGpaA or AoGpaB caused an increase in the number of sclerotia formed, suggesting that RGS domains of class VI GPCRs are the negative regulators of these two GTPases. Finally, we measured the expression of velvet complex genes and sclerotia formation-related genes and found that the expression of velB was significantly increased in the multiple gene deletion mutants. Taken together, these results demonstrate that class VI GPCRs negatively regulate sclerotia formation through their GTPase-activating activity in the RGS domains.Key points• Class VI GPCRs in A. oryzae regulate sclerotia formation in A. oryzae• RGS function of class VI GPCRs is responsible for regulation of sclerotia formation• Loss of class VI GPCRs resulted in increased expression of sclerotia-related genes

β-Arrestin-dependent and -independent endosomal G protein activation by the vasopressin type 2 receptor.

The vasopressin type 2 receptor (V2R) is an essential G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) in renal regulation of water homeostasis. Upon stimulation, the V2R activates Gαs and Gαq/11, which is followed by robust recruitment of β-arrestins and receptor internalization into endosomes. Unlike canonical GPCR signaling, the β-arrestin association with the V2R does not terminate Gαs activation, and thus, Gαs-mediated signaling is sustained while the receptor is internalized. Here, we demonstrate that this V2R ability to co-interact with G protein/β-arrestin and promote endosomal G protein signaling is not restricted to Gαs, but also involves Gαq/11. Furthermore, our data imply that β-arrestins potentiate Gαs/Gαq/11 activation at endosomes rather than terminating their signaling. Surprisingly, we found that the V2R internalizes and promote endosomal G protein activation independent of β-arrestins to a minor degree. These new observations challenge the current model of endosomal GPCR signaling and suggest that this event can occur in both β-arrestin-dependent and -independent manners.

β-Arrestin-dependent and -independent endosomal G protein activation by the vasopressin type 2 receptor

The vasopressin type 2 receptor (V2R) is an essential G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) in renal regulation of water homeostasis. Upon stimulation, the V2R activates Gαs and Gαq/11, which is followed by robust recruitment of β-arrestins and receptor internalization into endosomes. Unlike canonical GPCR signaling, the β-arrestin association with the V2R does not terminate Gαs activation, and thus, Gαs-mediated signaling is sustained while the receptor is internalized. Here, we demonstrate that this V2R ability to co-interact with G protein/β-arrestin and promote endosomal G protein signaling is not restricted to Gαs, but also involves Gαq/11. Furthermore, our data imply that β-arrestins potentiate Gαs/Gαq/11 activation at endosomes rather than terminating their signaling. Surprisingly, we found that the V2R internalizes and promote endosomal G protein activation independent of β-arrestins to a minor degree. These new observations challenge the current model of endosomal GPCR signaling and suggest that this event can occur in both β-arrestin-dependent and -independent manners.

CCR7 acts as both a sensor and a sink for CCL19 to coordinate collective leukocyte migration.

Immune responses rely on the rapid and coordinated migration of leukocytes. Whereas it is well established that single-cell migration is often guided by gradients of chemokines and other chemoattractants, it remains poorly understood how these gradients are generated, maintained, and modulated. By combining experimental data with theory on leukocyte chemotaxis guided by the G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) CCR7, we demonstrate that in addition to its role as the sensory receptor that steers migration, CCR7 also acts as a generator and a modulator of chemotactic gradients. Upon exposure to the CCR7 ligand CCL19, dendritic cells (DCs) effectively internalize the receptor and ligand as part of the canonical GPCR desensitization response. We show that CCR7 internalization also acts as an effective sink for the chemoattractant, dynamically shaping the spatiotemporal distribution of the chemokine. This mechanism drives complex collective migration patterns, enabling DCs to create or sharpen chemotactic gradients. We further show that these self-generated gradients can sustain the long-range guidance of DCs, adapt collective migration patterns to the size and geometry of the environment, and provide a guidance cue for other comigrating cells. Such a dual role of CCR7 as a GPCR that both senses and consumes its ligand can thus provide a novel mode of cellular self-organization.

Characterization of the real-time internalization of nine GPCRs reveals distinct dependence on arrestins and G proteins

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are seven transmembrane receptors that respond to external stimuli and undergo conformational changes to activate G proteins and modulate cellular processes leading to biological outcomes. To prevent overstimulation and prolonged exposure to stimuli, GPCRs are regulated by internalization. While the canonical GPCR internalization mechanism in mammalian cells is arrestin-dependent, clathrin-mediated endocytosis, more diverse GPCR internalization mechanisms have been described over the years. However, there is a lack of consistent methods used in the literature making it complicated to determine a receptor's internalization pathway. Here, we utilized a highly efficient time-resolved Förster resonance energy transfer (TR-FRET) internalization assay to determine the internalization profile of nine distinct GPCRs representing the GPCR classes A, B and C and with different G protein coupling profiles. This technique, coupled with clustered regularly interspaced palindromic repeats (CRISPR) engineered knockout cells allows us to effectively study the involvement of heterotrimeric G proteins and non-visual arrestins. We found that all the nine receptors internalized upon agonist stimulation in a concentration-dependent manner and six receptors showed basal internalization. Yet, there is no correlation between the receptor class and primary G protein coupling to the arrestin and G protein dependence for GPCR internalization. Overall, this study presents a platform for studying internalization that is applicable to most GPCRs and may even be extended to other membrane proteins. This method can be easily applicable to other endocytic machinery of interest and ultimately will lend itself towards the construction of comprehensive receptor internalization profiles.

Life, death and resurrection of plant GPCRs.

The activation of G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) by extracellular ligands constitutes the first step of heterotrimeric G-protein signalling in animals. In plants, canonical GPCRs have been known for over 25 years, often in association with agronomically important functions. But their role in plant G-protein signalling and even their annotation as GPCR was contested in the last decade, only to be revisited in the light of more recent evidences. In this first ever review on plant GPCRs, we catalogue all the plant GPCRs described to date and discuss the evidences for and against their role in plants in general and G-protein signalling in particular. We argue against writing off GPCRs and point to the missing links to be investigated to establish firm conclusions either way.

Determining the Requirements for Gαi:β‐arrestin Complex Formation at G Protein‐Coupled Receptors

G protein‐coupled receptors (GPCRs) comprise the largest class of transmembrane receptors and are targeted by nearly a third of prescription drugs. Canonical GPCR signaling involves pathways mediated by G proteins and β‐arrestins (βarrs). While these have historically been thought of as separate, our lab has demonstrated that the inhibitory G protein Gα subunit (Gαi) and βarr form complexes following receptor activation. We have also shown that Gαi:βarr complex formation occurs even if the receptor signals through other classes of G proteins or lacks G protein activity altogether, as in the case of endogenously βarr‐biased Atypical Chemokine Receptor 3 (ACKR3). To expand on this work, we used a split nano‐luciferase assay to examine Gαi:βarr complex formation at βarr‐biased mutants of two ‘balanced’ receptors, which exhibit both G protein and βarr signaling— the type 1 Angiotensin II Receptor (AT1R) and D2 dopamine Receptor (D2R). Consistent with our results with ACKR3, we found that mutation of these other receptors to abrogate G protein‐mediated signaling did not eliminate Gαi:βarr association. Observing this at multiple additional receptors further supported the idea that G protein activity is not required for Gαi:βarr complex formation. To add to our characterization of the determinants of Gαi:βarr association, we then sought to explore how different mechanisms of βarr activation may contribute to complex formation at ACKR3. To accomplish this, we utilized previously described polar core, proximal finger loop, and lipid mutant βarr constructs. The polar core and proximal finger loop mutants achieve constitutive activation by different mechanisms, while the lipid mutant’s ability to be recruited to and bind at the plasma membrane is deficient; these result in decreased Gαi:βarr association at Vasopressin Receptor 2 (V2R). We compared these mutants’ ability to associate with Gαi at ACKR3. Our constitutively active βarr constructs showed differential abilities to form Gαi:βarr complexes compared to wild‐type βarr, suggesting that certain methods of βarr activation may be more relevant in Gαi:βarr complex formation than others. Additional insights into the determinants of Gαi:βarr association in the context of receptor, G protein, and βarr activity will enhance our understanding of the Gαi:βarr complex and its importance in GPCR signaling, potentially informing future development of therapeutic agents targeting GPCRs.

Research Advances in Heterotrimeric G-Protein α Subunits and Uncanonical G-Protein Coupled Receptors in Plants.

As crucial signal transducers, G-proteins and G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) have attracted increasing attention in the field of signal transduction. Research on G-proteins and GPCRs has mainly focused on animals, while research on plants is relatively rare. The mode of action of G-proteins is quite different from that in animals. The G-protein α (Gα) subunit is the most essential member of the G-protein signal cycle in animals and plants. The G-protein is activated when Gα releases GDP and binds to GTP, and the relationships with the GPCR and the downstream signal are also achieved by Gα coupling. It is important to study the role of Gα in the signaling pathway to explore the regulatory mechanism of G-proteins. The existence of a self-activated Gα in plants makes it unnecessary for the canonical GPCR to activate the G-protein by exchanging GDP with GTP. However, putative GPCRs have been found and proven to play important roles in G-protein signal transduction. The unique mode of action of G-proteins and the function of putative GPCRs in plants suggest that the same definition used in animal research cannot be used to study uncanonical GPCRs in plants. This review focuses on the different functions of the Gα and the mode of action between plants and animals as well as the functions of the uncanonical GPCR. This review employs a new perspective to define uncanonical GPCRs in plants and emphasizes the role of uncanonical GPCRs and Gα subunits in plant stress resistance and agricultural production.

The Orphan GPCR Receptor, GPR88, Interacts with Nuclear Protein Partners in the Cerebral Cortex.

GPR88 is an orphan G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) highly expressed in striatal medium spiny neurons (MSN), also found in cortical neurons at low level. In MSN, GPR88 has a canonical GPCR plasma membrane/cytoplasmic expression, whereas in cortical neurons, we previously reported an atypical intranuclear localization. Molecular size analysis suggests that GPR88, expressed in plasma membrane of MSN or in nuclear compartment of cortical neurons, corresponds to the full-length protein. By transfection of cortical neurons, we showed that GPR88 fluorescent chimeras exhibit a nuclear localization. This localization is contingent on the third intracytoplasmic loop and C-terminus domains, even though these domains do not contain any known nuclear localization signals (NLS). Using yeast two-hybrid screening with these domains, we identified the nuclear proteins ATRX, TOP2B, and BAZ2B, all involved in chromatin remodeling, as potential protein partners of GPR88. We also validated the interaction of GPR88 with these nuclear proteins by proximity ligation assay on cortical neurons in culture and coimmunoprecipitation experiments on cortical extracts from GPR88 wild-type (WT) and knockout (KO) mice. The identification of GPR88 subcellular partners may provide novel functional insights for nonclassical modes of GPCR action that could be relevant in the maturating process of neocortical neurons.

Structural basis of the activation of the CC chemokine receptor 5 by a chemokine agonist.

The human CC chemokine receptor 5 (CCR5) is a G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) that plays a major role in inflammation and is involved in cancer, HIV, and COVID-19. Despite its importance as a drug target, the molecular activation mechanism of CCR5, i.e., how chemokine agonists transduce the activation signal through the receptor, is yet unknown. Here, we report the cryo-EM structure of wild-type CCR5 in an active conformation bound to the chemokine super-agonist [6P4]CCL5 and the heterotrimeric Gi protein. The structure provides the rationale for the sequence-activity relation of agonist and antagonist chemokines. The N terminus of agonist chemokines pushes onto specific structural motifs at the bottom of the orthosteric pocket that activate the canonical GPCR microswitch network. This activation mechanism differs substantially from other CC chemokine receptors that bind chemokines with shorter N termini in a shallow binding mode involving unique sequence signatures and a specialized activation mechanism.

GPR4 signaling is essential for the promotion of acid-mediated angiogenic capacity of endothelial progenitor cells by activating STAT3/VEGFA pathway in patients with coronary artery disease

BackgroundPatients with coronary artery disease (CAD) are characterized by a decline in vascular regeneration, which is related to the dysfunction of endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs). G-protein-coupled receptor 4 (GPR4) is a proton-sensing G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) that contributes to neovascularization in acidic microenvironments. However, the role of GPR4 in regulating the angiogenic capacity of EPCs from CAD patients in response to acidity generated in ischemic tissue remains completely unclear.MethodsThe angiogenic capacity of EPCs collected from CAD patients and healthy subjects was evaluated in different pH environments. The GPR4 function of regulating EPC-mediated angiogenesis was analyzed both in vitro and in vivo. The downstream mechanisms were further investigated by genetic overexpression and inhibition.ResultsAcidic environment prestimulation significantly enhanced the angiogenic capacity of EPCs from the non-CAD group both in vivo and in vitro, while the same treatment yielded the opposite result in the CAD group. Among the four canonical proton-sensing GPCRs, GPR4 displays the highest expression in EPCs. The expression of GRP4 was markedly lower in EPCs from CAD patients than in EPCs from non-CAD individuals independent of acid stimulation. The siRNA-mediated knockdown of GPR4 with subsequent decreased phosphorylation of STAT3 mimicked the impaired function of EPCs from CAD patients at pH 6.4 but not at pH 7.4. Elevating GPR4 expression restored the neovessel formation mediated by EPCs from CAD patients in an acidic environment by activating STAT3/VEGFA signaling. Moreover, the beneficial impact of GPR4 upregulation on EPC-mediated angiogenic capacity was abrogated by blockade of the STAT3/VEGFA signaling pathway.ConclusionsOur present study demonstrated for the first time that loss of GPR4 is responsible for the decline in proton sensing and angiogenic capacity of EPCs from CAD patients. Augmentation of GPR4 expression promotes the neovessel formation of EPCs by activating STAT3/VEGF signaling. This finding implicates GPR4 as a potential therapeutic target for CAD characterized by impaired neovascularization in ischemic tissues.

Protein Phosphatase 2A and Clathrin-Mediated Endocytosis Facilitate Robust Melanopsin Light Responses and Resensitization.

PurposeIntrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGCs) that express the visual pigment melanopsin regulate non-image-forming visual tasks, such as circadian photoentrainment and pupil constriction, as well as contrast detection for image formation. Sustained ipRGC function throughout the day is, therefore, of great importance. Melanopsin is a bistable rhabdomeric-type (R-type) visual pigment, which is thought to use light to regenerate its chromophore from all-trans-retinal back to 11-cis-retinal and does not depend on constant chromophore supply to the extent required by visual pigment in rod and cone photoreceptors. Like the majority of photopigments and G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), melanopsin deactivation requires C-terminal phosphorylation and subsequent β-arrestin binding. We hypothesize that melanopsin utilizes canonical GPCR resensitization mechanisms, including dephosphorylation and endocytosis, during the light, and together, they provide a mechanism for prolonged light responses.MethodsHere, we examined expression of protein phosphatases from a variety of subfamilies by RT-PCR and immunohistochemical analyses of the mouse retina. The expression of protein phosphatase 2A (PP2A) in ipRGCs was assessed. We also examine the role of phosphatase and endocytic activity in sustaining melanopsin signaling using transiently-transfected HEK293 cells.ResultsOur analyses suggest that melanopsin-mediated light responses can be rapidly and extensively enhanced by PP2A activity. Light-activated melanopsin undergoes endocytosis in a clathrin-dependent manner. This endocytic activity enhances light responses upon repeated stimulation, implicating a role for endocytic activity in resensitization.ConclusionsThus, we propose that melanopsin phototransduction is maintained by utilizing canonical GPCR resensitization mechanisms rather than reliance on chromophore replenishment from supporting cells.

β-Arrestin2 is a critical component of the GPCR–eNOS signalosome

Endothelial cell nitric oxide (NO) synthase (eNOS), the enzyme responsible for synthesis of NO in endothelial cells, is regulated by complex posttranslational mechanisms. Sinusoidal portal hypertension, a disorder characterized by liver sinusoidal endothelial cell (SEC) injury with resultant reduced eNOS activity and NO production within the liver, has been associated with defects in eNOS protein-protein interactions and posttranslational modifications. We and others have previously identified novel eNOS interactors, including G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) kinase interactor 1 (GIT1), which we found to play an unexpected stimulatory role in GPCR-mediated eNOS signaling. Here we report that β-arrestin 2 (β-Arr2), a canonical GPCR signaling partner, localizes in SECs with eNOS in a GIT1/eNOS/NO signaling module. Most importantly, we show that β-Arr2 stimulates eNOS activity, and that β-Arr2 expression is reduced and formation of the GIT1/eNOS/NO signaling module is interrupted during liver injury. In β-Arr2-deficient mice, bile duct ligation injury (BDL) led to significantly reduced eNOS activity and to a dramatic increase in portal hypertension compared to BDL in wild-type mice. Overexpression of β-Arr2 in injured or β-Arr2-deficient SECs rescued eNOS function by increasing eNOS complex formation and NO production. We also found that β-Arr2-mediated GIT1/eNOS complex formation is dependent on Erk1/2 and Src, two kinases known to interact with and be activated by β-Arr2 in response to GCPR activation. Our data emphasize that β-Arr2 is an integral component of the GIT1/eNOS/NO signaling pathway and have implications for the pathogenesis of sinusoidal portal hypertension.

New Insights from IGF-IR Stimulating Activity Analyses: Pathological Considerations.

Insulin-like growth factor-I (IGF-I) and insulin-like growth factor-II (IGF-II) play a crucial factor in the growth, differentiation and survival of cells in health and disease. IGF-I and IGF-II primarily activate the IGF-I receptor (IGF-IR), which is present on the cell surface. Activation of the IGF-IR stimulates multiple pathways which finally results in multiple biological effects in a variety of tissues and cells. In addition, activation of the IGF-IR has been found to be essential for the growth of cancers. The conventional view in the past was that the IGF-IR was exclusively a tyrosine kinase receptor and that phosphorylation of tyrosine residues, after binding of IGF-I to the IGF-IR, started a cascade of post-receptor events. Recent research has shown that this view was too simplistic. It has been found that the IGF-IR also has kinase-independent functions and may even emit signals in the unoccupied state through some yet-to-be-defined non-canonical pathways. The IGF-IR may further form hybrids with the insulin receptors but also with receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) outside the insulin-IGF system. In addition, the IGF-IR has extensive cross-talk with many other receptor tyrosine kinases and their downstream effectors. Moreover, there is now emerging evidence that the IGF-IR utilizes parts of the G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR) pathways: the IGF-IR can be considered as a functional RTK/GPCR hybrid, which integrates the kinase signaling with some IGF-IR mediated canonical GPCR characteristics. Like the classical GPCRs the IGF-IR can also show homologous and heterologous desensitization. Recently, it has been found that after activation by a ligand, the IGF-IR may be translocated into the nucleus and function as a transcriptional cofactor. Thus, in recent years, it has become clear that the IGF-IR signaling pathways are much more complex than first thought. Therefore a big challenge for the (near) future will be how all the new knowledge about IGF-IR signaling can be translated into the clinical practice and improve diagnosis and treatment of diseases.

Biased agonists of the chemokine receptor CXCR3 differentially drive formation of Gαi and β‐arrestin complexes

G‐protein‐coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the most common cell surface receptor class and influence nearly every biological process within a cell. Approximately 30% of all FDA‐approved medications target GPCRs. Following receptor activation, G proteins and β‐arrestins are currently appreciated to be the two primary proximal intracellular signaling pathways that regulate GPCR signaling. It has been thought that G protein and β‐arrestin signaling pathways are largely discernable, evidenced in part by ‘biased agonists’ that can preferentially activate one of these pathways relative to the other. However, increased crosstalk between G protein and β‐arrestin pathways is beginning to be appreciated. We recently described the ability of Gα proteins to directly interact with β‐arrestins to form signaling scaffolds, with Gαi/o found to directly interact with β‐arrestin following GPCR activation regardless of canonical GPCR G protein coupling. We previously demonstrated in other work that all GPCRs tested, including the vasopressin type 2 receptor, β2‐adrenergic receptor, neurotensin receptor type 1, and the dopamine D1 and D2 receptors, formed a Gαi:β‐arrestin complex. Now that we appreciate this novel GPCR signaling paradigm, it is unclear if biased agonists that preferentially stimulate either G protein‐ or β‐arrestin‐dependent signaling differentially regulate Gαi:β‐arrestin interactions, if at all. To address this question, we utilized the chemokine receptor CXCR3 that binds three endogenous chemokines with high affinity. We demonstrate that these endogenous biased CXCR3 chemokines, CXCL9, CXCL10, and CXCL11, along with its synthetic biased agonists, VUF10661 and VUF11418, differentially form Gαi:β‐arrestin complexes. The ability of CXCR3 agonists to form Gαi:β‐arrestin complexes does not correlate highly with more well‐established GPCR signaling pathways including G protein recruitment, G protein signaling (e.g., regulation of cAMP), or β‐arrestin recruitment, suggesting that Gαi:β‐arrestin complex formation is distinct from conventional G protein or β‐arrestin signaling events. Additionally, differential Gαi:β‐arrestin complex formation was found to correlate with similar degrees of Gαi:β‐arrestin:CXCR3 “megaplex” formation, suggesting that formation of a long‐lived complex may depend upon close coupling of the two effectors at the receptor initially. This work provides further support for a separable Gαi:β‐arrestin signaling pathway and enhances our understanding of GPCR signaling and biased agonism.Support or Funding InformationNIH

Kinetics of CXCL12 binding to atypical chemokine receptor 3 reveal a role for the receptor N terminus in chemokine binding.

Chemokines bind to membrane-spanning chemokine receptors, which signal through G proteins and promote cell migration. However, atypical chemokine receptor 3 (ACKR3) does not appear to couple to G proteins, and instead of directly promoting cell migration, it regulates the extracellular concentration of chemokines that it shares with the G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) CXCR3 and CXCR4, thereby influencing the responses of these receptors. Understanding how these receptors bind their ligands is important for understanding these different processes. Here, we applied association and dissociation kinetic measurements coupled to β-arrestin recruitment assays to investigate ACKR3:chemokine interactions. Our results showed that CXCL12 binding is unusually slow and driven by the interplay between multiple binding epitopes. We also found that the amino terminus of the receptor played a key role in chemokine binding and activation by preventing chemokine dissociation. It was thought that chemokines initially bind receptors through interactions between the globular domain of the chemokine and the receptor amino terminus, which then guides the chemokine amino terminus into the transmembrane pocket of the receptor to initiate signaling. On the basis of our kinetic data, we propose an alternative mechanism in which the amino terminus of the chemokine initially forms interactions with the extracellular loops and transmembrane pocket of the receptor, which is followed by the receptor amino terminus wrapping around the core of the chemokine to prolong its residence time. These data provide insight into how ACKR3 competes and cooperates with canonical GPCRs in its function as a scavenger receptor.

Heterotrimeric G protein signaling in plant immunity.

In animals, heterotrimeric guanine nucleotide-binding proteins (G proteins) transduce signals perceived by numerous G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). However, no canonical GPCRs with guanine nucleotide exchange factor (GEF) activity are present in plant genomes. Accumulated evidence indicates that, instead of GPCRs, the receptor-like kinases (RLKs) function upstream of G proteins in plants. Regulator of G protein signaling 1 (RGS1) functions to convert the GTP-bound Gα to the GDP-bound form through its GTPase-accelerating protein (GAP) activity. Because of the intrinsic differences in the biochemical properties between Arabidopsis and animal Gα, the actions of animal and Arabidopsis RGS1 result in contrasting outcomes in G signaling activation/deactivation. Animal RGSs accelerate the deactivation of the activated G signaling, whereas Arabidopsis RGS1 prevents the activation of G signaling in the resting state. Phosphorylation of Arabidopsis RGS1 triggered by ligand-RLK recognition results in the endocytosis or degradation of RGS1, leading to the separation of RGS1 from Gα and thus the derepression of G signaling. Here, we summarize the involvement of the G proteins in plant immunity, with a special focus on the molecular mechanism of G signaling activation/deactivation regulated by RLKs and RGS1. We also provide a brief perspective on the outstanding questions that need to be addressed to fully understand G signaling in plant immunity.

5-HT2C Receptor Structures Reveal the Structural Basis of GPCR Polypharmacology

Drugs frequently require interactions with multiple targets-via a process known as polypharmacology-to achieve their therapeutic actions. Currently, drugs targeting several serotonin receptors, including the 5-HT2C receptor, are useful for treating obesity, drug abuse, and schizophrenia. The competing challenges of developing selective 5-HT2C receptor ligands or creating drugs with a defined polypharmacological profile, especially aimed at G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), remain extremely difficult. Here, we solved two structures of the 5-HT2C receptor in complex with the highly promiscuous agonist ergotamine and the 5-HT2A-C receptor-selective inverse agonist ritanserin at resolutions of 3.0Å and 2.7Å, respectively. We analyzed their respective binding poses to provide mechanistic insights into their receptor recognition and opposing pharmacological actions. This study investigates the structural basis of polypharmacology at canonical GPCRs andillustrates how understanding characteristic patterns of ligand-receptor interaction and activationmay ultimately facilitate drug design at multiple GPCRs.

GPR182 is a novel marker for sinusoidal endothelial differentiation with distinct GPCR signaling activity in vitro

Endothelial cells (EC) along the vascular tree exhibit organ-specific angiodiversity. Compared to most other ECs, liver sinusoidal endothelial cells (LSEC) that constitute the organ-specific microvasculature of the liver are morphologically and functionally unique. Previously, we showed that transcription factor Gata4 acts as a master regulator controlling LSEC differentiation. Upon analysis of the molecular signature of LSEC, we identified GPR182 as a potential LSEC-specific orphan G-protein coupled receptor (GPCR). Here, we demonstrate that GPR182 is expressed by LSEC and by EC with sinusoidal differentiation in spleen, lymph node and bone marrow in healthy human tissues. In a tissue microarray analysis of human hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) samples, endothelial GPR182 expression was significantly reduced in tumor samples compared to peritumoral liver tissue samples (p = 0.0105). Loss of endothelial GPR182 expression was also seen in fibrotic and cirrhotic liver tissues. In vitro, GPR182 differentially regulated canonical GPCR signaling pathways as shown using reporter luciferase assays in HEK293T cells. Whereas ERK and RhoA signaling were inhibited, CREB and Calcium signaling were activated by ectopic GPR182 overexpression. Our data demonstrate that GPR182 is an endothelial subtype-specific marker for human sinusoidal EC of the liver, spleen, lymph node and bone marrow. In addition, we provide evidence for GPR182-dependent downstream signaling via ERK and SRF pathways that may be involved in regulating endothelial subtype-specific sinusoidal differentiation and sinusoidal functions such as permeability.