Search

Background β-thalassemia is an inherited hemoglobinopathy resulting in quantitative changes in the β-globin chain. Understanding the molecular basis of that disorder requires studying the expression of genes controlling the pathways that affect the erythropoietic homeostasis especially the MAPK pathway. The MAPKs are a family of serine/threonine kinases that play an essential role in connecting cell-surface receptors to DNA in the nucleus of the cell. Aim to study the effect of expression of GNAI2, DUSP5 and ARRB1 genes on MAPK signaling pathway in pediatric patients with beta thalassemia. Methods Forty children with beta thalassemia major (TM), forty children with beta thalassemia intermedia (TI) and forty age and gender matched healthy controls were enrolled in this study. Detection of GNAI2, DUSP5 and ARRB1 mRNA expression was done by real time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). Results revealed increased expression of ARRB1 (Arrestin Beta 1) gene, and decreased expression of both GNAI2 (Guanine nucleotide-binding protein G (i) subunit alpha-2) and DUSP5 (Dual specificity protein phosphatase 5) genes in both patient groups than control groups respectively. Conclusions Change in the rate of expression of ARRB1, GNAI2 and DUSP5 may have a role in the pathogenesis of abnormal hematopoiesis in cases of β thalassemia through affecting the MAPK pathway., Highlights ∗ Β-thalassemia is an inherited hemoglobinopathy resulting in quantitative changes in the β-globin chain. ∗ Understanding the molecular basis of that disorder requires studying the expression of genes controlling the pathways that affect the erythropoietic homeostasis especially the MAPK pathway. ∗ The MAPKs are a family of serine/threonine kinases that play an essential role in connecting cell-surface receptors to DNA in the nucleus of the cell. ∗ Change in the rate of expression of ARRB1, GNAI2 and DUSP5 may have a role in the pathogenesis of abnormal hematopoiesis in cases of β thalassemia through affecting the MAPK pathway.

Non-visual arrestins interact with hundreds of different G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Here we show that by introducing mutations into elements that directly bind receptors, the specificity of arrestin-3 can be altered. Several mutations in the two parts of the central “crest” of the arrestin molecule, middle-loop and C-loop, enhanced or reduced arrestin-3 interactions with several GPCRs in receptor subtype and functional state-specific manner. For example, the Lys139Ile substitution in the middle-loop dramatically enhanced the binding to inactive M2 muscarinic receptor, so that agonist activation of the M2 did not further increase arrestin-3 binding. Thus, the Lys139Ile mutation made arrestin-3 essentially an activation-independent binding partner of M2, whereas its interactions with other receptors, including the β2-adrenergic receptor and the D1 and D2 dopamine receptors, retained normal activation dependence. In contrast, the Ala248Val mutation enhanced agonist-induced arrestin-3 binding to the β2-adrenergic and D2 dopamine receptors, while reducing its interaction with the D1 dopamine receptor. These mutations represent the first example of altering arrestin specificity via enhancement of the arrestin-receptor interactions rather than selective reduction of the binding to certain subtypes.

The visual/β-arrestins, a small family of proteins originally described for their role in the desensitization and intracellular trafficking of G protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs), have emerged as key regulators of multiple signaling pathways. Evolutionarily related to a larger group of regulatory scaffolds that share a common arrestin fold, the visual/β-arrestins acquired the capacity to detect and bind activated GPCRs on the plasma membrane, which enables them to control GPCR desensitization, internalization, and intracellular trafficking. By acting as scaffolds that bind key pathway intermediates, visual/β-arrestins both influence the tonic level of pathway activity in cells and, in some cases, serve as ligand-regulated scaffolds for GPCR-mediated signaling. Growing evidence supports the physiologic and pathophysiologic roles of arrestins and underscores their potential as therapeutic targets. Circumventing arrestin-dependent GPCR desensitization may alleviate the problem of tachyphylaxis to drugs that target GPCRs, and find application in the management of chronic pain, asthma, and psychiatric illness. As signaling scaffolds, arrestins are also central regulators of pathways controlling cell growth, migration, and survival, suggesting that manipulating their scaffolding functions may be beneficial in inflammatory diseases, fibrosis, and cancer. In this review we examine the structure–function relationships that enable arrestins to perform their diverse roles, addressing arrestin structure at the molecular level, the relationship between arrestin conformation and function, and sites of interaction between arrestins, GPCRs, and nonreceptor-binding partners. We conclude with a discussion of arrestins as therapeutic targets and the settings in which manipulating arrestin function might be of clinical benefit.

Desensitization and acute tolerance are terms used to describe the attenuation of receptor responsiveness by prolonged or intermittent exposure to an agonist. Unlike desensitization of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), which is commonly explained by steric hindrance caused by the β-arrestins that are translocated to the activated receptors, molecular mechanisms involved in the acute tolerance of GPCRs remain unclear. Our studies with several GPCRs and related mutants showed that the acute tolerance of GPCRs could occur independently of agonist-induced β-arrestin translocation. A series of co-immunoprecipitation experiments revealed a correlation between receptor tolerance and interactions among receptors, β-arrestin2, and Gβγ. Gβγ displayed a stable interaction with receptors and β-arrestin2 in cells expressing GPCRs that were prone to undergo tolerance compared to the GPCRs that were resistant to acute tolerance. Strengthening the interaction between Gβγ and β-arrestin rendered the GPCRs to acquire the tendency of acute tolerance. Overall, stable interaction between the receptor and Gβγ complex is required for the formation of a complex with β-arrestin, and determines the potential of a particular GPCR to undergo acute tolerance. Rather than turning off the signal, β-arrestins seem to contribute on continuous signaling when they are in the context of complex with receptor and Gβγ.

Seven transmembrane G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are often phosphorylated at the C terminus and on intracellular loops in response to various extracellular stimuli. Phosphorylation of GPCRs by GPCR kinases and certain other kinases can promote the recruitment of arrestin molecules. The arrestins critically regulate GPCR functions not only by mediating receptor desensitization and internalization, but also by redirecting signaling to G protein-independent pathways via interactions with numerous downstream effector molecules. Accumulating evidence over the past decade has given rise to the phospho-barcode hypothesis, which states that ligand-specific phosphorylation patterns of a receptor direct its distinct functional outcomes. Our recent work using unnatural amino acid incorporation and fluorine-19 nuclear magnetic resonance (19F-NMR) spectroscopy led to the flute model, which provides preliminary insight into the receptor phospho-coding mechanism, by which receptor phosphorylation patterns are recognized by an array of phosphate-binding pockets on arrestin and are translated into distinct conformations. These selective conformations are recognized by various effector molecules downstream of arrestin. The phospho-barcoding mechanism enables arrestin to recognize a wide range of phosphorylation patterns of GPCRs, contributing to their diverse functions.

Atypical chemokine receptors do not mediate chemotaxis or G protein signaling, but they recruit arrestin. They also efficiently scavenge their chemokine ligands, thereby contributing to gradient maintenance and termination. ACKR3, also known as CXCR7, binds and degrades the constitutive chemokine CXCL12, which also binds the canonical receptor CXCR4, and CXCL11, which also binds CXCR3. Here we report comprehensive mutational analysis of the ACKR3 interaction with its chemokine ligands, using 30 substitution mutants. Readouts are radioligand binding competition, arrestin recruitment, and chemokine scavenging. Our results suggest different binding modes for both chemokines. CXCL11 depends on the ACKR3 N terminus and some extracellular loop (ECL) positions for primary binding, ECL residues mediate secondary binding and arrestin recruitment potency. CXCL12 binding required key residues Asp-1794.60 and Asp-2756.58 (residue numbering follows the Ballesteros-Weinstein scheme), with no evident involvement of N-terminal residues, suggesting an uncommon mode of receptor engagement. Mutation of residues corresponding to CRS2 in CXCR4 (positions Ser-1032.63 and Gln-3017.39) increased CXCL11 binding, but reduced CXCL12 affinity. Mutant Q301E7.39 did not recruit arrestin. Mutant K118A3.26 in ECL1 showed moderate baseline arrestin recruitment with ablation of ligand-induced responses. Substitutions that affected CXCL11 binding also diminished scavenging. However, detection of reduced CXCL12 scavenging by mutants with impaired CXCL12 affinity required drastically reduced receptor expression levels, suggesting that scavenging pathways can be saturated and that CXCL12 binding exceeds scavenging at higher receptor expression levels. Arrestin recruitment did not correlate with scavenging; although Q301E7.39 degraded chemokines in the absence of arrestin, S103D2.63 had reduced CXCL11 scavenging despite intact arrestin responses.

Arrestins are cytosolic proteins that regulate G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) desensitization, internalization, trafficking and signalling. Arrestin recruitment uncouples GPCRs from heterotrimeric G proteins, and targets the proteins for internalization via clathrin-coated pits. Arrestins also function as ligand-regulated scaffolds that recruit multiple non-G-protein effectors into GPCR-based 'signalsomes'. Although the dominant function(s) of arrestins vary between receptors, the mechanism whereby different GPCRs specify these divergent functions is unclear. Using a panel of intramolecular fluorescein arsenical hairpin (FlAsH) bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) reporters to monitor conformational changes in β-arrestin2, here we show that GPCRs impose distinctive arrestin 'conformational signatures' that reflect the stability of the receptor-arrestin complex and role of β-arrestin2 in activating or dampening downstream signalling events. The predictive value of these signatures extends to structurally distinct ligands activating the same GPCR, such that the innate properties of the ligand are reflected as changes in β-arrestin2 conformation. Our findings demonstrate that information about ligand-receptor conformation is encoded within the population average β-arrestin2 conformation, and provide insight into how different GPCRs can use a common effector for different purposes. This approach may have application in the characterization and development of functionally selective GPCR ligands and in identifying factors that dictate arrestin conformation and function.

Acute hormone secretion triggered by G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) activation underlies many fundamental physiological processes. GPCR signalling is negatively regulated by β-arrestins, adaptor molecules that also activate different intracellular signalling pathways. Here we reveal that TRV120027, a β-arrestin-1-biased agonist of the angiotensin II receptor type 1 (AT1R), stimulates acute catecholamine secretion through coupling with the transient receptor potential cation channel subfamily C 3 (TRPC3). We show that TRV120027 promotes the recruitment of TRPC3 or phosphoinositide-specific phospholipase C (PLCγ) to the AT1R-β-arrestin-1 signalling complex. Replacing the C-terminal region of β-arrestin-1 with its counterpart on β-arrestin-2 or using a specific TAT-P1 peptide to block the interaction between β-arrestin-1 and PLCγ abolishes TRV120027-induced TRPC3 activation. Taken together, our results show that the GPCR-arrestin complex initiates non-desensitized signalling at the plasma membrane by coupling with ion channels. This fast communication pathway might be a common mechanism of several cellular processes.

In addition to their canonical function as negative regulators of G protein coupled receptors (GPCRs), arrestins, a small family of cyclic protein, serve as multi-functional adaptors by tethering several signaling components together. To elicit the appropriate cellular response, arrestins have to ensure that the right components are linked together to prevent the formation of mismatched protein complexes. In addition to more than 700 GPCRs, two non-visual arrestins can interact with dozens other protein partners. Thus, the recruitments of the signal effector proteins to arrestin should be precisely regulated. We hypothesize that binding induced conformational changes play decisive roles in regulating the recruitments of binding partners to arrestins. It is now clear that arrestin goes significant conformational movements in many regulating process. To exploit the arrestin-mediated signaling as adaptors, the structural basis of protein-protein interactions between arrestin and non-receptor binding partners is essential. The broad objective of this proposal is to explore the binding-induced conformational changes of arrestins by signaling effector proteins. The primary goal of this current proposal is developing a 19F-NMR method to detect the local movements of arrestin protein.

Invertebrate visual opsins are G protein-coupled receptors coupled to retinoid chromophores that isomerize reversibly between inactive rhodopsin and active metarhodopsin upon absorption of photons of light. The squid visual system has an arrestin protein that binds to metarhodopsin to block signaling to Gq and activation of phospholipase C. Squid rhodopsin kinase (SQRK) can phosphorylate both metarhodopsin and arrestin, a dual role that is unique among the G protein-coupled receptor kinases. The sites and role of arrestin phosphorylation by SQRK were investigated here using recombinant proteins. Arrestin was phosphorylated on serine 392 and serine 397 in the C-terminus. Unphosphorylated arrestin bound to metarhodopsin and phosphorylated metarhodopsin with similar high affinities (Kd 33 and 21 nM respectively), while phosphorylation of arrestin reduced the affinity 3- to 5-fold (Kd 104 nM). Phosphorylation of metarhodopsin slightly increased the dissociation of arrestin observed during a 1 hour incubation. Together these studies suggest a unique role for SQRK in phosphorylating both receptor and arrestin and inhibiting the binding of these two proteins in the squid visual system. Invertebrate visual systems are inactivated by arrestin binding to metarhodopsin that does not require receptor phosphorylation. Here we show that squid rhodopsin kinase phosphorylates arrestin on two serines (S392,S397) in the C-terminus and phosphorylation decreases the affinity of arrestin for squid metarhodopsin. Metarhodopsin phosphorylation has very little effect on arrestin binding but does increase arrestin dissociation.

Arrestins have been shown to regulate numerous G protein–coupled receptors (GPCRs) in studies employing receptor/arrestin overexpression in artificial cell systems. Which arrestin isoforms regulate which GPCRs in primary cell types is poorly understood. We sought to determine the effect of β-arrestin-1 or β-arrestin-2 inhibition or gene ablation on signaling and function of multiple GPCRs endogenously expressed in airway smooth muscle (ASM). In vitro [second messenger (calcium, cAMP generation)], ex vivo (ASM tension generation in suspended airway), and in vivo (invasive airway resistance) analyses were performed on human ASM cells and murine airways/whole animal subject to β-arrestin-1 or -2 knockdown or knockout (KO). In both human and murine model systems, knockdown or KO of β-arrestin-2 relative to control missense small interfering RNA or wild-type mice selectively increased (40–60%) β2-adrenoceptor signaling and function. β-arrestin-1 knockdown or KO had no effect on signaling and function of β2-adrenoceptor or numerous procontractile GPCRs, but selectively inhibited M3 muscarinic acetylcholine receptor signaling (∼50%) and function (∼25% ex vivo, >50% in vivo) without affecting EC50 values. Arrestin subtypes differentially regulate ASM GPCRs and β-arrestin-1 inhibition represents a novel approach to managing bronchospasm in obstructive lung diseases.—Pera, T., Hegde, A., Deshpande, D. A., Morgan, S. J., Tiegs, B. C., Theriot, B. S., Choi, Y. H., Walker, J. K. L., Penn, R. B. Specificity of arrestin subtypes in regulating airway smooth muscle G protein–coupled receptor signaling and function.

Summary G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) mediate diverse signaling in part through interaction with arrestins, whose binding promotes receptor internalization and signaling through G protein-independent pathways. High-affinity arrestin binding requires receptor phosphorylation, often at the receptor's C-terminal tail. Here, we report an X-ray free electron laser (XFEL) crystal structure of the rhodopsin-arrestin complex, in which the phosphorylated C terminus of rhodopsin forms an extended intermolecular β sheet with the N-terminal β strands of arrestin. Phosphorylation was detected at rhodopsin C-terminal tail residues T336 and S338. These two phospho-residues, together with E341, form an extensive network of electrostatic interactions with three positively charged pockets in arrestin in a mode that resembles binding of the phosphorylated vasopressin-2 receptor tail to β-arrestin-1. Based on these observations, we derived and validated a set of phosphorylation codes that serve as a common mechanism for phosphorylation-dependent recruitment of arrestins by GPCRs.

Binding of agonists to G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) activates heterotrimeric G proteins and downstream signaling. Agonist-bound GPCRs are then phosphorylated by protein kinases and bound by arrestin to trigger desensitization and endocytosis. Arrestin plays another important signaling function. It recruits and regulates activity of an extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) cascade. However, molecular details and timing of ERK activation remain fundamental unanswered questions that limit understanding of how arrestin-dependent GPCR signaling controls cell functions. Here we validate and model a system that tracks the dynamics of interactions of arrestin with receptors and of ERK activation using optical reporters. Our intermolecular FRET measurements in living cells are consistent with β-arrestin binding to M1 muscarinic acetylcholine receptors (M1Rs) in two different binding modes, transient and stable. The stable mode persists for minutes after agonist removal. The choice of mode is governed by phosphorylation on key residues in the third intracellular loop of the receptor. We detect a similar intramolecular conformational change in arrestin in either binding mode. It develops within seconds of arrestin binding to the M1 receptor, and it reverses within seconds of arrestin unbinding from the transient binding mode. Furthermore, we observed that, when stably bound to phosphorylated M1R, β-arrestin scaffolds and activates MEK-dependent ERK. In contrast, when transiently bound, β-arrestin reduces ERK activity via recruitment of a protein phosphatase. All this ERK signaling develops at the plasma membrane. In this scaffolding hypothesis, a shifting balance between the two arrestin binding modes determines the degree of ERK activation at the membrane.

The amyloid precursor protein (APP) has long been appreciated for its role in Alzheimer's disease (AD) pathology. However, less is known about the physiologic function of APP outside of AD. Particularly, whether and how APP may regulate functions of cell surface receptors, including GPCRs, remains largely unclear. In this study, we identified a novel direct interaction between APP and the α2A-adrenergic receptor (α2AAR) that occurs at the intracellular domains of both proteins. The APP interaction with α2AAR is promoted by agonist stimulation and competes with arrestin 3 binding to the receptor. Consequently, the presence of APP attenuates α2AAR internalization and desensitization, which are arrestin-dependent processes. Furthermore, in neuroblastoma neuro-2A cells and primary superior cervical ganglion neurons, where APP is highly expressed, the lack of APP leads to a dramatic increase in plasma membrane recruitment of endogenous arrestin 3 following α2AAR activation. Concomitantly, agonist-induced internalization of α2AAR is significantly enhanced in these neuronal cells. Our study provided the first evidence that APP fine tunes GPCR signaling and trafficking. Given the important role of α2AAR in controlling norepinephrine release and response, this novel regulation of α2AAR by APP may have an impact on modulation of noradrenergic activity and sympathetic tone.-Zhang, F., Gannon, M., Chen, Y., Zhou, L., Jiao, K., Wang, Q. The amyloid precursor protein modulates α2A-adrenergic receptor endocytosis and signaling through disrupting arrestin 3 recruitment.

The molecular mechanism of arrestin–G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR ) complex formation has been analyzed using inter alia spectroscopic, mutagenesis and structure determination methods. The latest crystal structure elucidating one conformation of the rhodopsin -bound arrestin-1 complex confirmed our structural model of an overall complex conformation and experimentally based assumptions about single residues located at the direct binding interface. Comprehensive analyses of single amino acid contributions in arrestin-1 and other methodologies expand our knowledge of structure–function relationships for receptor recognition and arrestin–GPCR complex formation. With a lot of progress made in the last few years, we review most recent literature covering the roles of essential arrestin-1 residues for pre-activation, receptor recognition and receptor binding. Mechanistic understanding of these processes at the atomic level is key for the identification of receptor conformations triggering given signaling pathways and the creation of novel tools for biased ligand drug discovery.

The visual/β-arrestins perform remarkably diverse roles in cells. Possessing the capacity to detect and bind hundreds of different activated GPCRs , they are integral to the control of GPCR desensitization, internalization and intracellular trafficking. At the same time, they are able to bind and localize dozens of cargo proteins, including signaling pathway intermediates that affect the tonic level of pathway activity and in some cases confer GPCR-dependent regulation. A fundamental question in biology is how proteins like arrestins can achieve the conformational flexibility necessary to interact with so many different partners while maintaining the specificity necessary for fidelity in signal transduction . Recent data, both from static structures of arrestins in their basal and ‘activated’ conformations, and dynamic resonance energy transfer measurements, have begun to provide answers. Crystallographic and mutagenesis data indicate that the conformational shifts occurring upon receptor engagement are determined by contact between the arrestin globular domains and a relatively few residues within the GPCR intracellular loops. These contacts, in turn, impose receptor-specific arrestin conformations that influence the avidity with which it binds the receptor and its ability to engage certain downstream partners. Differences in ligand structure are likewise encoded in receptor conformation and transmitted to the arrestin, providing the physical basis for ligand ‘bias’. Resonance energy transfer data also indicate that arrestins maintain their ‘active’ conformation for a period of time after letting go of the receptor, raising the possibility that arrestins, like heterotrimeric G proteins, might be activated catalytically.

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCR) classically initiate G protein-dependent signaling in response to extracellular stimulation, which is followed by arrestin-mediated desensitization and receptor internalization. However, non-visual arrestins (arrestin-2 and arrestin-3) are also demonstrated to mediate G protein-independent signaling by serving as adaptors and scaffolds through the assembly of multiprotein complexes. By recruiting various protein partners including trafficking proteins and signaling molecules directly to the GPCR, non-visual arrestins can connect activated receptors to diverse signaling pathways. Particularly, both non-visual arrestins have been demonstrated to scaffold three components of mitogen activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling modules in order to ensure the fidelity of signaling by regulating their spatial arrangement. As a large family of serine/theronine kinases that includes ERK1/2, JNK and p38 kinases, the MAPKs control many important cellular functions, including cell cycle progression, transcriptional regulation and apoptosis. Therefore, it is of great importance to explore how non-visual arrestins mediate the interaction with different GPCRs, as well as assemble different MAPKs into a signaling complex to regulate different pathways.

descripción no proporcionada por scopus

G protein-coupled receptor phosphorylation plays a major role in receptor desensitization and arrestin binding. It is, however, unclear how distinct receptor phosphorylation patterns may influence arrestin binding and subsequent trafficking. Here we engineer phosphorylation sites into the C-terminal tail of the β2-adrenoceptor (β2AR) and demonstrate that this mutant, termed β2AR(SSS), showed increased isoprenaline-stimulated phosphorylation and differences in arrestin-3 affinity and trafficking. By measuring arrestin-3 recruitment and the stability of arrestin-3 receptor complexes in real time using fluorescence resonance energy transfer and fluorescence recovery after photobleaching, we demonstrate that arrestin-3 dissociated quickly and almost completely from the β2AR, whereas the interaction with β2AR(SSS) was 2- to 4-fold prolonged. In contrast, arrestin-3 interaction with a β2-adrenoceptor fused to the carboxyl-terminal tail of the vasopressin type 2 receptor was nearly irreversible. Further analysis of arrestin-3 localization revealed that by engineering phosphorylation sites into the β2-adrenoceptor the receptor showed prolonged interaction with arrestin-3 and colocalization with arrestin in endosomes after internalization. This is in contrast to the wild-type receptor that interacts transiently with arrestin-3 at the plasma membrane. Furthermore, β2AR(SSS) internalized more efficiently than the wild-type receptor, whereas recycling was very similar for both receptors. Thus, we show how the interaction between arrestins and receptors can be increased with minimal receptor modification and that relatively modest increases in receptor-arrestin affinity are sufficient to alter arrestin trafficking.

Arrestins mediate desensitization and internalization of G protein-coupled receptors and also direct receptor signaling toward heterotrimeric G protein-independent signaling pathways. We previously identified a four-residue segment (residues 212-215) of the dopamine D2 receptor that is necessary for arrestin binding in an in vitro heterologous expression system but that also impairs receptor expression. We now describe the characterization of additional mutations at that arrestin binding site in the third intracellular loop. Mutating two (residues 214 and 215) or three (residues 213-215) of the four residues to alanine partially decreased agonist-induced recruitment of arrestin3 without altering activation of a G protein. Arrestin-dependent receptor internalization, which requires arrestin binding to β2-adaptin (the β2 subunit of the clathrin-associated adaptor protein AP2) and clathrin, was disproportionately affected by the three-residue mutation, with no agonist-induced internalization observed even in the presence of overexpressed arrestin or G protein-coupled receptor kinase 2. The disjunction between arrestin recruitment and internalization could not be explained by alterations in the time course of the receptor-arrestin interaction, the recruitment of G protein-coupled receptor kinase 2, or the receptor-induced interaction between arrestin and β2-adaptin, suggesting that the mutation impairs a property of the internalization complex that has not yet been identified.

ARRDC3 is one of six known human α-arrestins, and has been implicated in the downregulation of the β2-adrenergic receptor (β2AR). ARRDC3 consists of a two-lobed arrestin fold and a C-terminal tail containing two PPYX motifs. In the current model for receptor downregulation by ARRDC3, the arrestin fold portion is thought to bind the receptor, while the PPXY motifs recruit ubiquitin ligases of the NEDD4 family. Here we report the crystal structures of the N-terminal lobe of human ARRDC3 in two conformations, at 1.73 and 2.8 A resolution, respectively. The structures reveal a large electropositive region that is capable of binding phosphate ions of crystallization. Residues within the basic patch were shown to be important for binding to β2AR, similar to the situation with β-arrestins. This highlights potential parallels in receptor recognition between α- and β-arrestins.

Various studies have implicated the concave surface of arrestin in the binding of the cytosolic surface of rhodopsin. However, specific sites of contact between the two proteins have not previously been defined in detail. Here, we report that arrestin shares part of the same binding site on rhodopsin as does the transducin Gα subunit C-terminal tail, suggesting binding of both proteins to rhodopsin may share some similar underlying mechanisms. We also identify two areas of contact between the proteins near this region. Both sites lie in the arrestin N-domain, one in the so-called “finger” loop (residues 67–79) and the other in the 160 loop (residues 155–165). We mapped these sites using a novel tryptophan-induced quenching method, in which we introduced Trp residues into arrestin and measured their ability to quench the fluorescence of bimane probes attached to cysteine residues on TM6 of rhodopsin (T242C and T243C). The involvement of finger loop binding to rhodopsin was expected, but the evidence of the arrestin 160 loop contacting rhodopsin was not. Remarkably, our data indicate one site on rhodopsin can interact with multiple structurally separate sites on arrestin that are almost 30 Å apart. Although this observation at first seems paradoxical, in fact, it provides strong support for recent hypotheses that structural plasticity and conformational changes are involved in the arrestin–rhodopsin binding interface and that the two proteins may be able to interact through multiple docking modes, with arrestin binding to both monomeric and dimeric rhodopsin.

Arrestins function as adapter proteins that mediate G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) desensitization, internalization, and additional rounds of signaling. Here we have compared binding of the GPCR rhodopsin to 403 mutants of arrestin-1 covering its complete sequence. This comprehensive and unbiased mutagenesis approach provides a functional dimension to the crystal structures of inactive, preactivated p44 and phosphopeptide-bound arrestins and will guide our understanding of arrestin-GPCR complexes. The presented functional map quantitatively connects critical interactions in the polar core and along the C tail of arrestin. A series of amino acids (Phe375, Phe377, Phe380, and Arg382) anchor the C tail in a position that blocks binding of the receptor. Interaction of phosphates in the rhodopsin C terminus with Arg29 controls a C-tail exchange mechanism in which the C tail of arrestin is released and exposes several charged amino acids (Lys14, Lys15, Arg18, Lys20, Lys110, and Lys300) for binding of the phosphorylated receptor C terminus. In addition to this arrestin phosphosensor, our data reveal several patches of amino acids in the finger (Gln69 and Asp73-Met75) and the lariat loops (L249-S252 and Y254) that can act as direct binding interfaces. A stretch of amino acids at the edge of the C domain (Trp194-Ser199, Gly337-Gly340, Thr343, and Thr345) could act as membrane anchor, binding interface for a second rhodopsin, or rearrange closer to the central loops upon complex formation. We discuss these interfaces in the context of experimentally guided docking between the crystal structures of arrestin and light-activated rhodopsin.

The large and multifunctional family of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are regulated by a small family of structurally conserved arrestin proteins. In order to bind an active GPCR, arrestin must first be activated by interaction with the phosphorylated receptor C-terminus. Recent years have witnessed major developments in high-resolution crystal structures of pre-active arrestins and arrestin or arrestin-derived peptides in complex with an active GPCR. Although each structure individually offers only a limited snapshot, taken together and interpreted in light of recent complementary functional data, they offer valuable insight into how arrestin is activated by and couples to a phosphorylated active GPCR.

β-Arrestins are well-known regulators and mediators of G protein-coupled receptor signalling, and accumulating evidence reveals that they are functionally involved in inflammation and autoimmune diseases. Of the two β-arrestins, β-arrestin 1 is documented to play regulatory roles in an animal model of multiple sclerosis (MS), whereas the role of β-arrestin 2 is less clear. Here, we show that β-arrestin 2-deficient mice displayed the exacerbated and sustained symptoms of experimental autoimmune encephalomyelitis (EAE), an animal model of MS. At the cellular level, deficiency of β-arrestin 2 led to a decreased number of Foxp3(+) CD4(+) regulatory T (Treg) cells in peripheral lymphoid organs of EAE mice. Consistently, our in vitro observations also revealed that loss of β-arrestin 2 impaired the conversion of Foxp3(-) CD4(+) T cells into Foxp3(+) CD4(+) inducible Treg cells. Taken together, our data suggest that β-arrestin 2 plays a regulatory role in MS, that is opposite to that of β-arrestin 1, in autoimmune diseases such as MS, which is at least partially through regulation of iTreg cell differentiation.

Our growing appreciation of the pluridimensionality of G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) signaling, combined with the phenomenon of orthosteric ligand "bias", has created the possibility of drugs that selectively modulate different aspects of GPCR function for therapeutic benefit. When viewed from the short-term perspective, e.g. changes in receptor conformation, effector coupling or second messenger generation, biased ligands appear to activate a subset of the response profile produced by a conventional agonist. Yet when examined in vivo, the limited data available suggest that biased ligand effects can diverge from their conventional counterparts in ways that cannot be predicted from their in vitro efficacy profile. What is currently missing, at least with respect to G protein and arrestin pathway-selective ligands, is a rational framework for relating the in vitro efficacy of a "biased" agonist to its in vivo actions that will enable drug screening programs to identify ligands with the desired biological effects.

Adaptive thermogenesis and cold-induced activation of uncoupling protein 1 (Ucp1) in brown adipose tissue in rodents is well-described and attributed to sympathetic activation of β-adrenergic signaling. The arrestin domain containing protein Arrdc3 is a regulator of obesity in mice and also appears linked to obesity in humans. We generated a mouse with conditional deletion of Arrdc3, and here we present evidence that genetic ablation of Arrdc3 specifically in adipocytes results in increased Ucp1 expression in subcutaneous and parametrial adipose tissue. Although this increase in expression did not correspond with significant changes in body weight or energy expenditure, adipocyte-specific Arrdc3-null mice had improved glucose tolerance. It was previously hypothesized that Arrdc3 ablation leads to increased β-adrenergic receptor sensitivity; however, in vitro experiments show that Arrdc3-null adipocytes responded to β-adrenergic receptor agonist with decreased Ucp1 levels. Additionally, canonical β-adrenergic receptor signaling was not different in Arrdc3-null adipocytes. These data reveal a role for Arrdc3 in the regulation of Ucp1 expression in adipocytes. However, this adipocyte effect is insufficient to generate the obesity-resistant phenotype of mice with ubiquitous deletion of Arrdc3, indicating a likely role for Arrdc3 in cells other than adipocytes.

Proteins in the arrestin family exhibit a conserved structural fold that nevertheless allows for significant differences in their selectivity for G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) and their phosphorylation states. To reveal the mechanism of activation that prepares arrestin for selective interaction with GPCRs, and to understand the basis for these differences, we used unbiased molecular dynamics simulations to compare the structural and dynamic properties of wild type Arr1 (Arr1-WT), Arr3 (Arr3-WT), and a constitutively active Arr1 mutant, Arr1-R175E, characterized by a perturbation of the phosphate recognition region called "polar core". We find that in our simulations the mutant evolves toward a conformation that resembles the known preactivated structures of an Arr1 splice-variant, and the structurally similar phosphopeptide-bound Arr2-WT, while this does not happen for Arr1-WT. Hence, we propose an activation allosteric mechanism connecting the perturbation of the polar core to a global conformational change, including the relative reorientation of N- and C-domains, and the emergence of electrostatic properties of putative binding surfaces. The underlying local structural changes are interpreted as markers of the evolution of an arrestin structure toward an active-like conformation. Similar activation related changes occur in Arr3-WT in the absence of any perturbation of the polar core, suggesting that this system could spontaneously visit preactivated states in solution. This hypothesis is proposed to explain the lower selectivity of Arr3 toward nonphosphorylated receptors. Moreover, by elucidating the allosteric mechanism underlying activation, we identify functionally critical regions on arrestin structure that can be targeted with drugs or chemical tools for functional modulation. MSCA-IF-2015, MEMBRANEPROT 659826 IF/00578/2014 UID/NEU/04539/2013 Federación Española de Enfermedades Raras

Cannabinoid receptor interacting protein 1a (CRIP1a) is a CB1 receptor (CB1R) distal C-terminal-associated protein that alters CB1R interactions with G-proteins. We tested the hypothesis that CRIP1a is capable of also altering CB1R interactions with β-arrestin proteins that interact with the CB1R at the C-terminus. Coimmunoprecipitation studies indicated that CB1R associates in complexes with either CRIP1a or β-arrestin, but CRIP1a and β-arrestin fail to coimmunoprecipitate with each other. This suggests a competition for CRIP1a and β-arrestin binding to the CB1R, which we hypothesized could attenuate the action of β-arrestin to mediate CB1R internalization. We determined that agonist-mediated reduction of the density of cell surface endogenously expressed CB1Rs was clathrin and dynamin dependent and could be modeled as agonist-induced aggregation of transiently expressed GFP-CB1R. CRIP1a overexpression attenuated CP55940-mediated GFP-CB1R as well as endogenous β-arrestin redistribution to punctae, and conversely, CRIP1a knockdown augmented β-arrestin redistribution to punctae. Peptides mimicking the CB1R C-terminus could bind to both CRIP1a in cell extracts as well as purified recombinant CRIP1a. Affinity pull-down studies revealed that phosphorylation at threonine-468 of a CB1R distal C-terminus 14-mer peptide reduced CB1R-CRIP1a association. Coimmunoprecipitation of CB1R protein complexes demonstrated that central or distal C-terminal peptides competed for the CB1R association with CRIP1a, but that a phosphorylated central C-terminal peptide competed for association with β-arrestin 1, and phosphorylated central or distal C-terminal peptides competed for association with β-arrestin 2. Thus, CRIP1a can compete with β-arrestins for interaction with C-terminal CB1R domains that could affect agonist-driven, β-arrestin-mediated internalization of the CB1R.

Ligand-specific recruitment of arrestins facilitates functional selectivity of G-protein-coupled receptor signaling. Here, we describe agonist-selective recruitment of different arrestin isoforms to the delta opioid receptor in mice. A high-internalizing delta opioid receptor agonist (SNC80) preferentially recruited arrestin 2 and, in arrestin 2 knock-outs (KOs), we observed a significant increase in the potency of SNC80 to inhibit mechanical hyperalgesia and decreased acute tolerance. In contrast, the low-internalizing delta agonists (ARM390, JNJ20788560) preferentially recruited arrestin 3 with unaltered behavioral effects in arrestin 2 KOs. Surprisingly, arrestin 3 KO revealed an acute tolerance to these low-internalizing agonists, an effect never observed in wild-type animals. Furthermore, we examined delta opioid receptor–Ca2+channel coupling in dorsal root ganglia desensitized by ARM390 and the rate of resensitization was correspondingly decreased in arrestin 3 KOs. Live-cell imaging in HEK293 cells revealed that delta opioid receptors are in pre-engaged complexes with arrestin 3 at the cell membrane and that ARM390 strengthens this membrane interaction. The disruption of these complexes in arrestin 3 KOs likely accounts for the altered responses to low-internalizing agonists. Together, our results show agonist-selective recruitment of arrestin isoforms and reveal a novel endogenous role of arrestin 3 as a facilitator of resensitization and an inhibitor of tolerance mechanisms.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENTAgonists that bind to the same receptor can produce highly distinct signaling events and arrestins are a major mediator of this ligand bias. Here, we demonstrate that delta opioid receptor agonists differentially recruit arrestin isoforms. We found that the high-internalizing agonist SNC80 preferentially recruits arrestin 2 and knock-out (KO) of this protein results in increased efficacy of SNC80. In contrast, low-internalizing agonists (ARM390 and JNJ20788560) preferentially recruit arrestin 3 and, surprisingly, KO of arrestin 3 produces acute tolerance and impaired receptor resensitization to these agonists. Arrestin 3 is in pre-engaged complexes with the delta opioid receptor at the cell membrane and low-internalizing agonists promote this interaction. This study reveals a novel role for arrestin 3 as a facilitator of receptor resensitization.

The CB2 cannabinoid receptor (CB2) remains a tantalizing, but unrealized therapeutic target. CB2 receptor ligands belong to varied structural classes and display extreme functional selectivity. Here, we have screened diverse CB2 receptor ligands at canonical (inhibition of adenylyl cyclase) and noncanonical (arrestin recruitment) pathways. The nonclassic cannabinoid (-)-cis-3-[2-hydroxy-4-(1,1-dimethylheptyl)phenyl]-trans-4-(3-hydroxypropyl)cyclohexanol (CP55940) was the most potent agonist for both pathways, while the classic cannabinoid ligand (6aR,10aR)-3-(1,1-Dimethylbutyl)-6a,7,10,10a-tetrahydro-6,6,9-trimethyl-6H-dibenzo[b,d]pyran JWH133) was the most efficacious agonist among all the ligands profiled in cyclase assays. In the cyclase assay, other classic cannabinoids showed little [(-)-trans-Δ(9)-tetrahydrocannabinol and (-)-(6aR,7,10,10aR)-tetrahydro-6,6,9-trimethyl-3-(1-methyl-1-phenylethyl)-6H-dibenzo[b,d]pyran-1-ol] (KM233) to no efficacy [(6aR,10aR)-1-methoxy-6,6,9-trimethyl-3-(2-methyloctan-2-yl)-6a,7,10,10a-tetrahydrobenzo[c]chromene(L759633) and (6aR,10aR)-3-(1,1-dimethylheptyl)-6a,7,8,9,10,10a-hexahydro-1-methoxy-6,6-dimethyl-9-methylene-6H-dibenzo[b,d]pyran]L759656. Most aminoalkylindoles, including [(3R)-​2,​3-​dihydro-​5-​methyl-​3-​(4-​morpholinylmethyl)pyrrolo[1,​2,​3-​de]-​1,​4-​benzoxazin-​6-​yl]-​1-​naphthalenyl-​methanone,​ monomethanesulfonate (WIN55212-2), were moderate efficacy agonists. The cannabilactone 3-(1,1-dimethyl-heptyl)-1-hydroxy-9-methoxy-benzo(c)chromen-6-one (AM1710) was equiefficacious to CP55940 to inhibit adenylyl cyclase, albeit with lower potency. In the arrestin recruitment assays, all classic cannabinoid ligands failed to recruit arrestins, indicating a bias toward G-protein coupling for this class of compound. All aminoalkylindoles tested, except for WIN55212-2 and (1-​pentyl-​1H-​indol-​3-​yl)(2,​2,​3,​3-​tetramethylcyclopropyl)-​methanone (UR144), failed to recruit arrestin. WIN55212-2 was a low efficacy agonist for arrestin recruitment, while UR144 was arrestin biased with no significant inhibition of cyclase. Endocannabinoids were G-protein biased with no arrestin recruitment. The diarylpyrazole antagonist 5-​(4-​chloro-​3-​methylphenyl)-​1-​[(4-​methylphenyl)methyl]-​N-​[(1S,​2S,​4R)-​1,​3,​3-​trimethylbicyclo[2.2.1]hept-​2-​yl]-​1H-​pyrazole-​3-​carboxamide (SR144258) was an inverse agonist in cyclase and arrestin recruitment assays while the aminoalkylindole 6-iodo-2-methyl-1-[2-(4-morpholinyl)ethyl]-1H-indol-3-yl](4-methoxyphenyl)methanone (AM630) and carboxamide N-(1,3-benzodioxol-5-ylmethyl)-1,2-dihydro-7-methoxy-2-oxo-8-(pentyloxy)-3-quinolinecarboxamide (JTE907) were inverse agonists in cyclase but low efficacy agonists in arrestin recruitment assays. Thus, CB2 receptor ligands display strong and varied functional selectivity at both pathways. Therefore, extreme care must be exercised when using these compounds to infer the role of CB2 receptors in vivo.

Chemokine receptors recruit the multifunctional scaffolding protein beta arrestin in response to binding of their chemokine ligands. Given that arrestin recruitment represents a signaling axis that is in part independent from G-protein signaling, it has become a hallmark of G protein-coupled receptor functional selectivity. Therefore, quantification of arrestin recruitment has become a requirement for the delineation of chemokine and drug candidate activity along different signaling axes. Bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) techniques provide methodology for such quantification that can reveal differences between nonredundant chemokines binding the same receptor, and that can be upscaled for high-throughput testing. We here provide protocols for the careful setup of BRET-based arrestin recruitment assays, and examples for the application of such systems in dose-response or time-course experiments. Suggestions are given for troubleshooting, optimizing test systems, and the interpretation of results obtained with BRET-based assays, which indeed yield an intricate blend of quantitative and qualitative information.

κ-Opioid receptor (KOR) agonists do not activate the reward pathway stimulated by morphine-like μ-opioid receptor (MOR) agonists and thus have been considered to be promising nonaddictive analgesics. However, KOR agonists produce other adverse effects, including dysphoria, diuresis, and constipation. The therapeutic promise of KOR agonists has nonetheless recently been revived by studies showing that their dysphoric effects require arrestin recruitment, whereas their analgesic effects do not. Moreover, KOR agonist-induced antinociceptive tolerance observed in vivo has also been proposed to be correlated to the ability to induce arrestin-dependent phosphorylation, desensitization, and internalization of the receptor. The discovery of functionally selective drugs that are therapeutically effective without the adverse effects triggered by the arrestin pathway is thus an important goal. We have identified such an extreme G protein-biased KOR compound, 6'-guanidinonaltrindole (6'-GNTI), a potent partial agonist at the KOR receptor for the G protein activation pathway that does not recruit arrestin. Indeed, 6'-GNTI functions as an antagonist to block the arrestin recruitment and KOR internalization induced by other nonbiased agonists. As an extremely G protein-biased KOR agonist, 6'-GNTI represents a promising lead compound in the search for nonaddictive opioid analgesic as its signaling profile suggests that it will be without the dysphoria and other adverse effects promoted by arrestin recruitment and its downstream signaling.

Visual arrestin specifically binds to photoactivated and phosphorylated rhodopsin and inactivates phototransduction. In contrast, the p44 splice variant can terminate phototransduction by binding to nonphosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin. Here we report the crystal structure of bovine p44 at a resolution of 1.85 Å. Compared to native arrestin, the p44 structure reveals significant differences in regions crucial for receptor binding, namely flexible loop V-VI and polar core regions. Additionally, electrostatic potential is remarkably positive on the N-domain and the C-domain. The p44 structure represents an active conformation that serves as a model to explain the 'constitutive activity' found in arrestin variants.

Arrestins are regulatory molecules for G-protein coupled receptor function. In visual rhodopsin, selective binding of arrestin to the cytoplasmic side of light-activated, phosphorylated rhodopsin (P-Rh*) terminates signaling via the G-protein transducin. While the “phosphate-sensor” of arrestin for the recognition of receptor-attached phosphates is identified, the molecular mechanism of arrestin binding and the involvement of receptor conformations in this process are still largely hypothetic. Here we used fluorescence pump-probe and time-resolved fluorescence depolarization measurements to investigate the kinetics of arrestin conformational changes and the corresponding nanosecond dynamical changes at the receptor surface. We show that at least two sequential conformational changes of arrestin occur upon interaction with P-Rh*, thus providing a kinetic proof for the suggested multistep nature of arrestin binding. At the cytoplasmic surface of P-Rh*, the structural dynamics of the amphipathic helix 8 (H8), connecting transmembrane helix 7 and the phosphorylated C-terminal tail, depends on the arrestin interaction state. We find that a high mobility of H8 is required in the low-affinity (prebinding) but not in the high-affinity binding state. High-affinity arrestin binding is inhibited when a bulky, inflexible group is bound to H8, indicating close interaction. We further show that this close steric interaction of H8 with arrestin is mandatory for the transition from prebinding to high-affinity binding; i.e., for arrestin activation. This finding implies a regulatory role for H8 in activation of visual arrestin, which shows high selectivity to P-Rh* in contrast to the broad receptor specificity displayed by the two nonvisual arrestins.

Arrestins bind active phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors, blocking G protein activation and channeling the signaling to G protein-independent pathways. Free arrestin-3 and receptor-bound arrestin-3 scaffold the ASK1-MKK4-JNK3 module, promoting JNK3 phosphorylation, whereas highly homologous arrestin-2 does not. Here, we used arrestin-2/3 chimeras and mutants to identify key residues of arrestin-3 responsible for its ability to facilitate JNK3 activation. Our data demonstrate that both arrestin domains are involved in JNK3 activation, with the C-terminal domain being more important than the N-terminal domain. We found that Val-343 is the key contributor to this function, whereas Leu-278, Ser-280, His-350, Asp-351, His-352, and Ile-353 play supporting roles. We also show that the arrestin-3-specific difference in the arrangement of the β-strands in the C-terminal domain that underlies its lower selectivity for active phosphoreceptors does not play an appreciable role in its ability to enhance JNK3 activation. Importantly, the strength of the binding of ASK1 or JNK3, as revealed by the efficiency of co-immunoprecipitation, does not correlate with the ability of arrestin proteins to promote ASK1-dependent JNK3 phosphorylation. Thus, multiple residues on the non-receptor-binding side of arrestin-3 are crucial for JNK3 activation, and this function and the receptor-binding characteristics of arrestin can be manipulated independently by targeted mutagenesis.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE The uterotonins oxytocin and histamine, mediate contractile signals through specific G protein-coupled receptors, a process which is tightly controlled during gestation to prevent preterm labour. We previously identified G protein-coupled receptor kinase (GRK)2 and GRK6 as respective cardinal negative regulators of histamine H1 and oxytocin receptor signalling. GRK-mediated phosphorylation promotes arrestin recruitment, not only desensitizing receptors but activating an increasing number of diverse signalling pathways. Here we investigate potential roles that arrestins play in the regulation of myometrial oxytocin/histamine H1 receptor signalling. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH Endogenous arrestins2 and 3 were specifically depleted using RNA-interference in a human myometrial cell line and the consequences of this for G protein-coupled receptor-mediated signalling were assessed using Ca2+/inositol 1,4,5-trisphophate imaging and standard mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) assays. KEY RESULTS Depletion of arrestin3, but not arrestin2 enhanced and prolonged H1 receptor-stimulated Ca2+ responses, whilst depletion of either arrestin increased oxytocin receptor responses. Arrestin3 depletion decreased H1 receptor desensitization, whilst removal of either arrestin isoform was equally effective in preventing oxytocin receptor desensitization. Following arrestin3 depletion oxytocin-induced phospho-extracellular signal-regulated kinase1/2 signals were diminished and histamine-stimulated signals virtually absent, whereas depletion of arrestin2 augmented extracellular signal-regulated kinase1/2 responses to each agonist. Conversely, depletion of arrestin3 enhanced p38 signals to each agonist, whilst arrestin2 suppression increased oxytocin-, but not histamine-induced p38 MAPK responses. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS Arrestin proteins are key regulators of H1 and oxytocin receptor desensitization, and play integral roles mediating uterotonin-stimulated MAPK-signalling. These data provide insights into the in situ regulation of these receptor subtypes and may inform pathophysiological functioning in preterm labour.

In the rod cell of the retina, arrestin is responsible for blocking signaling of the G-protein-coupled receptor rhodopsin. The general visual signal transduction model implies that arrestin must be able to interact with a single light-activated, phosphorylated rhodopsin molecule (Rho*P), as would be generated at physiologically relevant low light levels. However, the elongated bi-lobed structure of arrestin suggests that it might be able to accommodate two rhodopsin molecules. In this study, we directly addressed the question of binding stoichiometry by quantifying arrestin binding to Rho*P in isolated rod outer segment membranes. We manipulated the “photoactivation density,” i.e. the percentage of active receptors in the membrane, with the use of a light flash or by partially regenerating membranes containing phosphorylated opsin with 11-cis-retinal. Curiously, we found that the apparent arrestin-Rho*P binding stoichiometry was linearly dependent on the photoactivation density, with one-to-one binding at low photoactivation density and one-to-two binding at high photoactivation density. We also observed that, irrespective of the photoactivation density, a single arrestin molecule was able to stabilize the active metarhodopsin II conformation of only a single Rho*P. We hypothesize that, although arrestin requires at least a single Rho*P to bind the membrane, a single arrestin can actually interact with a pair of receptors. The ability of arrestin to interact with heterogeneous receptor pairs composed of two different photo-intermediate states would be well suited to the rod cell, which functions at low light intensity but is routinely exposed to several orders of magnitude more light.

Internalization of G-protein-coupled receptors is mediated by phosphorylation of the C-terminus, followed by binding with the cytosolic protein arrestin. To explore structural factors that may play a role in internalization of cannabinoid receptor 1 (CB1), we utilize a phosphorylated peptide derived from the distal C-terminus of CB1 (CB1(5P)(454-473)). Complexes formed between the peptide and human arrestin-2 (wt-arr2(1-418)) were compared to those formed with a truncated arrestin-2 mutant (tr-arr2(1-382)) using isothermal titration calorimetry and nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. The pentaphosphopeptide CB1(5P)(454-473) adopts a helix-loop conformation, whether binding to full-length arrestin-2 or its truncated mutant. This structure is similar to that of a heptaphosphopeptide, mimicking the distal segment of the rhodopsin C-tail (Rh(7P)(330-348)), binding to visual arrestin, suggesting that this adopted structure bears functional significance. Isothermal titration calorimetry (ITC) experiments show that the CB1(5P)(454-473) peptide binds to tr-arr2(1-382) with higher affinity than to the full-length wt-arr2(1-418). As the observed structure of the bound peptides is similar in either case, we attribute the increased affinity to a more exposed binding site on the N-domain of the truncated arrestin construct. The transferred NOE data from the bound phosphopeptides are used to predict a model describing the interaction with arrestin, using the data driven HADDOCK docking program. The truncation of arrestin-2 provides scope for positively charged residues in the polar core of the protein to interact with phosphates present in the loop of the CB1(5P)(454-473) peptide.

Nonvisual arrestins are regulated by direct post-translational modifications, such as phosphorylation, ubiquitination, and nitrosylation. However, whether arrestins are regulated by other post-translational modifications remains unknown. Here we show that nonvisual arrestins are modified by small ubiquitin-like modifier 1 (SUMO-1) upon activation of β(2)-adrenergic receptor (β(2)AR). Lysine residues 295 and 400 in arrestin-3 fall within canonical SUMO consensus sites, and mutagenic analysis reveals that Lys-400 represents the main SUMOylation site. Depletion of the SUMO E2 modifying enzyme Ubc9 blocks arrestin-3 SUMOylation and attenuates β(2)AR internalization, suggesting that arrestin SUMOylation mediates G protein-coupled receptor endocytosis. Consistent with this, expression of a SUMO-deficient arrestin mutant failed to promote β(2)AR internalization as compared with wild-type arrestin-3. Our data reveal an unprecedented role for SUMOylation in mediating GPCR endocytosis and provide novel mechanistic insight into arrestin function and regulation.

L-type prostaglandin synthase (L-PGDS) produces PGD(2), a lipid mediator involved in neuromodulation and inflammation. Here, we show that L-PGDS and arrestin-3 (Arr3) interact directly and can be co-immunoprecipitated endogenously from MG-63 osteoblasts. Perinuclear L-PGDS/Arr3 co-localization is observed in PGD(2)-producing MG-63 cells and is induced by the addition of the L-PGDS substrate or co-expression of COX-2 in HEK293 cells. Inhibition of L-PGDS activity in MG-63 cells triggers redistribution of Arr3 and L-PGDS to the cytoplasm. Perinuclear localization of L-PGDS is detected in wild-type mouse embryonic fibroblasts (MEFs) but is more diffused in MEFs-arr-2(-/-)-arr-3(-/-). Arrestin-3 promotes PGD(2) production by L-PGDS in vitro. IL-1β-induced PGD(2) production is significantly lower in MEFs-arr-2(-/-)-arr-3(-/-) than in wild-type MEFs but can be rescued by expressing Arr2 or Arr3. A peptide corresponding to amino acids 86-100 of arrestin-3 derived from its L-PGDS binding domain stimulates L-PGDS-mediated PGD(2) production in vitro and in MG-63 cells. We report the first characterization of an interactor/modulator of a PGD(2) synthase and the identification of a new function for arrestin, which may open new opportunities for improving therapies for the treatment of inflammatory diseases.

The chemokine receptor CCR2, which has been implicated in a variety of inflammatory, autoimmune, and cardiovascular conditions, binds several natural chemokine ligands. Here, we assessed the recruitment of β-arrestin to CCR2 in response to these ligands using bioluminescence resonance energy transfer technology. Compared with CCL2, which was considered as a full agonist, other CCR2 ligands were partial agonists with reduced efficacy and potency. Agonist potencies were not a function of their affinity for CCR2. Efficacy of arrestin recruitment matched that of agonist-induced CCR2 internalization. Although the potency and efficacy rank orders of the ligands in arrestin recruitment were similar to those observed for Gα(i1) activation, arrestin recruitment was at least in part resistant to Gα(i/o)-inactivating pertussis toxin, suggesting partial independence from Gα(i/o). The degree of pertussis toxin resistance of arrestin recruitment was different between the chemokines. Moreover, qualitative differences between the arrestin responses to the different ligands were identified in the stability of the response: although CCL7-induced arrestin recruitment had a half-life of less than 15 min, CCL8 and CCL13 induced stable CCR2-arrestin interactions. Finally, the ligands stabilized different conformations of the CCR2 homodimer. Our results support the validity of models for receptor-ligand interactions in which different ligands stabilize different receptor conformations also for endogenous receptor ligands, with corresponding implications for drug development targeting CCR2.

The addictive potential of opioids may be related to their differential ability to induce G protein signaling and endocytosis. We compared the ability of 20 ligands (sampled from the main chemical classes of opioids) to promote the association of mu and delta receptors with G protein or beta-arrestin 2. Receptor-arrestin binding was monitored by bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET) in intact cells, where pertussis toxin experiments indicated that the interaction was minimally affected by receptor signaling. To assess receptor-G protein coupling without competition from arrestins, we employed a cell-free BRET assay using membranes isolated from cells expressing luminescent receptors and fluorescent Gbeta(1). In this system, the agonist-induced enhancement of BRET (indicating shortening of distance between the two proteins) was G alpha-mediated (as shown by sensitivity to pertussis toxin and guanine nucleotides) and yielded data consistent with the known pharmacology of the ligands. We found marked differences of efficacy for G protein and arrestin, with a pattern suggesting more restrictive structural requirements for arrestin efficacy. The analysis of such differences identified a subset of structures showing a marked discrepancy between efficacies for G protein and arrestin. Addictive opiates like morphine and oxymorphone exhibited large differences both at delta and mu receptors. Thus, they were effective agonists for G protein coupling but acted as competitive enkephalins antagonists (delta) or partial agonists (mu) for arrestin. This arrestin-selective antagonism resulted in inhibition of short and long term events mediated by arrestin, such as rapid receptor internalization and down-regulation.

Binding of arrestin to photoactivated phosphorylated rhodopsin terminates the amplification of visual signals in photoreceptor cells. Currently, there is no crystal structure of a rhodopsin-arrestin complex available, although structures of unbound rhodopsin and arrestin have been determined. High-affinity receptor binding is dependent on distinct arrestin sites responsible for recognition of rhodopsin activation and phosphorylation. The loop connecting beta-strands V and VI in rod arrestin has been implicated in the recognition of active rhodopsin. We report the structure of receptor-bound arrestin peptide Arr(67-77) mimicking this loop based on solution NMR data. The peptide binds photoactivated rhodopsin in the unphosphorylated and phosphorylated form with similar affinities and stabilizes the metarhodopsin II photointermediate. A largely alpha-helical conformation of the receptor-bound peptide is observed.

Endocytosis of ligand-activated plasma membrane receptors has been shown to contribute to the regulation of their downstream signaling. beta-arrestins interact with the phosphorylated tail of activated receptors and act as scaffolds for the recruitment of adaptor proteins and clathrin, that constitute the machinery used for receptor endocytosis. Visual- and beta-arrestins have a two-lobe, immunoglobulin-like, beta-strand sandwich structure. The recent resolution of the crystal structure of VPS26, one of the retromer subunits, unexpectedly evidences an arrestin fold in this protein, which is otherwise unrelated to arrestins. From a functional point of view, VPS26 is involved in the retrograde transport of the mannose 6-P receptor from the endosomes to the trans-Golgi network. In addition to the group of genuine arrestins and Vps26, mammalian cells harbor a vast repertoire of proteins that are related to arrestins on the basis of their PFAM Nter and Cter arrestin- domains, which are named Arrestin Domain- Containing proteins (ADCs). The biological role of ADC proteins is still poorly understood. The three subfamilies have been merged into an arrestin-related protein clan.This paper provides an overall analysis of arrestin clan proteins. The structures and functions of members of the subfamilies are reviewed in mammals and model organisms such as Drosophila, Caenorhabditis, Saccharomyces and Dictyostelium.

The arrestins are a family of molecules that terminate signaling from many different G protein-coupled receptors, by inhibiting the association between receptor and downstream effectors. We recently employed a human betaarrestin2-GFP fusion protein to explore the dynamics of different neuropeptide receptors in Drosophila and have previously used a betaarrestin translocation assay to identify ligands at orphan receptors. Here, we report that the Drosophila arrestin encoded by kurtz functions in a similar fashion and can be employed to investigate GPCR-arrestin associations. Specifically, a GFP-krz fusion protein, upon co-expression with various Drosophila peptide receptors, an amine receptor, and a mammalian peptide receptor translocates to the plasma membrane in specific response to ligand application. This molecular phenotype is exhibited in a mammalian cell line as well as in a Drosophila cell line. Notably, the details of receptor-arrestin associations in terms of endocytotic patterns are functionally conserved between the mammalian arrestins and kurtz. Furthermore, we report that kurtz mutants exhibit hypersensitivity to osmotic stress, implicating GPCR desensitization as an important feature of the endocrine events that shape this stress response.

Arrestins mediate G protein-coupled receptor desensitization, internalization, and signaling. Dopamine D(2) and D(3) receptors have similar structures but distinct characteristics of interaction with arrestins. The goals of this study were to compare arrestin-binding determinants in D(2) and D(3) receptors other than phosphorylation sites and to create a D(2) receptor that is deficient in arrestin binding. We first assessed the ability of purified arrestins to bind to glutathione transferase (GST) fusion proteins containing the receptor third intracellular loops (IC3). Arrestin3 bound to IC3 of both D(2) and D(3) receptors, with the affinity and localization of the binding site indistinguishable between the receptor subtypes. Mutagenesis of the GST-IC3 fusion proteins identified an important determinant of the binding of arrestin3 in the N-terminal region of IC3. Alanine mutations of this determinant (IYIV212-215) in the full-length D(2) receptor generated a signaling-biased receptor with intact ligand binding and G-protein coupling and activation, but deficient in receptor-mediated arrestin3 translocation to the membrane, agonist-induced receptor internalization, and agonist-induced desensitization in human embryonic kidney 293 cells. This mutation also decreased arrestin-dependent activation of extracellular signal-regulated kinases. The finding that nonphosphorylated D(2)-IC3 and D(3)-IC3 have similar affinity for arrestin is consistent with previous suggestions that the differential effects of D(2) and D(3) receptor activation on membrane translocation of arrestin and receptor internalization are due, at least in part, to differential phosphorylation of the receptors. In addition, these results imply that the sequence IYIV212-215 at the N terminus of IC3 of the D(2) receptor is a key element of the arrestin binding site.

In retinal rods, photoexcited rhodopsin (R*) is inactivated upon phosphorylation by rhodopsin kinase and the subsequent binding of arrestin. We have studied the structural role of a cationic region of bovine arrestin (Val170-Arg182) using anti-peptide IgGs specifically recognizing this segment and the corresponding oligopeptide. Our results clearly indicate that amino acids Val170-Arg182 are shielded within the arrestin-rhodopsin-complex and very likely belong to a binding domain of arrestin for phosphorylated R*. The purified anti-peptide IgGs strongly reacted with isolated arrestin but did not recognize arrestin when bound to phosphorylated R*. In agreement with these experiments, the oligopeptide Val170–Arg182 was found to compete with arrestin for binding to phosphorylated R*. Increasing concentrations of this peptide caused an oligomerization of phosphorylated rhodopsin when illuminated by white light as well as in the dark. Unphosphorylated rhodopsin did not oligomerize up to a 400-fold molar ratio of peptide/rhodopsin. Limited proteolysis of the phosphorylated carboxy terminus of rhodopsin with endoproteinase Asp-N caused a significant decrease in the peptide-induced formation of oligomers. Therefore, Val170-Arg182 of bovine arrestin probably interacts with the phosphorylated carboxy-terminus of rhodopsin. The data presented support the proposal of Palczewski et al. (1991c) considering the region Lys163– Arg182 in bovine arrestin to be a possible binding domain for phosphorylated R*.

Arrestin binding to agonist-occupied phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors typically increases the affinity of agonist binding, increases resistance of receptor-bound agonist to removal with high acid/salt buffer, and leads to receptor desensitization and internalization. We tested whether thyrotropin-releasing hormone (TRH) receptors lacking phosphosites in the C-terminal tail could form stable and functional complexes with arrestin. Fibroblasts from mice lacking arrestins 2 and 3 were used to distinguish between arrestin-dependent and -independent effects. Arrestin did not promote internalization or desensitization of a receptor that had key Ser/Thr phosphosites mutated to Ala (4Ala receptor). Nevertheless, arrestin greatly increased acid/salt resistance and the affinity of 4Ala receptor for TRH. Truncation of 4Ala receptor just distal to the key phosphosites (4AlaStop receptor) abolished arrestin-dependent acid/salt resistance but not the effect of arrestin on agonist affinity. Arrestin formed stable complexes with activated wild-type and 4Ala receptors but not with 4AlaStop receptor, as measured by translocation of arrestin-green fluorescent protein to the plasma membrane or chemical cross-linking. An arrestin mutant that does not interact with clathrin and AP2 did not internalize receptor but still promoted high affinity TRH binding, acid/salt resistance, and desensitization. A sterically restricted arrestin mutant did not cause receptor internalization or desensitization but did promote acid/salt resistance and high agonist affinity. The results demonstrate that arrestin binds to proximal or distal phosphosites in the receptor tail. Arrestin binding at either site causes increased agonist affinity and acid/salt resistance, but only the proximal phosphosites evoke the necessary conformational changes in arrestin for receptor desensitization and internalization.