Search

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.

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 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.

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 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.

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.

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 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.

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.

In this study we investigate conformational changes in Loop V-VI of visual arrestin during binding to light-activated, phosphorylated rhodopsin (Rho*-P) using a combination of site-specific cysteine mutagenesis and intramolecular fluorescence quenching. Introduction of cysteines at positions in the N-domain at residues predicted to be in close proximity to Ile-72 in Loop V-VI of arrestin (i.e. Glu-148 and Lys-298) appear to form an intramolecular disulfide bond with I72C, significantly diminishing the binding of arrestin to Rho*-P. Using a fluorescence approach, we show that the steady-state emission from a monobromobimane fluorophore in Loop V-VI is quenched by tryptophan residues placed at 148 or 298. This quenching is relieved upon binding of arrestin to Rho*-P. These results suggest that arrestin Loop V-VI moves during binding to Rho*-P and that conformational flexibility of this loop is essential for arrestin to adopt a high affinity binding state.

Receptors have fascinated biologists for more than a century and they have fascinated me for the entirety of my own research career. The seven transmembrane receptors, also known as G protein coupled receptors, represent the largest of the several families of plasma membrane receptors, comprising more than a thousand genes and regulating virtually all known physiological processes in mammals. Moreover, they represent one of the commonest targets of currently used drugs. I have spent the entirety of my research career working on these receptors. Here I set down some personal reflections on the evolution of the field during the past 35 years, hanging the thread of the story on some of the work from my own laboratory.

Arrestins regulate the activity and subcellular localization of G protein-coupled receptors and other signaling molecules. Here we demonstrate that arrestins bind microtubules (MTs) in vitro and in vivo. The MT-binding site on arrestins significantly overlaps with the receptor-binding site, but the conformations of MT-bound and receptor-bound arrestin are different. Arrestins recruit ERK1/2 and the E3 ubiquitin ligase Mdm2 to microtubules in cells, similar to the arrestin-dependent mobilization of these proteins to the receptor. Arrestin-mediated sequestration of ERK to MTs reduces the level of ERK activation. In contrast, recruitment of Mdm2 to microtubules by arrestin channels Mdm2 activity toward cytoskeleton-associated proteins, dramatically increasing their ubiquitination. The mobilization of signaling molecules to microtubules is a novel biological function of arrestin proteins.

We report that visual arrestin can regulate retinal release and late photoproduct formation in rhodopsin. Our experiments, which employ a fluorescently labeled arrestin and rhodopsin solubilized in detergent/phospholipid micelles, indicate that arrestin can trap a population of retinal in the binding pocket with an absorbance characteristic of Meta II with the retinal Schiff-base intact. Furthermore, arrestin can convert Metarhodopsin III (formed either by thermal decay or blue-light irradiation) to a Meta II-like absorbing species. Together, our results suggest arrestin may be able to play a more complex role in the rod cell besides simply quenching transducin activity. This possibility may help explain why arrestin deficiency leads to problems like stationary night blindness (Oguchi disease) and retinal degeneration.

Our previous studies have demonstrated that neither receptor endocytosis nor arrestin is required for ERK activation by the alpha2-adrenergic receptor (Wang, Q., Zhao, J., Brady, A. E., Feng, J., Allen, P. B., Lefkowitz, R. J., Greengard, P., and Limbird, L. E. (2004) Science 304, 1940-1944). The present studies address whether arrestin plays a role in determining the route of alpha2AR-evoked ERK signaling activation, taking advantage of endogenous expression of the alpha(2A)AR subtype in mouse embryonic fibroblasts (MEFs) and the availability of MEFs without arrestin expression (derived from Arr2,3-/- mice). Our data demonstrate that the endogenous alpha(2A)AR evokes ERK phosphorylation through both a Src-dependent and a Src-independent pathway, both of which are G protein dependent and converge on the Ras-Raf-MEK pathway. Arrestin is essential to recruit Src to this process, as alpha(2A)AR-mediated ERK signaling in Arr2,3-/- MEFs does not involve Src. Stimulation of alpha(2A)AR enhances arrestin-Src interaction and promotes activation of Src. alpha2 agonists have similar potencies in stimulating Src-dependent and Src-independent ERK phosphorylation in wild-type and Arr2,3-/- cells, respectively. However, Src-independent alpha(2A)AR-mediated ERK stimulation has both a longer duration of activation and a more rapid translocation of pERK into the nucleus when compared with Src-dependent activation. These data not only affirm the role of arrestin as an escort for signaling molecules such as Src family kinases but also demonstrate the impact of arrestin-dependent modulation on both the temporal and spatial properties of ERK activation.

The 4 mammalian arrestins serve as almost universal regulators of the largest known family of signaling proteins, G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Arrestins terminate receptor interactions with G proteins, redirect the signaling to a variety of alternative pathways, and orchestrate receptor internalization and subsequent intracellular trafficking. The elucidation of the structural basis and fine molecular mechanisms of the arrestin–receptor interaction paved the way to the targeted manipulation of this interaction from both sides to produce very stable or extremely transient complexes that helped to understand the regulation of many biologically important processes initiated by active GPCRs. The elucidation of the structural basis of arrestin interactions with numerous non-receptor-binding partners is long overdue. It will allow the construction of fully functional arrestins in which the ability to interact with individual partners is specifically disrupted or enhanced by targeted mutagenesis. These “custom-designed” arrestin mutants will be valuable tools in defining the role of various interactions in the intricate interplay of multiple signaling pathways in the living cell. The identification of arrestin-binding sites for various signaling molecules will also set the stage for designing molecular tools for therapeutic intervention that may prove useful in numerous disorders associated with congenital or acquired disregulation of GPCR signaling.

In this study, we address the mechanism of visual arrestin release from light-activated rhodopsin using fluorescently labeled arrestin mutants. We find that two mutants, I72C and S251C, when labeled with the small, solvent-sensitive fluorophore monobromobimane, exhibit spectral changes only upon binding light-activated, phosphorylated rhodopsin. Our analysis indicates that these changes are probably due to a burying of the probes at these sites in the rhodopsin-arrestin or phospholipid-arrestin interface. Using a fluorescence approach based on this observation, we demonstrate that arrestin and retinal release are linked and are described by similar activation energies. However, at physiological temperatures, we find that arrestin slows the rate of retinal release ∼2-fold and abolishes the pH dependence of retinal release. Using fluorescence, EPR, and biochemical approaches, we also find intriguing evidence that arrestin binds to a post-Meta II photodecay product, possibly Meta III. We speculate that arrestin regulates levels of free retinal in the rod cell to help limit the formation of damaging oxidative retinal adducts. Such adducts may contribute to diseases like atrophic age-related macular degeneration (AMD). Thus, arrestin may serve to both attenuate rhodopsin signaling and protect the cell from excessive retinal levels under bright light conditions.

Recently we found that visual arrestin binds microtubules and that this interaction plays an important role in arrestin localization in photoreceptor cells. Here we use site-directed mutagenesis and spin labeling to explore the molecular mechanism of this novel regulatory interaction. The microtubule binding site maps to the concave sides of the two arrestin domains, overlapping with the rhodopsin binding site, which makes arrestin interactions with rhodopsin and microtubules mutually exclusive. Arrestin interaction with microtubules is enhanced by several "activating mutations" and involves multiple positive charges and hydrophobic elements. The comparable affinity of visual arrestin for microtubules and unpolymerized tubulin (K(D)40 mum and65 mum, respectively) suggests that the arrestin binding site is largely localized on the individual alphabeta-dimer. The changes in the spin-spin interaction of a double-labeled arrestin indicate that the conformation of microtubule-bound arrestin differs from that of free arrestin in solution. In sharp contrast to rhodopsin, where tight binding requires an extended interdomain hinge, arrestin binding to microtubules is enhanced by deletions in this region, suggesting that in the process of microtubule binding the domains may move in the opposite direction. Thus, microtubule and rhodopsin binding induce different conformational changes in arrestin, suggesting that arrestin assumes three distinct conformations in the cell, likely with different functional properties.

Arrestins play a fundamental role in the regulation and signal transduction of G protein-coupled receptors. Here we describe the crystal structure of cone arrestin at 2.3A resolution. The overall structure of cone visual arrestin is similar to the crystal structures of rod visual and the non-visual arrestin-2, consisting of two domains, each containing ten beta-sheets. However, at the tertiary structure level, there are two major differences, in particular on the concave surfaces of the two domains implicated in receptor binding and in the loop between beta-strands I and II. Functional analysis shows that cone arrestin, in sharp contrast to its rod counterpart, bound cone pigments and non-visual receptors. Conversely, non-visual arrestin-2 bound cone pigments, suggesting that it may also regulate phototransduction and/or photopigment trafficking in cone photoreceptors. These findings indicate that cone arrestin displays structural and functional features intermediate between the specialized rod arrestin and the non-visual arrestins, which have broad receptor specificity. A unique functional feature of cone arrestin was the low affinity for its cognate receptor, resulting in an unusually rapid dissociation of the complex. Transient arrestin binding to the photopigment in cones may be responsible for the extremely rapid regeneration and reuse of the photopigment that is essential for cone function at high levels of illumination.

Arrestins are regulatory proteins that bind specifically to ligand-activated phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors to terminate G protein-mediated signaling, cause the internalization of the receptor-arrestin complex, and initiate additional intracellular signaling cascades. Multiple lines of evidence suggest that arrestin normally exists in an inactive basal state and undergoes conformational activation in the process of receptor binding. "Pre-activated" phosphorylation-independent arrestin mutants display increased binding to ligand-activated but unphosphorylated receptors. The mutations are believed to expose key receptor-binding regions, allowing the mutants to mimic, to some extent, the transition of arrestin to its active state. In the present study, amide hydrogen exchange (HX) and mass spectrometry (MS) were used to examine the inactive conformation of wild-type arrestin2 and compare its solution conformation with two pre-activated mutants (R169E and 3A (I385A, V386A, F387A)). The results suggest an unexpected level of structural organization within arrestin elements containing clathrin and adaptin2-binding sites that were previously believed to be completely disordered. Increased deuterium incorporation was observed in both mutant forms compared with wild-type, indicating a change in the conformation of the mutants. Three regions demonstrated significant differences in deuterium incorporation: the first 33 residues of the N terminus and residues 243-255 (both previously implicated in receptor interaction), and residues 271-299. The results suggest that subtle differences in conformation are responsible for the significant difference in biological activity displayed by pre-activated arrestin mutants and that similar changes occur in the process of arrestin binding to the receptor.

SummaryIn rod photoreceptors, arrestin localizes to the outer segment (OS) in the light and to the inner segment (IS) in the dark. Here, we demonstrate that redistribution of arrestin between these compartments can proceed in ATP-depleted photoreceptors. Translocation of transducin from the IS to the OS also does not require energy, but depletion of ATP or GTP inhibits its reverse movement. A sustained presence of activated rhodopsin is required for sequestering arrestin in the OS, and the rate of arrestin relocalization to the OS is determined by the amount and the phosphorylation status of photolyzed rhodopsin. Interaction of arrestin with microtubules is increased in the dark. Mutations that enhance arrestin-microtubule binding attenuate arrestin translocation to the OS. These results indicate that the distribution of arrestin in rods is controlled by its dynamic interactions with rhodopsin in the OS and microtubules in the IS and that its movement occurs by simple diffusion.

Homologous desensitization of D1 dopamine receptors is thought to occur through their phosphorylation leading to arrestin association which interdicts G protein coupling. In order to identify the relevant domains of receptor phosphorylation, and to determine how this leads to arrestin association, we created a series of mutated D1 receptor constructs. In one mutant, all of the serine/threonine residues within the 3rd cytoplasmic domain were altered (3rdTOT). A second construct was created in which only three of these serines (serines 256, 258, and 259) were mutated (3rd234). We also created four truncation mutants of the carboxyl terminus (T347, T369, T394, and T404). All of these constructs were comparable with the wild-type receptor with respect to expression and adenylyl cyclase activation. In contrast, both of the 3rd loop mutants exhibited attenuated agonist-induced receptor phosphorylation that was correlated with an impaired desensitization response. Sequential truncation of the carboxyl terminus of the receptor resulted in a sequential loss of agonist-induced phosphorylation. No phosphorylation was observed with the most severely truncated T347 mutant. Surprisingly, all of the truncated receptors exhibited normal desensitization. The ability of the receptor constructs to promote arrestin association was evaluated using arrestin-green fluorescent protein translocation assays and confocal fluorescence microscopy. The 3rd234 mutant receptor was impaired in its ability to induce arrrestin translocation, whereas the T347 mutant was comparable with wild type. Our data suggest a model in which arrestin directly associates with the activated 3rd cytoplasmic domain in an agonist-dependent fashion; however, under basal conditions, this is sterically prevented by the carboxyl terminus of the receptor. Receptor activation promotes the sequential phosphorylation of residues, first within the carboxyl terminus and then the 3rd cytoplasmic loop, thereby dissociating these domains and allowing arrestin to bind to the activated 3rd loop. Thus, the role of receptor phosphorylation is to allow access of arrestin to its receptor binding domain rather than to create an arrestin binding site per se.

Arrestins selectively bind to phosphorylated activated forms of their cognate G protein-coupled receptors. Arrestin binding prevents further G protein activation and often redirects signaling to other pathways. The comparison of the high-resolution crystal structures of arrestin2, visual arrestin, and rhodopsin as well as earlier mutagenesis and peptide inhibition data collectively suggest that the elements on the concave sides of both arrestin domains most likely participate in receptor binding directly, thereby dictating its receptor preference. Using comparative binding of visual arrestin/arrestin2 chimeras to the preferred target of visual arrestin, light-activated phosphorylated rhodopsin (PRh*), and to the arrestin2 target, phosphorylated activated m2 muscarinic receptor (P-m2 mAChR*), we identified the elements that determine the receptor specificity of arrestins. We found that residues 49–90 (β-strands V and VI and adjacent loops in the N-domain) and 237–268 (β-strands XV and XVI in the C-domain) in visual arrestin and homologous regions in arrestin2 are largely responsible for their receptor preference. Only 35 amino acids (22 of which are nonconservative substitutions) in the two elements are different. Simultaneous exchange of both elements between visual arrestin and arrestin2 fully reverses their receptor specificity, demonstrating that these two elements in the two domains of arrestin are necessary and sufficient to determine their preferred receptor targets.

Arrestins mediate phosphorylation-dependent desensitization, internalization, and initiation of signaling cascades for the majority of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Many GPCRs undergo agonist-mediated internalization through arrestin-dependent mechanisms, wherein arrestin serves as an adapter between the receptor and endocytic proteins. To understand the role of arrestins in N-formyl peptide receptor (FPR) trafficking, we stably expressed the FPR in a mouse embryonic fibroblast cell line (MEF) that lacked endogenous arrestin 2 and arrestin 3 (arrestin-deficient). We compared FPR internalization and recycling kinetics in these cells to congenic wild type MEF cell lines. Internalization of the FPR was not altered in the absence of arrestins. Since the FPR remains associated with arrestins following internalization, we investigated whether the rate of FPR recycling was altered in arrestin-deficient cells. While the FPR was able to recycle in the wild type cells, receptor recycling was largely absent in the arrestin double knockout cells. Reconstitution of the arrestin-deficient line with either arrestin 2 or arrestin 3 restored receptor recycling. Confocal fluorescence microscopy studies demonstrated that in arrestin-deficient cells the FPR may become trapped in the perinuclear recycling compartment. These observations indicate that, although the FPR can internalize in the absence of arrestins, recycling of internalized receptors to the cell surface is prevented. Our results suggest a novel role for arrestins in the post-endocytic trafficking of GPCRs.

Deactivation of G-protein-coupled receptors relies on a timely blockade by arrestin. However, under dim light conditions, virtually all arrestin is in the rod inner segment, and the splice variant p(44) (Arr(1-370A)) is the stop protein responsible for receptor deactivation. Using size exclusion chromatography and biophysical assays for membrane-bound protein-protein interaction, membrane binding, and G-protein activation, we have investigated the interactions of Arr(1-370A) and proteolytically truncated Arr(3-367) with rhodopsin. We find that these short arrestins do not only interact with the phosphorylated active receptor but also with inactive phosphorylated rhodopsin or opsin in membranes or solution. Because of the latter interaction they are not soluble (like arrestin) but membrane-bound in the dark. Upon photoexcitation, Arr(3-367) and Arr(1-370A) interact with prephosphorylated rhodopsin faster than arrestin and start to quench G(t) activation on a subsecond time scale. The data indicate that in the course of rhodopsin deactivation, Arr(1-370A) is handed over from inactive to active phosphorylated rhodopsin. This mechanism could provide a new aspect of receptor shutoff in the single photon operating range of the rod cell.

Receptor desensitization by G-protein receptor kinases (GRK) and arrestins is likely to be an important component underlying the development of tolerance to opioid drugs. Reconstitution of this process in Xenopus oocytes revealed distinct differences in the kinetics of GRK and arrestin regulation of the closely related opioid receptors mu (MOR), delta (DOR), and kappa (KOR). We demonstrated that under identical conditions, GRK and arrestin-dependent desensitization of MOR proceeds dramatically slower than that of DOR. Furthermore, GRK3 phosphorylation sites required for opioid receptor desensitization also greatly differ. The determinants for DOR and KOR desensitization reside in the carboxyl-terminal tail, whereas MOR depends on Thr-180 in the second intracellular loop. Although this later finding might indicate an inefficient phosphorylation of MOR Thr-180, increasing the amount of arrestin expressed greatly increased the rate of MOR desensitization to a rate comparable with that of DOR. Similarly, coexpression of a constitutively active arrestin 2(R169E) with MOR and DOR desensitized both receptors in an agonist-dependent, GRK-independent manner at rates that were indistinguishable. Together, these data suggest that it is the activation of arrestin, rather than its binding, that is the rate-limiting step in MOR desensitization. In addition, mutation of Thr-161 in DOR, homologous to MOR Thr-180, significantly inhibited the faster desensitization of DOR. These results suggest that DOR desensitization involves phosphorylation of both the carboxyl-terminal tail and the second intracellular loop that together leads to a more efficient activation of arrestin and thus faster desensitization.

The phosphorylation-dependent binding of arrestins to cytoplasmic domains of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) is thought to be a crucial step in receptor desensitization. In some GPCR systems, arrestins have also been demonstrated to be involved in receptor internalization, resensitization, and the activation of signaling cascades. The objective of the current study was to examine binding interactions of members of the arrestin family with the formyl peptide receptor (FPR), a member of the GPCR family of receptors. Peptides representing the unphosphorylated and phosphorylated carboxyl terminus of the FPR were synthesized and bound to polystyrene beads via a biotin/streptavidin interaction. Using fluorescein-conjugated arrestins, binding interactions between arrestins and the bead-bound FPR carboxyl terminus were analyzed by flow cytometry. Arrestin-2 and arrestin-3 bound to the FPR carboxyl-terminal peptide in a phosphorylation-dependent manner, withK d values in the micromolar range. Binding of visual arrestin, which binds rhodopsin with high selectivity, was not observed. Arrestin-2-(1–382) and arrestin-3-(1–393), truncated mutant forms of arrestin that display phosphorylation-independent binding to intact receptors, were also observed to bind the bead-bound FPR terminus in a phosphorylation-dependent manner, but with much greater affinity than the full-length arrestins, yieldingK d values in the 5–50 nm range. Two additional arrestin mutants, which are full-length but display phosphorylation-independent binding to intact GPCRs, were evaluated for their binding affinity to the FPR carboxyl terminus. Whereas the single point mutant, arrestin-2 R169E, displayed an affinity similar to that of the full-length arrestins, the triple point mutant, arrestin-2 I386A/V387A/F388A, displayed an affinity more similar to that of the truncated forms of arrestin. The results suggest that the carboxyl terminus of arrestin is a critical determinant in regulating the binding affinity of arrestin for the phosphorylated domains of GPCRs.

Arrestins play a key role in the homologous desensitization of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). These cytosolic proteins selectively bind to the agonist-activated and GPCR kinase-phosphorylated forms of the GPCR, precluding its further interaction with the G protein. Certain mutations in visual arrestin yield "constitutively active" proteins that bind with high affinity to the light-activated form of rhodopsin without requiring phosphorylation. The crystal structure of visual arrestin shows that these activating mutations perturb two groups of intramolecular interactions that keep arrestin in its basal (inactive) state. Here we introduced homologous mutations into arrestin2 and arrestin3 and found that the resulting mutants bind to the beta(2)-adrenoreceptor in vitro in a phosphorylation-independent fashion. The same mutants effectively desensitize both the beta(2)-adrenergic and delta-opioid receptors in the absence of receptor phosphorylation in Xenopus oocytes. Moreover, the arrestin mutants also desensitize the truncated delta-opioid receptor from which the C terminus, containing critical phosphorylation sites, has been removed. Conservation of the phosphate-sensitive hot spots in non-visual arrestins suggests that the overall fold is similar to that of visual arrestin and that the mechanisms whereby receptor-attached phosphates drive arrestin transition into the active binding competent state are conserved throughout the arrestin family of proteins.

Background: Arrestins are responsible for the desensitization of many sequence-divergent G protein-coupled receptors. They compete with G proteins for binding to activated phosphorylated receptors, initiate receptor internalization, and activate additional signaling pathways. Results: In order to understand the structural basis for receptor binding and arrestin's function as an adaptor molecule, we determined the X-ray crystal structure of two truncated forms of bovine β-arrestin in its cytosolic inactive state to 1.9 A. Mutational analysis and chimera studies identify the regions in β-arrestin responsible for receptor binding specificity. β-arrestin demonstrates high structural homology with the previously solved visual arrestin. All key structural elements responsible for arrestin's mechanism of activation are conserved. Conclusions: Based on structural analysis and mutagenesis data, we propose a previously unappreciated part in β-arrestin's mode of action by which a cationic amphipathic helix may function as a reversible membrane anchor. This novel activation mechanism would facilitate the formation of a high-affinity complex between β-arrestin and an activated receptor regardless of its specific subtype. Like the interaction between β-arrestin's polar core and the phosphorylated receptor, such a general activation mechanism would contribute to β-arrestin's versatility as a regulator of many receptors.

After stimulation with agonist, G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) activate G proteins and become phosphorylated by G protein-coupled receptor kinases (GRKs), and most of them translocate cytosolic arrestin proteins to the cytoplasmic membrane. Agonist-activated GPCRs are specifically phosphorylated by GRKs and are targeted for endocytosis by arrestin proteins, suggesting a connection between GPCR conformational changes and interaction with GRKs and arrestins. Previously, we showed that by substitution of histidine for residues at the cytoplasmic side of helix 3 (H3) and helix 6 (H6) of the parathyroid hormone (PTH) receptor (PTHR), a zinc metal ion-binding site is engineered that prevents PTH-stimulated G(s) activation (Sheikh, S. P., Vilardaga, J.-P., Baranski, T. J., Lichtarge, O., Iiri, T., Meng, E. C., Nissenson, R. A., and Bourne, H. R. (1999) J. Biol. Chem. 274, 17033-17041). These data suggest that relative movements between H3 and H6 are critical for G(s) activation. Does this molecular event play a similar role in activation of GRK and arrestin and in PTHR-mediated G(q) activation? To answer this question, we utilized the two previously described mutant forms of PTHR, H401 and H402, which contain a naturally present histidine residue at position 301 in H3 and a second substituted histidine residue at positions 401 and 402 in H6, respectively. Both mutant receptors showed inhibition of PTH-stimulated inositol phosphate and cAMP generation in the presence of increasing concentrations of Zn(II). However, the mutants showed no Zn(II)-dependent impairment of phosphorylation by GRK-2. Likewise, the mutants were indistinguishable from wild-type PTHR in the ability to translocate beta-arrestins/green fluorescent protein to the cell membrane and were also not affected by sensitivity to Zn(II). These results suggest that agonist-mediated phosphorylation and internalization of PTHR require conformational switches of the receptor distinct from the cAMP and inositol phosphate signaling state. Furthermore, PTHR sequestration does not appear to require G protein activation.

Arrestins quench the signaling of a wide variety of G protein-coupled receptors by virtue of high-affinity binding to phosphorylated activated receptors. The high selectivity of arrestins for this particular functional form of receptor ensures their timely binding and dissociation. In a continuing effort to elucidate the molecular mechanisms responsible for arrestin's selectivity, we used the visual arrestin model to probe the functions of its N-terminal beta-strand I comprising the highly conserved hydrophobic element Val-Ile-Phe (residues 11-13) and the adjacent positively charged Lys(14) and Lys(15). Charge elimination and reversal in positions 14 and 15 dramatically reduce arrestin binding to phosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin (P-Rh*). The same mutations in the context of various constitutively active arrestin mutants (which bind to P-Rh*, dark phosphorylated rhodopsin (P-Rh), and unphosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin (Rh*)) have minimum impact on P-Rh* and Rh* binding and virtually eliminate P-Rh binding. These results suggest that the two lysines "guide" receptor-attached phosphates toward the phosphorylation-sensitive trigger Arg(175) and participate in phosphate binding in the active state of arrestin. The elimination of the hydrophobic side chains of residues 11-13 (triple mutation V11A, I12A, and F13A) moderately enhances arrestin binding to P-Rh and Rh*. The effects of triple mutation V11A, I12A, and F13A in the context of phosphorylation-independent mutants suggest that residues 11-13 play a dual role. They stabilize arrestin's basal conformation via interaction with hydrophobic elements in arrestin's C-tail and alpha-helix I as well as its active state by interactions with alternative partners. In the context of the recently solved crystal structure of arrestin's basal state, these findings allow us to propose a model of initial phosphate-driven structural rearrangements in arrestin that ultimately result in its transition into the active receptor-binding state.

Arrestin blocks the interaction of rhodopsin with the G protein transducin (G(t)). To characterize the sites of arrestin that interact with rhodopsin, we have utilized a spectrophotometric peptide competition assay. It is based on the stabilization of the active intermediates metarhodopsin II (MII) and phosphorylated MII by G(t) and arrestin, respectively (extra MII monitor). The protocol involves native disc membranes and three sets of peptides 10-30 amino acids in length spanning the arrestin sequence. In the absence of arrestin, not one of the peptides by itself had an effect on the amount of MII formed. However, inhibition of arrestin-dependent extra MII was found for the peptides at residues 11-30 and 51-70 (IC(50) < 100 microm) and residues 231-260 (IC(50) < 200 microm). A similar pattern of inhibition by arrestin peptides was seen when arrestin was replaced by G(t) or the farnesylated G(t)gamma C-terminal peptide. Only arrestin-(11-30) inhibited MII.G(t) less (IC(50) = 300 microm) than phosphorylated MII.arrestin. We interpreted the data by competition of the arrestin peptides for interaction sites at rhodopsin, exposed in the MII conformation and specific for both arrestin and G(t). The arrestin sites are located in both the C- and N-terminal domains of the arrestin structure.

Following activation by ligand, the N-formyl peptide receptor (FPR) undergoes processing events initiated by phosphorylation that lead to receptor desensitization and internalization. Our previous results have shown that FPR internalization can occur in the absence of receptor desensitization, suggesting that FPR desensitization and internalization are controlled by distinct mechanisms. More recently, we have provided evidence that internalization of the FPR occurs via a mechanism that is independent of the actions of arrestin, dynamin, and clathrin. In the present report, we demonstrate that stimulation of the FPR with agonist leads to a significant translocation of arrestin-2 from the cytosol to the membrane. Fluorescence microscopy revealed that the translocated arrestin-2 is highly colocalized with the ligand-bound FPR. A D71A mutant FPR, which does not undergo activation or phosphorylation in response to ligand, did not colocalize with arrestin-2. Surprisingly, an R123G mutant FPR, which does not bind G protein but does become phosphorylated and subsequently internalized, also did not bind arrestin. These results indicate that arrestin binding is not required for FPR internalization and demonstrate for the first time that a common motif, the conserved "DRY" domain of G protein-coupled receptors, is essential for phosphorylation-dependent arrestin binding, as well as G protein activation.

Arrestins play an important role in regulating desensitization and trafficking of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). However, limited insight into the specificity of arrestin-mediated regulation of GPCRs is currently available. Recently, we used an antisense strategy to reduce arrestin levels in HEK293 cells and characterize the role of arrestins on endogenous G(s)-coupled receptors (Mundell, S. J., Loudon, R. B., and Benovic, J. L. (1999) Biochemistry 38, 8723-8732). Here, we characterized GPCRs coupled to either G(q) (M(1) muscarinic acetylcholine receptor (M(1)AchR) and P2y(1) and P2y(2) purinergic receptors) or G(i) (somatostatin and AT1 angiotensin receptors) in wild type and arrestin antisense HEK293 cells. The agonist-specific desensitization of the M(1)Ach and somatostatin receptors was significantly attenuated in antisense-expressing cells, whereas desensitization of P2y(1) and P2y(2) purinergic and AT1 angiotensin receptors was unaffected by reduced arrestin levels. To further examine arrestin/GPCR specificity, we studied the effects of endogenous GPCR activation on the redistribution of arrestin-2 epitope tagged with the green fluorescent protein (arrestin-2-GFP). These studies revealed a receptor-specific movement of arrestin-2-GFP that mirrored the arrestin-receptor specificity observed in the antisense cells. Thus, agonist-induced activation of endogenous beta(2)-adrenergic, prostaglandin E(2), M(1)Ach, and somatostatin receptors induced arrestin-2-GFP redistribution to early endosomes, whereas P2y(1) and P2y(2) purinergic and AT1 angiotensin receptor activation did not. Thus, endogenous arrestins mediate the regulation of selective G(q)- and G(i)-coupled receptors in HEK293 cells.

Desensitization of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) involves the binding of members of the family of arrestins to the receptors. In the model system involving the visual GPCR rhodopsin, activation and phosphorylation of rhodopsin is thought to convert arrestin from a low to high affinity binding state. Phosphorylation of the M(2) muscarinic acetylcholine receptor (mAChR) has been shown to be required for binding of arrestins 2 and 3 in vitro and for arrestin-enhanced internalization in intact cells (Pals-Rylaarsdam, R., and Hosey, M. M. (1997) J. Biol. Chem. 272, 14152-14158). For the M(2) mAChR, arrestin binding requires phosphorylation at multiple serine and threonine residues at amino acids 307-311 in the third intracellular (i3) loop. Here, we have investigated the molecular basis for the requirement of receptor phosphorylation for arrestin binding. Constructs of arrestin 2 that can bind to other GPCRs in a phosphorylation-independent manner were unable to interact with a mutant M(2) mAChR in which the Ser/Thr residues at 307-311 were mutated to alanines. However, although phosphorylation-deficient mutants of the M(2) mAChR that lacked 50-157 amino acids from the i3 loop were unable to undergo agonist-dependent internalization when expressed alone in tsA201 cells, co-expression of arrestin 2 or 3 restored agonist-dependent internalization. Furthermore, a deletion of only 15 amino acids (amino acids 304-319) was sufficient to allow for phosphorylation-independent arrestin-receptor interaction. These results indicate that phosphorylation at residues 307-311 does not appear to be required to activate arrestin into a high affinity binding state. Instead, phosphorylation at residues 307-311 appears to facilitate the removal of an inhibitory constraint that precludes receptor-arrestin association in the absence of receptor phosphorylation.

Previous work on the desensitization of G protein-coupled receptors has focused on the role of arrestin binding following receptor phosphorylation. We have examined the hypothesis that phosphorylation alone contributes to desensitization. In this study we demonstrate that for the G(q)-coupled gastrin-releasing peptide receptor (GRP-R), phosphorylation by GRK2 to a stoichiometry of approximately 1 mol PO(4)/mol GRP-R is sufficient in the absence of arrestin to reduce the rate of receptor catalyzed G protein activation by approximately 80%. Furthermore, GRP-Rs exposed in vivo to agonist are rapidly phosphorylated to a similar stoichiometry and are desensitized to a similar degree. Finally, the molecular mechanism for both in vitro GRK2-induced and in vivo agonist-induced desensitization is primarily a decrease in the maximum velocity (V(max)) for the catalysis of guanine nucleotide exchange by the GRP-R rather than a change in the affinity of the receptor for the alpha(q) or betagamma subunits. Based on these results, we suggest that, for some G protein-coupled receptors, phosphorylation has a role in desensitization that is independent of arrestin.

Purpose: To investigate the ectopic transcription of arrestin in various human organs and tissues. Methods: Reverse transcriptase–polymerase chain reaction was used to investigate the ectopic transcription of the arrestin gene in the retina, anterior capsule of the lens, iris, bulbar conjunctiva, muscle, skin, placenta, intestine, and human blood. In addition, we examined the expression of arrestin mRNA isolated from whole blood cells of patients with Oguchi disease who had the 1147delA mutation in the arrestin gene. Results: Arrestin was expressed at the mRNA level in all our samples. The mRNA isolated from the blood cells of Oguchi patients was not associated with the same 1147delA mutation as was reported earlier in the arrestin gene but had the normal sequence. Conclusions: These results demonstrate the ectopic transcription of the arrestin gene in various tissues and also suggest the possibility of RNA editing in the blood cells of Oguchi patients.

Visual arrestin is the protein responsible for rapid quenching of G-protein-coupled receptor signaling. Arrestin exists as a latent inhibitor which must be 'activated' upon contact with a phosphorylated receptor. X-ray crystal structures of visual arrestin exhibit a tetrameric arrangement wherein an asymmetric dimer with an extensive interface between conformationally different subunits is related to a second asymmetric dimer by a local two-fold rotation axis. To test the biological relevance of this molecular organization in solution, we carried out a sedimentation equilibrium analysis of arrestin at both crystallographic and physiological protein concentrations. While the tetrameric form can exist at the high concentrations used in crystallography experiments, we find that arrestin participates in a monomer/dimer equilibrium at concentrations more likely to be physiologically relevant. Solution interaction analysis of a proteolytically modified, constitutively active form of arrestin shows diminished dimerization. We propose that self-association of arrestin may provide a mechanism for regulation of arrestin activity by (i) ensuring an adequate supply for rapid quenching of the visual signal and (ii) limiting the availability of active monomeric species, thereby preventing inappropriate signal termination.

Internalization of G protein-coupled opioid receptors depends on multiple criteria, including the affinity of drugs to their receptors and the state of the receptor–G protein interaction. Most recent studies reveal that cytosolic components like phosducin and arrestin interfere with receptor internalization, that is phosducin impairs receptor phosphorylation and arrestin enhances endocytosis by uncoupling the receptor from its G protein. This study was designed to examine the mutual effect phosducin and arrestin exert on receptor endocytosis. Neuronal NG 108-15 hybrid cells transiently expressing the μ-opioid receptor, which has been fused to green fluorescence protein, were employed to study internalization of the fluorescent μ-opioid receptor construct in living cells by means of confocal laser scanning microscopy. Fluorescent μ-opioid receptors were detected in drug-naive cells both at the cell membrane and at cell surface protrusions, most likely filopodia, microspikes and retraction fibres. The opioid receptors present in the cell membrane internalize upon etorphine (1 nM) exposure, a process clearly blocked in cells overexpressing phosducin. However, coexpression of both phosducin and β-arrestin 1 reverses this blockade. In contrast to etorphine, morphine fails to internalize μ-receptors expressed in NG 108-15 cells. When arrestin is overexpressed in these cells, morphine gains the ability to induce endocytosis, and this process is left unaffected by phosducin. The findings suggest that endocytosis of activated μ-opioid receptors primarily depends on arrestin-triggered uncoupling of the receptor from its G protein complex. Drug-induced receptor phosphorylation appears of subordinate significance for receptor internalization.

Arrestins are a family of proteins that modulate G protein-coupled receptor responses with distinct arrestin genes expressed in rods and cones. To understand the regulatory mechanisms controlling rod-specific expression, the abundant Xenopus rod arrestin cDNA and a partial genomic clone, containing the immediate upstream region and amino terminus of the polypeptide, have been characterized. The deduced polypeptide has approximately 69% identity to other vertebrate rod arrestins. Southern blot analysis and polymerase chain reaction of intronic sequences demonstrated multiple alleles for rod arrestin. DNase I footprinting with retinal proteins revealed four major DNA binding sites in the proximal promoter, coinciding with consensus sequences reported in mammalian promoters. Purified bovine Crx homeodomain and mouse Nrl proteins protected a number of these sites. A dual approach of transient embryo transfections and transgenesis was used to locate transcriptional control sequences essential for rod-specific expression in Xenopus. Constructs containing -1287/+113 of 5' upstream sequence with or without intron 1 directed high level expression, specifically in rods. A construct containing only -287/+113 directed expression of green fluorescent protein solely in rod cells. These results suggest that the Crx and Nrl binding sites in the proximal promoter are the primary cis-acting sequences regulating arrestin gene expression in rods.

Visual arrestin quenches light-induced signaling by binding to light-activated, phosphorylated rhodopsin (P-Rh*). Here we present structure-function data, which in conjunction with the refined crystal structure of arrestin (Hirsch, J. A., Schubert, C., Gurevich, V. V., and Sigler, P. B. (1999)Cell, in press), support a model for the conversion of a basal or “inactive” conformation of free arrestin to one that can bind to and inhibit the light activated receptor. The trigger for this transition is an interaction of the phosphorylated COOH-terminal segment of the receptor with arrestin that disrupts intramolecular interactions, including a hydrogen-bonded network of buried, charged side chains, referred to as the “polar core.” This disruption permits structural adjustments that allow arrestin to bind to the receptor. Our mutational survey identifies residues in arrestin (Arg175, Asp30, Asp296, Asp303, Arg382), which when altered bypass the need for the interaction with the receptor’s phosphopeptide, enabling arrestin to bind to activated, nonphosphorylated rhodopsin (Rh*). These mutational changes disrupt interactions and substructures which the crystallographic model and previous biochemical studies have shown are responsible for maintaining the inactive state. The molecular basis for these disruptions was confirmed by successfully introducing structure-based second site substitutions that restored the critical interactions. The nearly absolute conservation of the mutagenically sensitive residues throughout the arrestin family suggests that this mechanism is likely to be applicable to arrestin-mediated desensitization of most G-protein-coupled receptors.

G protein–coupled signaling is utilized by a wide variety of eukaryotes for communicating information from the extracellular environment. Signal termination is achieved by the action of the arrestins, which bind to activated, phosphorylated G protein–coupled receptors. We describe here crystallographic studies of visual arrestin in its basal conformation. The salient features of the structure are a bipartite molecule with an unusual polar core. This core is stabilized in part by an extended carboxy-terminal tail that locks the molecule into an inactive state. In addition, arrestin is found to be a dimer of two asymmetric molecules, suggesting an intrinsic conformational plasticity. In conjunction with biochemical and mutagenesis data, we propose a molecular mechanism by which arrestin is activated for receptor binding.

Arrestin proteins play a key role in the desensitization of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Recently we proposed a molecular mechanism whereby arrestin preferentially binds to the activated and phosphorylated form of its cognate GPCR. To test the model, we introduced two different types of mutations into beta-arrestin that were expected to disrupt two crucial elements that make beta-arrestin binding to receptors phosphorylation-dependent. We found that two beta-arrestin mutants (Arg169 --Glu and Asp383 --Ter) (Ter, stop codon) are indeed "constitutively active." In vitro these mutants bind to the agonist-activated beta2-adrenergic receptor (beta2AR) regardless of its phosphorylation status. When expressed in Xenopus oocytes these beta-arrestin mutants effectively desensitize beta2AR in a phosphorylation-independent manner. Constitutively active beta-arrestin mutants also effectively desensitize delta opioid receptor (DOR) and restore the agonist-induced desensitization of a truncated DOR lacking the critical G protein-coupled receptor kinase (GRK) phosphorylation sites. The kinetics of the desensitization induced by phosphorylation-independent mutants in the absence of receptor phosphorylation appears identical to that induced by wild type beta-arrestin + GRK3. Either of the mutations could have occurred naturally and made receptor kinases redundant, raising the question of why a more complex two-step mechanism (receptor phosphorylation followed by arrestin binding) is universally used.

Arrestin plays an important role in quenching phototransduction via its ability to bind to the phosphorylated light-activated form of the visual receptor rhodopsin (P-Rh*). Remarkable selectivity of visual arrestin toward this functional form is determined by an elegant sequential multisite binding mechanism. Previous structure-function studies have suggested that the COOH-terminal region of arrestin (residues 356-404) is not directly involved in rhodopsin interaction, but instead plays a regulatory role. This region supports basal arrestin conformation and ensures arrestin's transition into a high affinity rhodopsin-binding state upon an encounter with P-Rh*. Overall, our results corroborate this hypothesis and identify three functional subregions (residues 361-368, 369-378, and 379-404) and individual amino acids involved in the control of arrestin stability and binding selectivity. Two of the most potent mutants, arrestin(1-378) and arrestin(F375A,V376A, F377A) belong to a novel class of constitutively active arrestins with high affinity for P-Rh*, dark P-Rh, and Rh* (but not dark Rh), in contrast to earlier constructed mutants arrestin(R175E) and arrestin(Delta2-16) with high affinity for light-activated forms only. The implications of these findings for the mechanism of arrestin-rhodopsin interaction are discussed in light of the recently determined crystal structure of arrestin.

The rapid decrease of a response to a persistent stimulus, often termed desensitization, is a widespread biological phenomenon. Signal transduction by numerous G protein-coupled receptors appears to be terminated by a strikingly uniform two-step mechanism, most extensively characterized for the beta2-adrenergic receptor (beta2AR), m2 muscarinic cholinergic receptor (m2 mAChR), and rhodopsin. The model predicts that activated receptor is initially phosphorylated and then tightly binds an arrestin protein that effectively blocks further G protein interaction. Here we report that complexes of beta2AR-arrestin and m2 mAChR-arrestin have a higher affinity for agonists (but not antagonists) than do receptors not complexed with arrestin. The percentage of phosphorylated beta2AR in this high affinity state in the presence of full agonists varied with different arrestins and was enhanced by selective mutations in arrestins. The percentage of high affinity sites also was proportional to the intrinsic activity of an agonist, and the coefficient of proportionality varies for different arrestin proteins. Certain mutant arrestins can form these high affinity complexes with unphosphorylated receptors. Mutations that enhance formation of the agonist-receptor-arrestin complexes should provide useful tools for manipulating both the efficiency of signaling and rate and specificity of receptor internalization.

Quenching of phototransduction in retinal rod cells involves phosphorylation of photoactivated rhodopsin by the enzyme rhodopsin kinase followed by binding of the protein arrestin. Although it has been proposed that the mechanism of arrestin quenching of visual transduction is via steric exclusion of transducin binding to phosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin (P-Rh*), direct evidence for this mechanism is lacking. In this study, we investigated both the role of rhodopsin phosphorylation in modulating its interaction with arrestin and transducin and the proposed binding competition between arrestin and transducin for P-Rh*. While the β-adrenergic receptor kinase promotes significant arrestin binding to rhodopsin at a phosphorylation stoichiometry of ≥2 mol/mol, rhodopsin kinase promotes arrestin binding at a stoichiometry of ∼0.9 mol/mol. Moreover, while β-adrenergic receptor kinase phosphorylation of rhodopsin only modestly decreases transducin binding and activation, rhodopsin kinase phosphorylation of rhodopsin significantly decreases transducin binding and activation. Finally, arrestin competes effectively with transducin for binding to P-Rh* (50% inhibition at ∼1:1 molar ratio of arrestin:transducin) but has no effect on transducin binding to nonphosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin (Rh*), paralleling the functional inhibition by arrestin on P-Rh*-stimulated transducin activation (50% inhibition at ∼1.7:1 molar ratio of arrestin:transducin). These results demonstrate that a major role of rhodopsin phosphorylation is to promote high-affinity arrestin binding and decrease transducin binding thus allowing arrestin to effectively compete with transducin for binding to photoactivated rhodopsin.

Previously we demonstrated that nonvisual arrestins exhibit a high affinity interaction with clathrin, consistent with an adaptor function in the internalization of G protein-coupled receptors (Goodman, O. B., Jr., Krupnick, J. G., Santini, F., Gurevich, V. V., Penn, R. B., Gagnon, A. W., Keen, J. H., and Benovic, J. L. (1996) Nature 383, 447–450). In this report we show that a short sequence of highly conserved residues within the globular clathrin terminal domain is responsible for arrestin binding. Limited proteolysis of clathrin cages results in the release of terminal domains and concomitant abrogation of arrestin binding. The nonvisual arrestins, β-arrestin and arrestin3, but not visual arrestin, bind specifically to a glutathioneS-transferase-clathrin terminal domain fusion protein. Deletion analysis and alanine scanning mutagenesis localize the binding site to residues 89–100 of the clathrin heavy chain and indicate that residues 1–100 can function as an independent arrestin binding domain. Site-directed mutagenesis identifies an invariant glutamine (Glu-89) and two highly conserved lysines (Lys-96 and Lys-98) as residues critical for arrestin binding, complementing hydrophobic and acidic residues in arrestin3 which have been implicated in clathrin binding (Krupnick, J. G., Goodman, O. B., Jr., Keen, J. H., and Benovic, J. L. (1997) J. Biol. Chem. 272, 15011–15016). Despite exhibiting high affinity clathrin binding, arrestins do not induce coat assembly. The terminal domain is oriented toward the plasma membrane in coated pits, and its binding of both arrestins and AP-2 suggests that this domain is the anchor responsible for adaptor-receptor recruitment to the coated pit.

Six monoclonal antibodies directed against different epitopes of bovine retinal arrestin recognized a single polypeptide in extracts of achlorophyllous Euglena gracilis cells. This polypeptide had an apparent molecular weight slightly lower: 45kDa vs. 48 kDa, and a more basic isoelectric point compared to that of bovine visual arrestin. It was located in an insoluble cytoplasmic fraction. Immunofluorescence assays show a cytoplasmic punctuated pattern suggesting a cluster distribution or a linkage to some cell structure. The presence of arrestine-like molecules in achlorophyllous Euglena gracilis cells suggests that these proteins might be involved in a peculiar step of chemical signal transduction processes.

In rhabdomeral photoreceptors, light stimulates the phosphorylation of arrestin, a protein critical for quenching the photoresponse, by activating a calcium/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase (CaM PK). Here we present biochemical evidence that a CaM PK that phosphorylates arrestin in Limulus eyes is structurally similar to mammalian CaM PK II. In addition, cDNAs encoding proteins homologous to mammalian and Drosophila CaM PK II in the catalytic and regulatory domains were cloned and sequenced from a Limulus lateral eye cDNA library. The Limulus sequences are unique, however, in that they lack most of the association domain. The proteins encoded by these sequences may phosphorylate arrestin.