Search

Arrestins were discovered for their role in homologous desensitization of G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Later non-visual arrestins were shown to regulate several signaling pathways. Some of these pathways require arrestin binding to GPCRs, the regulation of others is receptor independent. Here, we demonstrate that arrestin-3 binds the E3 ubiquitin ligase parkin via multiple sites, preferentially interacting with its RING0 domain. Identification of the parkin domains involved suggests that arrestin-3 likely relieves parkin autoinhibition and/or stabilizes the enzymatically active "open" conformation of parkin. Arrestin-3 binding enhances ubiquitination by parkin of the mitochondrial protein mitofusin-1 and facilitates parkin-mediated mitophagy in HeLa cells. Furthermore, arrestin-3 and its mutant with enhanced parkin binding rescue mitofusin-1 ubiquitination and mitophagy in the presence of the Parkinson's disease-associated R275W parkin mutant, which is defective in both functions. Thus, modulation of parkin activity via arrestin-3 might be a novel strategy of anti-parkinsonian therapy., (© 2024 International Society for Neurochemistry.)

Purified arrestin proteins are necessary for biochemical, biophysical, and structural studies of these versatile regulators of cell signaling. Described herein is a basic protocol for arrestin expression in Escherichia coli and purification of tag-free wild-type and mutant arrestins. The method includes ammonium sulfate precipitation of arrestins from cell lysates, followed by Heparin-Sepharose chromatography. Depending on the arrestin type and/or mutations, the next step is Q-Sepharose or SP-Sepharose chromatography. In many cases, the nonbinding column is used as a filter to bind contaminants without retaining arrestin. In some cases, both chromatographic steps must be performed sequentially to achieve high purity. Purified arrestins can be concentrated up to 10 mg/ml, remain fully functional, and withstand several cycles of freezing and thawing, provided that the overall salt concentration is maintained at or above physiological levels. © 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC. Basic Protocol: Large-scale expression and purification of arrestins Alternate Protocol: Purification of arrestin-3 and truncated form of arrestin-1-(1-378) Support Protocol: Small-scale test expression of wild-type and mutant arrestins in E. coli., (© 2023 Wiley Periodicals LLC.)

Arrestin-1, or visual arrestin, exhibits an exquisite selectivity for light-activated phosphorylated rhodopsin (P-Rh*) over its other functional forms. That selectivity is believed to be mediated by two well-established structural elements in the arrestin-1 molecule, the activation sensor detecting the active conformation of rhodopsin and the phosphorylation sensor responsive to the rhodopsin phosphorylation, which only active phosphorylated rhodopsin can engage simultaneously. However, in the crystal structure of the arrestin-1-rhodopsin complex there are arrestin-1 residues located close to rhodopsin, which do not belong to either sensor. Here we tested by site-directed mutagenesis the functional role of these residues in wild type arrestin-1 using a direct binding assay to P-Rh* and light-activated unphosphorylated rhodopsin (Rh*). We found that many mutations either enhanced the binding only to Rh* or increased the binding to Rh* much more than to P-Rh*. The data suggest that the native residues in these positions act as binding suppressors, specifically inhibiting the arrestin-1 binding to Rh* and thereby increasing arrestin-1 selectivity for P-Rh*. This calls for the modification of a widely accepted model of the arrestin-receptor interactions.

Arrestins preferentially bind active phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). The middle loop, highly conserved in all arrestin subtypes, is localized in the central crest on the GPCR-binding side. Upon receptor binding, it directly interacts with bound GPCR and demonstrates the largest movement of any arrestin element in the structures of the complexes. Comprehensive mutagenesis of the middle loop of rhodopsin-specific arrestin-1 suggests that it primarily serves as a suppressor of binding to non-preferred forms of the receptor. Several mutations in the middle loop increase the binding to unphosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin severalfold, which makes them candidates for improving enhanced phosphorylation-independent arrestins. The data also suggest that enhanced forms of arrestin do not bind GPCRs exactly like the wild-type protein. Thus, the structures of the arrestin-receptor complexes, in all of which different enhanced arrestin mutants and reengineered receptors were used, must be interpreted with caution.

Arrestin binding to active phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors terminates G protein coupling and initiates another wave of signaling. Among the effectors that bind directly to receptor-associated arrestins are extracellular signal-regulated kinases 1/2 (ERK1/2), which promote cellular proliferation and survival. Arrestins may also engage ERK1/2 in isolation in a pre- or post-signaling complex that is likely in equilibrium with the full signal initiation complex. Molecular details of these binary complexes remain unknown. Here, we investigate the molecular mechanisms whereby arrestin-2 and arrestin-3 (a.k.a. β-arrestin1 and β-arrestin2, respectively) engage ERK1/2 in pairwise interactions. We find that purified arrestin-3 binds ERK2 more avidly than arrestin-2. A combination of biophysical techniques and peptide array analysis demonstrates that the molecular basis in this difference of binding strength is that the two non-visual arrestins bind ERK2 via different parts of the molecule. We propose a structural model of the ERK2-arrestin-3 complex in solution using size-exclusion chromatography coupled to small angle X-ray scattering (SEC-SAXS). This binary complex exhibits conformational heterogeneity. We speculate that this drives the equilibrium either toward the full signaling complex with receptor-bound arrestin at the membrane or toward full dissociation in the cytoplasm. As ERK1/2 regulates cell migration, proliferation, and survival, understanding complexes that relate to its activation could be exploited to control cell fate., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Arrestins regulate a wide range of signaling events, most notably when bound to active G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Among the known effectors recruited by GPCR-bound arrestins are Src family kinases, which regulate cellular growth and proliferation. Here, we focus on arrestin-3 interactions with Fgr kinase, a member of the Src family. Previous reports demonstrated that Fgr exhibits high constitutive activity, but can be further activated by both arrestin-dependent and arrestin-independent pathways. We report that arrestin-3 modulates Fgr activity with a hallmark bell-shaped concentration-dependence, consistent with a role as a signaling scaffold. We further demonstrate using NMR spectroscopy that a polyproline motif within arrestin-3 interacts directly with the SH3 domain of Fgr. To provide a framework for this interaction, we determined the crystal structure of the Fgr SH3 domain at 1.9 Å resolution and developed a model for the GPCR-arrestin-3-Fgr complex that is supported by mutagenesis. This model suggests that Fgr interacts with arrestin-3 at multiple sites and is consistent with the locations of disease-associated Fgr mutations. Collectively, these studies provide a structural framework for arrestin-dependent activation of Fgr., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Arrestins are a small family of proteins that bind G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Arrestin binds to active phosphorylated GPCRs with higher affinity than to all other functional forms of the receptor, including inactive phosphorylated and active unphosphorylated. The selectivity of arrestins suggests that they must have two sensors, which detect receptor-attached phosphates and the active receptor conformation independently. Simultaneous engagement of both sensors enables arrestin transition into a high-affinity receptor-binding state. This transition involves a global conformational rearrangement that brings additional elements of the arrestin molecule, including the middle loop, in contact with a GPCR, thereby stabilizing the complex. Here, we review structural and mutagenesis data that identify these two sensors and additional receptor-binding elements within the arrestin molecule. While most data were obtained with the arrestin-1-rhodopsin pair, the evidence suggests that all arrestins use similar mechanisms to achieve preferential binding to active phosphorylated GPCRs.

The finger loop in the central crest of the receptor-binding site of arrestins engages the cavity between the transmembrane helices of activated G-protein-coupled receptors. Therefore, it was hypothesized to serve as the sensor that detects the activation state of the receptor. We performed comprehensive mutagenesis of the finger loop in bovine visual arrestin-1, generated mutant radiolabeled proteins by cell-free translation, and determined the effects of mutations on the in vitro binding of arrestin-1 to purified phosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin. This interaction is driven by two factors, rhodopsin activation and rhodopsin-attached phosphates. Therefore, the binding of arrestin-1 to light-activated unphosphorylated rhodopsin is low. To evaluate the role of the finger loop specifically in the recognition of the active receptor conformation, we tested the effects of these mutations in the context of truncated arrestin-1 that demonstrates much higher binding to unphosphorylated activated and phosphorylated inactive rhodopsin. The majority of finger loop residues proved important for arrestin-1 binding to light-activated rhodopsin, with six mutations affecting the binding exclusively to this form. Thus, the finger loop is the key element of arrestin-1 activation sensor. The data also suggest that arrestin-1 and its enhanced mutant bind various functional forms of rhodopsin differently., (© 2020 International Society for Neurochemistry.)

G protein coupled receptors signal through G proteins or arrestins. A long-standing mystery in the field is why vertebrates have two non-visual arrestins, arrestin-2 and arrestin-3. These isoforms are ~75% identical and 85% similar; each binds numerous receptors, and appear to have many redundant functions, as demonstrated by studies of knockout mice. We previously showed that arrestin-3 can be activated by inositol-hexakisphosphate (IP 6 ). IP 6 interacts with the receptor-binding surface of arrestin-3, induces arrestin-3 oligomerization, and this oligomer stabilizes the active conformation of arrestin-3. Here, we compared the impact of IP 6 on oligomerization and conformational equilibrium of the highly homologous arrestin-2 and arrestin-3 and found that these two isoforms are regulated differently. In the presence of IP 6 , arrestin-2 forms "infinite" chains, where each promoter remains in the basal conformation. In contrast, full length and truncated arrestin-3 form trimers and higher-order oligomers in the presence of IP 6 ; we showed previously that trimeric state induces arrestin-3 activation (Chen et al., 2017). Thus, in response to IP 6 , the two non-visual arrestins oligomerize in different ways in distinct conformations. We identified an insertion of eight residues that is conserved across arrestin-2 homologs, but absent in arrestin-3 that likely accounts for the differences in the IP 6 effect. Because IP 6 is ubiquitously present in cells, this suggests physiological consequences, including differences in arrestin-2/3 trafficking and JNK3 activation. The functional differences between two non-visual arrestins are in part determined by distinct modes of their oligomerization. The mode of oligomerization might regulate the function of other signaling proteins., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Arrestins demonstrate strong preference for phosphorylated over unphosphorylated receptors, but how arrestins "sense" receptor phosphorylation is unclear. A conserved lysine in the lariat loop of arrestins directly binds the phosphate in crystal structures of activated arrestin-1, -2, and -3. The lariat loop supplies two negative charges to the central polar core, which must be disrupted for arrestin activation and high-affinity receptor binding. Therefore, we hypothesized that receptor-attached phosphates pull the lariat loop via this lysine, thus removing the negative charges and destabilizing the polar core. We tested the role of this lysine by introducing charge elimination (Lys->Ala) and reversal (Lys->Glu) mutations in arrestin-1, -2, and -3. These mutations in arrestin-1 only moderately reduced phospho-rhodopsin binding and had no detectable effect on arrestin-2 and -3 binding to cognate non-visual receptors in cells. The mutations of Lys300 in bovine and homologous Lys301 in mouse arrestin-1 on the background of pre-activated mutants had variable effects on the binding to light-activated phosphorylated rhodopsin, while affecting the binding to unphosphorylated rhodopsin to a greater extent. Thus, conserved lysine in the lariat loop participates in receptor binding, but does not play a critical role in phosphate-induced arrestin activation., (© 2020 International Society for Neurochemistry.)

Dynamic structural transitions within the seven-transmembrane bundle represent the mechanism by which G-protein-coupled receptors convert an extracellular chemical signal into an intracellular biological function. Here, the conformational dynamics of the neuropeptide Y receptor type 2 (Y2R) during activation was investigated. The apo, full agonist-, and arrestin-bound states of Y2R were prepared by cell-free expression, functional refolding, and reconstitution into lipid membranes. To study conformational transitions between these states, all six tryptophans of Y2R were 13 C-labeled. NMR-signal assignment was achieved by dynamic-nuclear-polarization enhancement and the individual functional states of the receptor were characterized by monitoring 13 C NMR chemical shifts. Activation of Y2R is mediated by molecular switches involving the toggle switch residue Trp281 6.48 of the highly conserved SWLP motif and Trp327 7.55 adjacent to the NPxxY motif. Furthermore, a conformationally preserved "cysteine lock"-Trp116 23.50 was identified., (© 2020 The Authors. Published by Wiley-VCH GmbH.)

Members of the arrestin superfamily have great propensity of self-association, but the physiological significance of this phenomenon is unclear. To determine the biological role of visual arrestin-1 oligomerization in rod photoreceptors, we expressed mutant arrestin-1 with severely impaired self-association in mouse rods and analyzed mice of both sexes. We show that the oligomerization-deficient mutant is capable of quenching rhodopsin signaling normally, as judged by electroretinography and single-cell recording. Like wild type, mutant arrestin-1 is largely excluded from the outer segments in the dark, proving that the normal intracellular localization is not due the size exclusion of arrestin-1 oligomers. In contrast to wild type, supraphysiological expression of the mutant causes shortening of the outer segments and photoreceptor death. Thus, oligomerization reduces the cytotoxicity of arrestin-1 monomer, ensuring long-term photoreceptor survival. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Visual arrestin-1 forms dimers and tetramers. The biological role of its oligomerization is unclear. To test the role of arrestin-1 self-association, we expressed oligomerization-deficient mutant in arrestin-1 knock-out mice. The mutant quenches light-induced rhodopsin signaling like wild type, demonstrating that in vivo monomeric arrestin-1 is necessary and sufficient for this function. In rods, arrestin-1 moves from the inner segments and cell bodies in the dark to the outer segments in the light. Nonoligomerizing mutant undergoes the same translocation, demonstrating that the size of the oligomers is not the reason for arrestin-1 exclusion from the outer segments in the dark. High expression of oligomerization-deficient arrestin-1 resulted in rod death. Thus, oligomerization reduces the cytotoxicity of high levels of arrestin-1 monomer., (Copyright © 2020 the authors.)

The multifaceted adaptor protein β-arr1 (β-arrestin1) promotes activation of focal adhesion kinase (FAK) by the chemokine receptor CXCR4, facilitating chemotaxis. This function of β-arr1 requires the assistance of the adaptor protein STAM1 (signal-transducing adaptor molecule 1) because disruption of the interaction between STAM1 and β-arr1 reduces CXCR4-mediated activation of FAK and chemotaxis. To begin to understand the mechanism by which β-arr1 together with STAM1 activates FAK, we used site-directed spin-labeling EPR spectroscopy-based studies coupled with bioluminescence resonance energy transfer-based cellular studies to show that STAM1 is recruited to activated β-arr1 by binding to a novel surface on β-arr1 at the base of the finger loop, at a site that is distinct from the receptor-binding site. Expression of a STAM1-deficient binding β-arr1 mutant that is still able to bind to CXCR4 significantly reduced CXCL12-induced activation of FAK but had no impact on ERK-1/2 activation. We provide evidence of a novel surface at the base of the finger loop that dictates non-GPCR interactions specifying β-arrestin-dependent signaling by a GPCR. This surface might represent a previously unidentified switch region that engages with effector molecules to drive β-arrestin signaling., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest—The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest with the contents of this article., (© 2020 Zhuo et al.)

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) has become a major health problem worldwide. Skeletal muscle (SKM) is the key tissue for whole-body glucose disposal and utilization. New drugs aimed at improving insulin sensitivity of SKM would greatly expand available therapeutic options. β-arrestin-1 and -2 (Barr1 and Barr2, respectively) are two intracellular proteins best known for their ability to mediate the desensitization and internalization of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Recent studies suggest that Barr1 and Barr2 regulate several important metabolic functions including insulin release and hepatic glucose production. Since SKM expresses many GPCRs, including the metabolically important β2-adrenergic receptor, the goal of this study was to examine the potential roles of Barr1 and Barr2 in regulating SKM and whole-body glucose metabolism. Using SKM-specific knockout (KO) mouse lines, we showed that the loss of SKM Barr2, but not of SKM Barr1, resulted in mild improvements in glucose tolerance in diet-induced obese mice. SKM-specific Barr1- and Barr2-KO mice did not show any significant differences in exercise performance. However, lack of SKM Barr2 led to increased glycogen breakdown following a treadmill exercise challenge. Interestingly, mice that lacked both Barr1 and Barr2 in SKM showed no significant metabolic phenotypes. Thus, somewhat surprisingly, our data indicate that SKM β-arrestins play only rather subtle roles (SKM Barr2) in regulating whole-body glucose homeostasis and SKM insulin sensitivity., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

The two non-visual subtypes, arrestin-2 and arrestin-3, are ubiquitously expressed and bind hundreds of G protein-coupled receptors. In addition, these arrestins also interact with dozens of non-receptor signaling proteins, including c-Src, ERK and JNK, that regulate cell death and survival. Arrestin-3 facilitates the activation of JNK family kinases, which are important players in the regulation of apoptosis. Here we show that arrestin-3 is specifically cleaved at Asp366, Asp405 and Asp406 by caspases during the apoptotic cell death. This results in the generation of one main cleavage product, arrestin-3-(1-366). The formation of this fragment occurs in a dose-dependent manner with the increase of fraction of apoptotic cells upon etoposide treatment. In contrast to a caspase-resistant mutant (D366/405/406E) the arrestin-3-(1-366) fragment reduces the apoptosis of etoposide-treated cells. We found that caspase cleavage did not affect the binding of the arrestin-3 to JNK3, but prevented facilitation of its activation, in contrast to the caspase-resistant mutant, which facilitated JNK activation similar to WT arrestin-3, likely due to decreased binding of the upstream kinases ASK1 and MKK4/7. The data suggest that caspase-generated arrestin-3-(1-366) prevents the signaling in the ASK1-MKK4/7-JNK1/2/3 cascade and protects cells, thereby suppressing apoptosis., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

We determined the effects of different expression levels of arrestin-1-3A mutant with enhanced binding to light-activated rhodopsin that is independent of phosphorylation. To this end, transgenic mice that express mutant rhodopsin with zero, one, or two phosphorylation sites, instead of six in the WT mouse rhodopsin, and normal complement of WT arrestin-1, were bred with mice expressing enhanced phosphorylation-independent arrestin-1-3A mutant. The resulting lines were characterized by retinal histology (thickness of the outer nuclear layer, reflecting the number of rod photoreceptors, and the length of the outer segments, which reflects rod health), as well as single- and double-flash ERG to determine the functionality of rods and the rate of photoresponse recovery. The effect of co-expression of enhanced arrestin-1-3A mutant with WT arrestin-1 in these lines depended on its level: higher (240% of WT) expression reduced the thickness of ONL and the length of OS, whereas lower (50% of WT) expression was harmless in the retinas expressing rhodopsin with zero or one phosphorylation site, and improved photoreceptor morphology in animals expressing rhodopsin with two phosphorylation sites. Neither expression level increased the amplitude of the a- and b-wave of the photoresponse in any of the lines. However, high expression of enhanced arrestin-1-3A mutant facilitated photoresponse recovery 2-3-fold, whereas lower level was ineffective. Thus, in the presence of normal complement of WT arrestin-1 only supra-physiological expression of enhanced mutant is sufficient to compensate for the defects of rhodopsin phosphorylation.

The emergence of microscale thermophoresis (MST) as a technique for determining the dissociation constants for bimolecular interactions has enabled these quantities to be measured in systems that were previously difficult or impracticable. However, most models for analyses of these data featured the assumption of a simple 1:1 binding interaction. The only model widely used for multiple binding sites was the Hill equation. Here, we describe two new MST analytic models that assume a 1:2 binding scheme: the first features two microscopic binding constants (K D (1) and K D (2)), while the other assumes symmetry in the bivalent molecule, culminating in a model with a single macroscopic dissociation constant (K D,M ) and a single factor (α) that accounts for apparent cooperativity in the binding. We also discuss the general applicability of the Hill equation for MST data. The performances of the algorithms on both real and simulated data are assessed, and implementation of the algorithms in the MST analysis program PALMIST is discussed., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to identify the molecular defect in the disease-causing human arrestin-1 C147F mutant., Methods: The binding of wild-type (WT) human arrestin-1 and several mutants with substitutions in position 147 (including C147F, which causes dominant retinitis pigmentosa in humans) to phosphorylated and unphosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin was determined. Thermal stability of WT and mutant human arrestin-1, as well as unfolded protein response in 661W cells, were also evaluated., Results: WT human arrestin-1 was selective for phosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin. Substitutions of Cys-147 with smaller side chain residues, Ala or Val, did not substantially affect binding selectivity, whereas residues with bulky side chains in the position 147 (Ile, Leu, and disease-causing Phe) greatly increased the binding to unphosphorylated rhodopsin. Functional survival of mutant proteins with bulky substitutions at physiological and elevated temperature was also compromised. C147F mutant induced unfolded protein response in cultured cells., Conclusions: Bulky Phe substitution of Cys-147 in human arrestin-1 likely causes rod degeneration due to reduced stability of the protein, which induces unfolded protein response in expressing cells.

A unique aspect of arrestin-3 is its ability to support both receptor-dependent and receptor-independent signaling. Here, we show that inositol hexakisphosphate (IP 6 ) is a non-receptor activator of arrestin-3 and report the structure of IP 6 -activated arrestin-3 at 2.4-Å resolution. IP 6 -activated arrestin-3 exhibits an inter-domain twist and a displaced C-tail, hallmarks of active arrestin. IP 6 binds to the arrestin phosphate sensor, and is stabilized by trimerization. Analysis of the trimerization surface, which is also the receptor-binding surface, suggests a feature called the finger loop as a key region of the activation sensor. We show that finger loop helicity and flexibility may underlie coupling to hundreds of diverse receptors and also promote arrestin-3 activation by IP 6 . Importantly, we show that effector-binding sites on arrestins have distinct conformations in the basal and activated states, acting as switch regions. These switch regions may work with the inter-domain twist to initiate and direct arrestin-mediated signaling.

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 M 2 muscarinic receptor, so that agonist activation of the M 2 did not further increase arrestin-3 binding. Thus, the Lys139Ile mutation made arrestin-3 essentially an activation-independent binding partner of M 2 , whereas its interactions with other receptors, including the β 2 -adrenergic receptor and the D 1 and D 2 dopamine receptors, retained normal activation dependence. In contrast, the Ala248Val mutation enhanced agonist-induced arrestin-3 binding to the β 2 -adrenergic and D 2 dopamine receptors, while reducing its interaction with the D 1 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., (Copyright © 2017. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Arrestins specifically bind active and phosphorylated forms of their cognate G protein-coupled receptors, blocking G protein coupling and often redirecting the signaling to alternative pathways. High-affinity receptor binding is accompanied by two major structural changes in arrestin: release of the C-tail and rotation of the two domains relative to each other. The first requires detachment of the arrestin C-tail from the body of the molecule, whereas the second requires disruption of the network of charge-charge interactions at the interdomain interface, termed the polar core. These events can be facilitated by mutations destabilizing the polar core or the anchoring of the C-tail that yield "preactivated" arrestins that bind phosphorylated and unphosphorylated receptors with high affinity. Here we explored the functional role in arrestin activation of the three native cysteines in the N domain, which are conserved in all arrestin subtypes. Using visual arrestin-1 and rhodopsin as a model, we found that substitution of these cysteines with serine, alanine, or valine virtually eliminates the effects of the activating polar core mutations on the binding to unphosphorylated rhodopsin while only slightly reducing the effects of the C-tail mutations. Thus, these three conserved cysteines play a role in the domain rotation but not in the C-tail release., (© 2017 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.)

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) signal primarily through G proteins or arrestins. Arrestin binding to GPCRs blocks G protein interaction and redirects signalling to numerous G-protein-independent pathways. Here we report the crystal structure of a constitutively active form of human rhodopsin bound to a pre-activated form of the mouse visual arrestin, determined by serial femtosecond X-ray laser crystallography. Together with extensive biochemical and mutagenesis data, the structure reveals an overall architecture of the rhodopsin-arrestin assembly in which rhodopsin uses distinct structural elements, including transmembrane helix 7 and helix 8, to recruit arrestin. Correspondingly, arrestin adopts the pre-activated conformation, with a ∼20° rotation between the amino and carboxy domains, which opens up a cleft in arrestin to accommodate a short helix formed by the second intracellular loop of rhodopsin. This structure provides a basis for understanding GPCR-mediated arrestin-biased signalling and demonstrates the power of X-ray lasers for advancing the frontiers of structural biology.

G protein-coupled receptor kinases (GRKs) play an important role in the desensitization of G protein-mediated signaling of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). The level of interest in mapping their phosphorylation sites has increased because recent studies suggest that the differential pattern of receptor phosphorylation has distinct biological consequences. In vitro phosphorylation experiments using well-controlled systems are useful for deciphering the complexity of these physiological reactions and understanding the targeted event. Here, we report on the phosphorylation of the class A GPCR neurotensin receptor 1 (NTSR1) by GRKs under defined experimental conditions afforded by nanodisc technology. Phosphorylation of NTSR1 by GRK2 was agonist-dependent, whereas phosphorylation by GRK5 occurred in an activation-independent manner. In addition, the negatively charged lipids in the immediate vicinity of NTSR1 directly affect phosphorylation by GRKs. Identification of phosphorylation sites in agonist-activated NTSR1 revealed that GRK2 and GRK5 target different residues located on the intracellular receptor elements. GRK2 phosphorylates only the C-terminal Ser residues, whereas GRK5 phosphorylates Ser and Thr residues located in intracellular loop 3 and the C-terminus. Interestingly, phosphorylation assays using a series of NTSR1 mutants show that GRK2 does not require acidic residues upstream of the phospho-acceptors for site-specific phosphorylation, in contrast to the β2-adrenergic and μ-opioid receptors. Differential phosphorylation of GPCRs by GRKs is thought to encode a particular signaling outcome, and our in vitro study revealed NTSR1 differential phosphorylation by GRK2 and GRK5.

Rod photoreceptors generate measurable responses to single-photon activation of individual molecules of the G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR), rhodopsin. Timely rhodopsin desensitization depends on phosphorylation and arrestin binding, which quenches G protein activation. Rhodopsin phosphorylation has been measured biochemically at C-terminal serine residues, suggesting that these residues are critical for producing fast, low-noise responses. The role of native threonine residues is unclear. We compared single-photon responses from rhodopsin lacking native serine or threonine phosphorylation sites. Contrary to expectation, serine-only rhodopsin generated prolonged step-like single-photon responses that terminated abruptly and randomly, whereas threonine-only rhodopsin generated responses that were only modestly slower than normal. We show that the step-like responses of serine-only rhodopsin reflect slow and stochastic arrestin binding. Thus, threonine sites play a privileged role in promoting timely arrestin binding and rhodopsin desensitization. Similar coordination of phosphorylation and arrestin binding may more generally permit tight control of the duration of GPCR activity.

G protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) kinases (GRKs) play a key role in homologous desensitization of GPCRs. It is widely assumed that most GRKs selectively phosphorylate only active GPCRs. Here, we show that although this seems to be the case for the GRK2/3 subfamily, GRK5/6 effectively phosphorylate inactive forms of several GPCRs, including β2-adrenergic and M2 muscarinic receptors, which are commonly used as representative models for GPCRs. Agonist-independent GPCR phosphorylation cannot be explained by constitutive activity of the receptor or membrane association of the GRK, suggesting that it is an inherent ability of GRK5/6. Importantly, phosphorylation of the inactive β2-adrenergic receptor enhanced its interactions with arrestins. Arrestin-3 was able to discriminate between phosphorylation of the same receptor by GRK2 and GRK5, demonstrating preference for the latter. Arrestin recruitment to inactive phosphorylated GPCRs suggests that not only agonist activation but also the complement of GRKs in the cell regulate formation of the arrestin-receptor complex and thereby G protein-independent signaling., (© 2015 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.)

G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are essential mediators of information transfer in eukaryotic cells. Interactions between GPCRs and their binding partners modulate the signaling process. For example, the interaction between GPCR and cognate G protein initiates the signal, while the interaction with cognate arrestin terminates G-protein-mediated signaling. In visual signal transduction, arrestin-1 selectively binds to the phosphorylated light-activated GPCR rhodopsin to terminate rhodopsin signaling. Under physiological conditions, the rhodopsin-arrestin-1 interaction occurs in highly specialized disk membrane in which rhodopsin resides. This membrane is replaced with mimetics when working with purified proteins. While detergents are commonly used as membrane mimetics, most detergents denature arrestin-1, preventing biochemical studies of this interaction. In contrast, bicelles provide a suitable alternative medium. An advantage of bicelles is that they contain lipids, which have been shown to be necessary for normal rhodopsin-arrestin-1 interaction. Here we describe how to reconstitute rhodopsin into bicelles, and how bicelle properties affect the rhodopsin-arrestin-1 interaction.

Purified arrestin proteins are necessary for biochemical, biophysical, and crystallographic studies of these versatile regulators of cell signaling. Described herein is a basic protocol for arrestin expression in E. coli and purification of the tag-free wild-type and mutant arrestins. The method includes ammonium sulfate precipitation of arrestins from cell lysates, followed by heparin-Sepharose chromatography. Depending on the arrestin type and/or mutations, the next step is Q-Sepharose or SP-Sepharose chromatography. In many cases the nonbinding column is used as a filter to bind contaminants without retaining arrestin. In some cases both chromatographic steps must be performed sequentially to achieve high purity. Purified arrestins can be concentrated up to 10 mg/ml, remain fully functional, and withstand several cycles of freezing and thawing, provided that overall salt concentration is maintained at or above physiological levels., (Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.)

The non-visual arrestins, arrestin-2 and arrestin-3, belong to a small family of multifunctional cytosolic proteins. Non-visual arrestins interact with hundreds of G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) and regulate GPCR desensitization by binding active phosphorylated GPCRs and uncoupling them from heterotrimeric G proteins. Recently, non-visual arrestins have been shown to mediate G protein-independent signaling by serving as adaptors and scaffolds that assemble multiprotein complexes. By recruiting various partners, including trafficking and signaling proteins, directly to GPCRs, non-visual arrestins connect activated receptors to diverse signaling pathways. To investigate arrestin-mediated signaling, a structural understanding of arrestin activation and interaction with GPCRs is essential. Here we identified global and local conformational changes in the non-visual arrestins upon binding to the model GPCR rhodopsin. To detect conformational changes, pairs of spin labels were introduced into arrestin-2 and arrestin-3, and the interspin distances in the absence and presence of the receptor were measured by double electron electron resonance spectroscopy. Our data indicate that both non-visual arrestins undergo several conformational changes similar to arrestin-1, including the finger loop moving toward the predicted location of the receptor in the complex as well as the C-tail release upon receptor binding. The arrestin-2 results also suggest that there is no clam shell-like closure of the N- and C-domains and that the loop containing residue 136 (homolog of 139 in arrestin-1) has high flexibility in both free and receptor-bound states., (© 2014 by The American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Inc.)

Although arrestins bind dozens of non-receptor partners, the interaction sites for most signaling proteins remain unknown. Here we report the identification of arrestin-3 elements involved in binding MAP kinase JNK3α2. Using purified JNK3α2 and MBP fusions containing separated arrestin-3 domains and peptides exposed on the non-receptor-binding surface of arrestin-3 we showed that both domains bind JNK3α2 and identified one element on the N-domain and two on the C-domain that directly interact with JNK3α2. Using in vitro competition we confirmed that JNK3α2 engages identified N-domain element and one of the C-domain peptides in the full-length arrestin-3. The 25-amino acid N-domain element has the highest affinity for JNK3α2, suggesting that it is the key site for JNK3α2 docking. The identification of elements involved in protein-protein interactions paves the way to targeted redesign of signaling proteins to modulate cell signaling in desired ways. The tools and methods developed here to elucidate the molecular mechanism of arrestin-3 interactions with JNK3α2 are suitable for mapping of arrestin-3 sites involved in interactions with other partners., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Mammals express four arrestin subtypes, three of which have been shown to self-associate. Cone photoreceptor-specific arrestin-4 is the only one that is a constitutive monomer. Visual arrestin-1 forms tetramers both in crystal and in solution, but the shape of its physiologically relevant solution tetramer is very different from that in the crystal. The biological role of the self-association of arrestin-1, expressed at very high levels in rod and cone photoreceptors, appears to be protective, reducing the concentration of cytotoxic monomers. The two nonvisual arrestin subtypes are highly homologous, and self-association of both is facilitated by IP6, yet they form dramatically different oligomers. Arrestin-2 apparently self-associates into "infinite" chains, very similar to those observed in IP6-soaked crystals, where IP6 connects the concave sides of the N- and C-domains of adjacent protomers. In contrast, arrestin-3 only forms dimers, in which IP6 likely connects the C-domains of two arrestin-3 molecules. Thus, each of the three self-associating arrestins does it in its own way, forming three different types of oligomers. The physiological role of the oligomerization of arrestin-1 and both nonvisual arrestins might be quite different, and in each case it remains to be definitively elucidated.

A variety of heritable and acquired disorders is associated with excessive signaling by mutant or overstimulated GPCRs. Since any conceivable treatment of diseases caused by gain-of-function mutations requires gene transfer, one possible approach is functional compensation. Several structurally distinct forms of enhanced arrestins that bind phosphorylated and even non-phosphorylated active GPCRs with much higher affinity than parental wild-type proteins have the ability to dampen the signaling by hyperactive GPCR, pushing the balance closer to normal. In vivo this approach was so far tested only in rod photoreceptors deficient in rhodopsin phosphorylation, where enhanced arrestin improved the morphology and light sensitivity of rods, prolonged their survival, and accelerated photoresponse recovery. Considering that rods harbor the fastest, as well as the most demanding and sensitive GPCR-driven signaling cascade, even partial success of functional compensation of defect in rhodopsin phosphorylation by enhanced arrestin demonstrates the feasibility of this strategy and its therapeutic potential.

Numerous human diseases are caused by excessive signaling of mutant G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) or receptors that are overstimulated due to upstream signaling imbalances. The feasibility of functional compensation by arrestins with enhanced ability to quench receptor signaling was recently tested in the visual system. The results showed that even in this extremely demanding situation of rods that have no ability to phosphorylate rhodopsin, enhanced arrestin improved rod morphology, light sensitivity, survival, and accelerated photoresponse recovery. Structurally distinct enhanced mutants of arrestins that bind phosphorylated and non-phosphorylated active GPCRs with much higher affinity than parental wild-type (WT) proteins have been constructed. These "super-arrestins" are likely to have the power to dampen the signaling by hyperactive GPCRs. However, most cells express 5-20 GPCR subtypes, only one of which would be overactive, while nonvisual arrestins are remarkably promiscuous, binding hundreds of different GPCRs. Thus, to be therapeutically useful, enhanced versions of nonvisual arrestins must be made fairly specific for particular receptors. Recent identification of very few arrestin residues as key receptor discriminators paves the way to the construction of receptor subtype-specific nonvisual arrestins.

Arrestin-1 binds light-activated phosphorhodopsin and ensures timely signal shutoff. We show that high transgenic expression of an arrestin-1 mutant with enhanced rhodopsin binding and impaired oligomerization causes apoptotic rod death in mice. Dark rearing does not prevent mutant-induced cell death, ruling out the role of arrestin complexes with light-activated rhodopsin. Similar expression of WT arrestin-1 that robustly oligomerizes, which leads to only modest increase in the monomer concentration, does not affect rod survival. Moreover, WT arrestin-1 co-expressed with the mutant delays retinal degeneration. Thus, arrestin-1 mutant directly affects cell survival via binding partner(s) other than light-activated rhodopsin. Due to impaired self-association of the mutant its high expression dramatically increases the concentration of the monomer. The data suggest that monomeric arrestin-1 is cytotoxic and WT arrestin-1 protects rods by forming mixed oligomers with the mutant and/or competing with it for the binding to non-receptor partners. Thus, arrestin-1 self-association likely serves to keep low concentration of the toxic monomer. The reduction of the concentration of harmful monomer is an earlier unappreciated biological function of protein oligomerization., (© 2013.)

The effects of activating mutations associated with night blindness on the stoichiometry of rhodopsin interactions with G protein-coupled receptor kinase 1 (GRK1) and arrestin-1 have not been reported. Here we show that the monomeric form of WT rhodopsin and its constitutively active mutants M257Y, G90D, and T94I, reconstituted into HDL particles are effectively phosphorylated by GRK1, as well as two more ubiquitously expressed subtypes, GRK2 and GRK5. All versions of arrestin-1 tested (WT, pre-activated, and constitutively monomeric mutants) bind to monomeric rhodopsin and show the same selectivity for different functional forms of rhodopsin as in native disc membranes. Rhodopsin phosphorylation by GRK1 and GRK2 promotes arrestin-1 binding to a comparable extent, whereas similar phosphorylation by GRK5 is less effective, suggesting that not all phosphorylation sites on rhodopsin are equivalent in promoting arrestin-1 binding. The binding of WT arrestin-1 to phospho-opsin is comparable to the binding to its preferred target, P-Rh*, suggesting that in photoreceptors arrestin-1 only dissociates after opsin regeneration with 11-cis-retinal, which converts phospho-opsin into inactive phospho-rhodopsin that has lower affinity for arrestin-1. Reduced binding of arrestin-1 to the phospho-opsin form of G90D mutant likely contributes to night blindness caused by this mutation in humans., (© 2013.)

We present active-state structures of the G protein-coupled receptor (GPCRs) rhodopsin carrying the disease-causing mutation G90D. Mutations of G90 cause either retinitis pigmentosa (RP) or congenital stationary night blindness (CSNB), a milder, non-progressive form of RP. Our analysis shows that the CSNB-causing G90D mutation introduces a salt bridge with K296. The mutant thus interferes with the E113Q-K296 activation switch and the covalent binding of the inverse agonist 11-cis-retinal, two interactions that are crucial for the deactivation of rhodopsin. Other mutations, including G90V causing RP, cannot promote similar interactions. We discuss our findings in context of a model in which CSNB is caused by constitutive activation of the visual signalling cascade.

Arrestin-1 selectively binds active phosphorylated rhodopsin (P-Rh*), demonstrating much lower affinity for inactive phosphorylated (P-Rh) and unphosphorylated active (Rh*) forms. Receptor interaction induces significant conformational changes in arrestin-1, which include large movement of the previously neglected 139-loop in the center of the receptor binding surface, away from the incoming receptor. To elucidate the functional role of this loop, in mouse arrestin-1 we introduced deletions of variable lengths and made several substitutions of Lys-142 in it and Asp-72 in the adjacent loop. Several mutants with perturbations in the 139-loop demonstrate increased binding to P-Rh*, dark P-Rh, Rh*, and phospho-opsin. Enhanced binding of arrestin-1 mutants to non-preferred forms of rhodopsin correlates with decreased thermal stability. The 139-loop perturbations increase P-Rh* binding of arrestin-1 at low temperatures and further change its binding profile on the background of 3A mutant, where the C-tail is detached from the body of the molecule by triple alanine substitution. Thus, the 139-loop stabilizes basal conformation of arrestin-1 and acts as a brake, preventing its binding to non-preferred forms of rhodopsin. Conservation of this loop in other subtypes suggests that it has the same function in all members of the arrestin family.

Arrestin-1 preferentially binds active phosphorylated rhodopsin. Previously, a mutant with enhanced binding to unphosphorylated active rhodopsin (Rh*) was shown to partially compensate for lack of rhodopsin phosphorylation in vivo. Here we showed that reengineering of the receptor binding surface of arrestin-1 further improves the binding to Rh* while preserving protein stability. In mammals, arrestin-1 readily self-associates at physiological concentrations. The biological role of this phenomenon can only be elucidated by replacing wild type arrestin-1 in living animals with a non-oligomerizing mutant retaining all other functions. We demonstrate that constitutively monomeric forms of arrestin-1 are sufficiently stable for in vivo expression. We also tested the idea that individual functions of arrestin-1 can be independently manipulated to generate mutants with the desired combinations of functional characteristics. Here we showed that this approach is feasible; stable forms of arrestin-1 with high Rh* binding can be generated with or without the ability to self-associate. These novel molecular tools open the possibility of testing of the biological role of arrestin-1 self-association and pave the way to elucidation of full potential of compensational approach to gene therapy of gain-of-function receptor mutations.

Solution NMR spectroscopy of labeled arrestin-1 was used to explore its interactions with dark-state phosphorylated rhodopsin (P-Rh), phosphorylated opsin (P-opsin), unphosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin (Rh*), and phosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin (P-Rh*). Distinct sets of arrestin-1 elements were seen to be engaged by Rh* and inactive P-Rh, which induced conformational changes that differed from those triggered by binding of P-Rh*. Although arrestin-1 affinity for Rh* was seen to be low (K(D) > 150 μM), its affinity for P-Rh (K(D) ~80 μM) was comparable to the concentration of active monomeric arrestin-1 in the outer segment, suggesting that P-Rh generated by high-gain phosphorylation is occupied by arrestin-1 under physiological conditions and will not signal upon photo-activation. Arrestin-1 was seen to bind P-Rh* and P-opsin with fairly high affinity (K(D) of~50 and 800 nM, respectively), implying that arrestin-1 dissociation is triggered only upon P-opsin regeneration with 11-cis-retinal, precluding noise generated by opsin activity. Based on their observed affinity for arrestin-1, P-opsin and inactive P-Rh very likely affect the physiological monomer-dimer-tetramer equilibrium of arrestin-1, and should therefore be taken into account when modeling photoreceptor function. The data also suggested that complex formation with either P-Rh* or P-opsin results in a global transition in the conformation of arrestin-1, possibly to a dynamic molten globule-like structure. We hypothesize that this transition contributes to the mechanism that triggers preferential interactions of several signaling proteins with receptor-activated arrestins.

Arrestin-1 (visual arrestin) binds to light-activated phosphorylated rhodopsin (P-Rh*) to terminate G-protein signaling. To map conformational changes upon binding to the receptor, pairs of spin labels were introduced in arrestin-1 and double electron-electron resonance was used to monitor interspin distance changes upon P-Rh* binding. The results indicate that the relative position of the N and C domains remains largely unchanged, contrary to expectations of a "clam-shell" model. A loop implicated in P-Rh* binding that connects β-strands V and VI (the "finger loop," residues 67-79) moves toward the expected location of P-Rh* in the complex, but does not assume a fully extended conformation. A striking and unexpected movement of a loop containing residue 139 away from the adjacent finger loop is observed, which appears to facilitate P-Rh* binding. This change is accompanied by smaller movements of distal loops containing residues 157 and 344 at the tips of the N and C domains, which correspond to "plastic" regions of arrestin-1 that have distinct conformations in monomers of the crystal tetramer. Remarkably, the loops containing residues 139, 157, and 344 appear to have high flexibility in both free arrestin-1 and the P-Rh*complex.

Based on the identification of residues that determine receptor selectivity of arrestins and the analysis of the evolution in the arrestin family, we introduced 10 mutations of "receptor discriminator" residues in arrestin-3. The recruitment of these mutants to M2 muscarinic (M2R), D1 (D1R) and D2 (D2R) dopamine, and β(2)-adrenergic receptors (β(2)AR) was assessed using bioluminescence resonance energy transfer-based assays in cells. Seven of 10 mutations differentially affected arrestin-3 binding to individual receptors. D260K and Q262P reduced the binding to β(2)AR, much more than to other receptors. The combination D260K/Q262P virtually eliminated β(2)AR binding while preserving the interactions with M2R, D1R, and D2R. Conversely, Y239T enhanced arrestin-3 binding to β(2)AR and reduced the binding to M2R, D1R, and D2R, whereas Q256Y selectively reduced recruitment to D2R. The Y239T/Q256Y combination virtually eliminated the binding to D2R and reduced the binding to β(2)AR and M2R, yielding a mutant with high selectivity for D1R. Eleven of 12 mutations significantly changed the binding to light-activated phosphorhodopsin. Thus, manipulation of key residues on the receptor-binding surface modifies receptor preference, enabling the construction of non-visual arrestins specific for particular receptor subtypes. These findings pave the way to the construction of signaling-biased arrestins targeting the receptor of choice for research or therapeutic purposes.

Arrestins are a small family of proteins that regulate G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs). Arrestins specifically bind to phosphorylated active receptors, terminating G protein coupling, targeting receptors to endocytic vesicles, and initiating G protein-independent signaling. The interaction of rhodopsin-attached phosphates with Lys-14 and Lys-15 in β-strand I was shown to disrupt the interaction of α-helix I, β-strand I, and the C-tail of visual arrestin-1, facilitating its transition into an active receptor-binding state. Here we tested the role of conserved lysines in homologous positions of non-visual arrestins by generating K2A mutants in which both lysines were replaced with alanines. K2A mutations in arrestin-1, -2, and -3 significantly reduced their binding to active phosphorhodopsin in vitro. The interaction of arrestins with several GPCRs in intact cells was monitored by a bioluminescence resonance energy transfer (BRET)-based assay. BRET data confirmed the role of Lys-14 and Lys-15 in arrestin-1 binding to non-cognate receptors. However, this was not the case for non-visual arrestins in which the K2A mutations had little effect on net BRET(max) values for the M2 muscarinic acetylcholine (M2R), β(2)-adrenergic (β(2)AR), or D2 dopamine receptors. Moreover, a phosphorylation-deficient mutant of M2R interacted with wild type non-visual arrestins normally, whereas phosphorylation-deficient β(2)AR mutants bound arrestins at 20-50% of the level of wild type β(2)AR. Thus, the contribution of receptor-attached phosphates to arrestin binding varies depending on the receptor-arrestin pair. Although arrestin-1 always depends on receptor phosphorylation, its role in the recruitment of arrestin-2 and -3 is much greater in the case of β(2)AR than M2R and D2 dopamine receptor.

Visual arrestin-1 plays a key role in the rapid and reproducible shutoff of rhodopsin signaling. Its highly selective binding to light-activated phosphorylated rhodopsin is an integral part of the functional perfection of rod photoreceptors. Structure-function studies revealed key elements of the sophisticated molecular mechanism ensuring arrestin-1 selectivity and paved the way to the targeted manipulation of the arrestin-1 molecule to design mutants that can compensate for congenital defects in rhodopsin phosphorylation. Arrestin-1 self-association and light-dependent translocation in photoreceptor cells work together to keep a constant supply of active rhodopsin-binding arrestin-1 monomer in the outer segment. Recent discoveries of arrestin-1 interaction with other signaling proteins suggest that it is a much more versatile signaling regulator than previously thought, affecting the function of the synaptic terminals and rod survival. Elucidation of the fine molecular mechanisms of arrestin-1 interactions with rhodopsin and other binding partners is necessary for the comprehensive understanding of rod function and for devising novel molecular tools and therapeutic approaches to the treatment of visual disorders., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Arrestins bind active phosphorylated forms of G protein-coupled receptors, terminating G protein activation, orchestrating receptor trafficking, and redirecting signaling to alternative pathways. Visual arrestin-1 preferentially binds rhodopsin, whereas the two non-visual arrestins interact with hundreds of G protein-coupled receptor subtypes. Here we show that an extensive surface on the concave side of both arrestin-2 domains is involved in receptor binding. We also identified a small number of residues on the receptor binding surface of the N- and C-domains that largely determine the receptor specificity of arrestins. We show that alanine substitution of these residues blocks the binding of arrestin-1 to rhodopsin in vitro and of arrestin-2 and -3 to β2-adrenergic, M2 muscarinic cholinergic, and D2 dopamine receptors in intact cells, suggesting that these elements critically contribute to the energy of the interaction. Thus, in contrast to arrestin-1, where direct phosphate binding is crucial, the interaction of non-visual arrestins with their cognate receptors depends to a lesser extent on phosphate binding and more on the binding to non-phosphorylated receptor elements.

Arrestin-1 binds light-activated phosphorhodopsin and ensures rapid signal termination. Its deficiency in humans and mice results in prolonged signaling and rod degeneration. However, most of the biochemical studies were performed on bovine arrestin-1, which was shown to self-associate forming dimers and tetramers, although only the monomer binds rhodopsin. It is unclear whether self-association is a property of arrestin-1 in all mammals or a specific feature of bovine protein. To address this issue, we compared self-association parameters of purified human and mouse arrestin-1 with those of its bovine counterpart using multiangle light scattering. We found that mouse and human arrestin-1 also robustly self-associate, existing in a monomer-dimer-tetramer equilibrium. Interestingly, the combination of dimerization and tetramerization constants in these three species is strikingly different. While tetramerization of bovine arrestin-1 is highly cooperative (K(D,dim)(4) > K(D,tet)), K(D,dim) ∼ K(D,tet) in the mouse form and K(D,dim) ≪ K(D,tet) in the human form. Importantly, in all three species at very high physiological concentrations of arrestin-1 in rod photoreceptors, most of it is predicted to exist in oligomeric form, with a relatively low concentration of the free monomer. Thus, it appears that maintenance of low levels of the active monomer is the biological role of arrestin-1 self-association.

In rod photoreceptors, signaling persists as long as rhodopsin remains catalytically active. Phosphorylation by rhodopsin kinase followed by arrestin-1 binding completely deactivates rhodopsin. Timely termination prevents excessive signaling and ensures rapid recovery. Mouse rods express arrestin-1 and rhodopsin at ∼0.8:1 ratio, making arrestin-1 the second most abundant protein in the rod. The biological significance of wild type arrestin-1 expression level remains unclear. Here we investigated the effects of varying arrestin-1 expression on its intracellular distribution in dark-adapted photoreceptors, rod functional performance, recovery kinetics, and morphology. We found that rod outer segments isolated from dark-adapted animals expressing arrestin-1 at wild type or higher level contain much greater fraction of arrestin-1 than previously estimated, 15-25% of the total. The fraction of arrestin-1 residing in the outer segments (OS) in animals with low expression (4-12% of wild type) is much lower, 5-7% of the total. Only 4% of wild type arrestin-1 level in the outer segments was sufficient to maintain near-normal retinal morphology, whereas rapid recovery required at least ∼12%. Supra-physiological arrestin-1 expression improved light sensitivity and facilitated photoresponse recovery, but was detrimental for photoreceptor health, particularly in the peripheral retina. Thus, physiological level of arrestin-1 expression in rods reflects the balance between short-term functional performance of photoreceptors and their long-term health., (Copyright © 2011 IBRO. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

G-protein-coupled receptor (GPCR) oligomerization has been observed in a wide variety of experimental contexts, but the functional significance of this phenomenon at different stages of the life cycle of class A GPCRs remains to be elucidated. Rhodopsin (Rh), a prototypical class A GPCR of visual transduction, is also capable of forming dimers and higher order oligomers. The recent demonstration that Rh monomer is sufficient to activate its cognate G protein, transducin, prompted us to test whether the same monomeric state is sufficient for rhodopsin phosphorylation and arrestin-1 binding. Here we show that monomeric active rhodopsin is phosphorylated by rhodopsin kinase (GRK1) as efficiently as rhodopsin in the native disc membrane. Monomeric phosphorylated light-activated Rh (P-Rh*) in nanodiscs binds arrestin-1 essentially as well as P-Rh* in native disc membranes. We also measured the affinity of arrestin-1 for P-Rh* in nanodiscs using a fluorescence-based assay and found that arrestin-1 interacts with monomeric P-Rh* with low nanomolar affinity and 1:1 stoichiometry, as previously determined in native disc membranes. Thus, similar to transducin activation, rhodopsin phosphorylation by GRK1 and high affinity arrestin-1 binding only requires a rhodopsin monomer.

Light-induced rhodopsin signaling is turned off with sub-second kinetics by rhodopsin phosphorylation followed by arrestin-1 binding. To test the availability of the arrestin-1 pool in dark-adapted outer segment (OS) for rhodopsin shutoff, we measured photoresponse recovery rates of mice with arrestin-1 content in the OS of 2.5%, 5%, 60%, and 100% of wild type (WT) level by two-flash ERG with the first (desensitizing) flash at 160, 400, 1000, and 2500 photons/rod. The time of half recovery (t(half)) in WT retinas increases with the intensity of the initial flash, becoming ∼2.5-fold longer upon activation of 2500 than after 160 rhodopsins/rod. Mice with 60% and even 5% of WT arrestin-1 level recovered at WT rates. In contrast, the mice with 2.5% of WT arrestin-1 had a dramatically slower recovery than the other three lines, with the t(half) increasing ∼28 fold between 160 and 2500 rhodopsins/rod. Even after the dimmest flash, the rate of recovery of rods with 2.5% of normal arrestin-1 was two times slower than in other lines, indicating that arrestin-1 level in the OS between 100% and 5% of WT is sufficient for rapid recovery, whereas with lower arrestin-1 the rate of recovery dramatically decreases with increased light intensity. Thus, the OS has two distinct pools of arrestin-1: cytoplasmic and a separate pool comprising ∼2.5% that is not immediately available for rhodopsin quenching. The observed delay suggests that this pool is localized at the periphery, so that its diffusion across the OS rate-limits the recovery. The line with very low arrestin-1 expression is the first where rhodopsin inactivation was made rate-limiting by arrestin manipulation.

Arrestins specifically bind activated and phosphorylated G protein-coupled receptors and orchestrate both receptor trafficking and channel signaling through G protein-independent pathways via direct interactions with numerous nonreceptor partners. Here we report the first successful use of solution NMR in mapping the binding sites in arrestin-1 (visual arrestin) for two polyanionic compounds that mimic phosphorylated light-activated rhodopsin: inositol hexaphosphate (IP6) and heparin. This yielded an identification of residues involved in the binding with these ligands that was more complete than what has previously been feasible. IP6 and heparin appear to bind to the same site on arrestin-1, centered on a positively charged region in the N-domain. We present the first direct evidence that both IP6 and heparin induced a complete release of the arrestin C-tail. These observations provide novel insight into the nature of the transition of arrestin from the basal to active state and demonstrate the potential of NMR-based methods in the study of protein-protein interactions involving members of the arrestin family.

Arrestins rapidly bind phosphorylated activated forms of their cognate G protein-coupled receptors, thereby preventing G protein coupling and often switching signaling to other pathways. Amphipathic alpha-helix I (residues 100-111) has been implicated in receptor binding, but the mechanism of its action has not been determined yet. Here we show that several mutations in the helix itself and in adjacent hydrophobic residues in the body of the N-domain reduce arrestin1 binding to light-activated phosphorylated rhodopsin (P-Rh*). On the background of phosphorylation-independent mutants that bind with high affinity to both P-Rh* and light-activated unphosphorylated rhodopsin, these mutations reduce the stability of the arrestin complex with P-Rh*, but not with light-activated unphosphorylated rhodopsin. Using site-directed spin labeling, we found that the local structure around alpha-helix I changes upon binding to rhodopsin. However, the intramolecular distances between alpha-helix I and adjacent beta-strand I (or the rest of the N-domain), measured using double electron-electron resonance, do not change, ruling out relocation of the helix due to receptor binding. Collectively, these data demonstrate that alpha-helix I plays an indirect role in receptor binding, likely keeping beta-strand I, which carries several phosphate-binding residues, in a position favorable for its interaction with receptor-attached phosphates.

G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the largest family of signaling proteins expressed in every cell in the body and are targeted by the majority of clinically used drugs [1]. GPCR signaling, including rhodopsin-driven phototransduction, is terminated by receptor phosphorylation followed by arrestin binding [2]. Genetic defects in receptor phosphorylation and excessive signaling by overactive GPCR mutants result in a wide variety of diseases, from retinal degeneration to cancer [3-6]. Here, we tested whether arrestin1 mutants with enhanced ability to bind active unphosphorylated rhodopsin [7-10] can suppress uncontrolled signaling, bypassing receptor phosphorylation by rhodopsin kinase (RK) and replacing this two-step mechanism with a single-step deactivation in rod photoreceptors. We show that in this precisely timed signaling system with single-photon sensitivity [11], an enhanced arrestin1 mutant partially compensates for defects in rhodopsin phosphorylation, promoting photoreceptor survival, improving functional performance, and facilitating photoresponse recovery. These proof-of-principle experiments demonstrate the feasibility of functional compensation in vivo for the first time, which is a promising approach for correcting genetic defects associated with gain-of-function mutations. Successful modification of protein-protein interactions by appropriate mutations paves the way to targeted redesign of signaling pathways to achieve desired functional outcomes.