Structural basis of beta-adrenergic receptor subtype specificity studied with chimeric beta 1/beta 2-adrenergic receptors.

The beta 1- and beta 2-adrenergic receptors are two structurally related, but pharmacologically distinguishable, receptor subtypes, both of which activate adenylyl cyclase in a catecholamine-dependent manner through the guanine nucleotide-binding regulatory protein Gs. The receptors are approximately 50% identical in amino acid sequence and each is characterized by the presence of seven putative transmembrane domains. To elucidate the structural basis for the pharmacological distinctions between these two receptor subtypes, we constructed a series of chimeric beta 1/beta 2-adrenergic receptor genes and expressed them by injection of RNA into Xenopus laevis oocytes. The pharmacological properties of the expressed chimeric receptor proteins were assessed by radioligand binding and adenylyl cyclase assays utilizing subtype-selective agonists and antagonists. Our data indicate that transmembrane region IV is largely responsible for determining beta 1 vs. beta 2 properties with respect to agonist binding (relative affinities for epinephrine and norepinephrine). Transmembrane regions VI and VII play an important role in determining binding of beta 1 vs. beta 2 selective antagonists. However, a number of the other transmembrane regions also contribute, to a lesser extent, to the determination of beta-adrenergic receptor subtype specificity for agonists and antagonists. Thus, several of the membrane-spanning regions appear to be involved in the determination of receptor subtype specificity, presumably by formation of a ligand-binding pocket, with determinants for agonist and antagonist binding being distinguishable.

Sequence and Structural Determinants of Specificity Differences between Paralogous Transcription Factors

Transcription factors (TFs) control the temporal and spatial expression of target genes by interacting with DNA in a sequence-specific manner. Recent advances in high throughput experiments that measure TF-DNA interactions in vitro and in vivo have facilitated the identification of DNA binding sites for thousands of TFs. However, it remains unclear how each individual TF achieves its specificity, especially in the case of paralogous TFs that recognize distinct target genomic sites despite sharing very similar DNA binding motifs. In my work, I used a combination of high throughput in vitro protein-DNA binding assays and machine-learning algorithms to characterize and model the binding specificity of 11 paralogous TFs from 4 distinct structural families. My work proves that even very closely related paralogous TFs, with indistinguishable DNA binding motifs, oftentimes exhibit differential binding specificity for their genomic target sites, especially for sites with moderate binding affinity. Importantly, the differences I identify in vitro and through computational modeling help explain, at least in part, the differential in vivo genomic targeting by paralogous TFs. Future work will focus on in vivo factors that might also be important for specificity differences between paralogous TFs, such as DNA methylation, interactions with protein cofactors, or the chromatin environment. In this larger context, my work emphasizes the importance of intrinsic DNA binding specificity in targeting of paralogous TFs to the genome.

Structural manifestation of the delocalization error of density functional approximations: C(4N+2) rings and C(20) bowl, cage, and ring isomers.

The ground state structure of C(4N+2) rings is believed to exhibit a geometric transition from angle alternation (N < or = 2) to bond alternation (N > 2). All previous density functional theory (DFT) studies on these molecules have failed to reproduce this behavior by predicting either that the transition occurs at too large a ring size, or that the transition leads to a higher symmetry cumulene. Employing the recently proposed perspective of delocalization error within DFT we rationalize this failure of common density functional approximations (DFAs) and present calculations with the rCAM-B3LYP exchange-correlation functional that show an angle-to-bond-alternation transition between C(10) and C(14). The behavior exemplified here manifests itself more generally as the well known tendency of DFAs to bias toward delocalized electron distributions as favored by Huckel aromaticity, of which the C(4N+2) rings provide a quintessential example. Additional examples are the relative energies of the C(20) bowl, cage, and ring isomers; we show that the results from functionals with minimal delocalization error are in good agreement with CCSD(T) results, in contrast to other commonly used DFAs. An unbiased DFT treatment of electron delocalization is a key for reliable prediction of relative stability and hence the structures of complex molecules where many structure stabilization mechanisms exist.