Family resemblances? Ligand binding and activation of family A and B G-protein-coupled receptors

In April 2007, the Biochemical Society held a meeting to compare and contrast ligand binding and activation of Family A and B GPCRs (G-protein-coupled receptors). Being the largest class, Family A GPCRs usually receive the most attention, although a previous Biochemical Society meeting has focused on Family B GPCRs. The aim of the present meeting was to bring researchers of both families together in order to identify commonalities between the two. The present article introduces the proceedings of the meeting, briefly commenting on the focus of each of the following articles. ©The Authors.

Ligand binding and activation of the CGRP receptor

The receptor for CGRP (calcitonin gene-related peptide) is a heterodimer between a GPCR (G-protein-coupled receptor), CLR (calcitonin receptor-like receptor) and an accessory protein, RAMP1 (receptor activity-modifying protein 1). Models have been produced of RAMP1 and CLR. It is likely that the C-terminus of CGRP interacts with the extracellular N-termini of CLR and RAMP1; the extreme N-terminus of CLR is particularly important and may interact directly with CGRP and also with RAMP1. The N-terminus of CGRP interacts with the TM (transmembrane) portion of the receptor; the second ECL (extracellular loop) is especially important. Receptor activation is likely to involve the relative movements of TMs 3 and 6 to create a G-protein-binding pocket, as in Family A GPCRs. Pro321 in TM6 appears to act as a pivot. At the base of TMs 2 and 3, Arg151, His155 and Glu211 may form a loose equivalent of the Family A DRY (Asp-Arg-Tyr) motif. Although the details of this proposed activation mechanism clearly do not apply to all Family B GPCRs, the broad outlines may be conserved. ©The Authors.

The heteromeric 5-HT3A/B receptor:the effect of 5-HT3B subunits on receptor structure and ligand recognition

The 5-HT3 receptors are members of the cys-loop family of ligand-gated ion channels. Two functional subtypes are known, the homomeric 5HT3A and the heteromeric 5HT3A/B receptors, which exhibit distinct biophysical characteristics but are difficult to differentiate pharmacologically. Atomic force microscopy has been used to determine the stoichiometry and architecture of the heteromeric 5HT3A/B receptor. Each subunit was engineered to express a unique C-terminal epitope tag, together with six sequential histidine residues to facilitate nickel affinity purification. The 5-HT3 receptors, ectopically expressed in HEK293 cells, were solubilised, purified and decorated with antibodies to the subunit specific epitope tags. Imaging of individual receptors by atomic force microscopy revealed a pentameric arrangement of subunits in the order BBABA, reading anti-clockwise when viewed from the extracellular face. Homology models for the heteromeric receptor were then constructed using both the electron microscopic structure of the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor, from Torpedo marmorata, and the X-ray crystallographic structure of the soluble acetylcholine binding protein, from Lymnaea stagnalis, as templates. These homology models were used, together with equivalent models constructed for the homomeric receptor, to interpret mutagenesis experiments designed to explore the minimal recognition differences of both the natural agonist, 5-HT, and the competitive antagonist, granisetron, for the two human receptor subtypes. The results of this work revealed that the 5-HT3B subunit residues within the ligand binding site, for both the agonist and antagonist, are accommodating to conservative mutations. They are consistent with the view that the 5-HT3A subunit provides the principal and the 5-HT38 subunit the complementary recognition interactions at the binding interface.

Ligand diffusion on protein surface observed in molecular dynamics simulation

The process of binding of small ligands to dihydrofolate reductase protein has been investigated using all-atom molecular dynamics simulations. The existence of a mechanism that facilitates the search of the binding site by the ligand is demonstrated. The mechanism consists of ligand diffusing on the protein’s surface. It has been discussed in the literature before, but has not been explicitly confirmed for realistic molecular systems. The strength of this nonspecific binding is roughly estimated and found to be essential for the binding kinetics.